Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

[mKoz26]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

I don't think it was a flagrant foul, however I can understand some claiming that it was. I don't think it was any intent on Rondo's part. I have seen much less contact be called flagrant though.

It's not about intent! It's about results! Watch the Shaq video I posted.

[ANDROMADA 1]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

This is a garbage response. Flagrant fouls exist for a reason especially in the playoffs. And a big reason is to prevent aggressive play from escalating. Its a call they should have made but they blew it. The fact that its the playoffs doesnt exonerate a referee from doing his job.

So, what, should Miller take out Rondos knee the next game because its playoff basketball and it stops Rondo from making a play (or playing anymore this season)? Your response is nonsensical.

Thanks,Fouls do exist for a reason I agree.There is no such thing as a perfectly refereed gm.Refs for the most part do a very good job,so get off the refs back.Second, you simply stop Rhondo the most effective way that you can....

[gruberted]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

Not aiming for the face? Are you on crack?

Watch the video not even close.

[ExtremeGamer]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

No interest in either team, but watching it live and the replays last night, it was a clear cut flagrant foul to me. Rondo made no attempt at the ball, made an attempt to stop Miller, there's a difference. The head shot was clearly a missed call.

[ehh]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

A flagrant foul? Really?

There is no way that should have been a flagrant foul. Anyone who's played basketball at a remotely high level knows you don't intentionally open-handed smack someone in the face even if you're trying to foul them on purpose. If we saw more of a clothesline or more body contact then we'd be talking flagrant/suspension. Rondo jumps while Miller is starting his shot and I highly doubt Rondo expected a 6'11 guy was gonna attempt a running finger roll.

[yvesdereuter]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

I don't think it was a flagrant foul, however I can understand some claiming that it was. I don't think it was any intent on Rondo's part. I have seen much less contact be called flagrant though.

You have to go for the ball. He didnt. If thats not a flagrant foul, it doesnt exist. Basically, what youre saying is anything goes. Theres really not much preventing Chicago from breaking Rondos face on a drive to the basket, if what you say is true.

Some of you should really think about what youre saying.

[yvesdereuter]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

A flagrant foul? Really?

There is no way that should have been a flagrant foul. Anyone who's played basketball at a remotely high level knows you don't intentionally open-handed smack someone in the face even if you're trying to foul them on purpose. If we saw more of a clothesline or more body contact then we'd be talking flagrant/suspension. Rondo jumps while Miller is starting his shot and I highly doubt Rondo expected a 6'11 guy was gonna attempt a running finger roll.

Jalen Rose said it was a flagrant foul. Im pretty sure he's played at a higher level than you.

[J0nnD0ugh]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

A flagrant foul? Really?

There is no way that should have been a flagrant foul. Anyone who's played basketball at a remotely high level knows you don't intentionally open-handed smack someone in the face even if you're trying to foul them on purpose. If we saw more of a clothesline or more body contact then we'd be talking flagrant/suspension. Rondo jumps while Miller is starting his shot and I highly doubt Rondo expected a 6'11 guy was gonna attempt a running finger roll.

Intent does not matter. "I didn't mean to travel." It's still a travel. "I didn't mean to charge.". It's still a charge. It doesn't matter he didn't mean to hit him in the face. He hit him in the face and drew blood. That's a flagrant foul.

And sorry to offend people who mentioned this. But its the stupidest argument in the world to try to blame Miller for the incident because he tried to lay the ball up. What kind of cockamamy baloney is that?

[ehh]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

Intent does not matter. "I didn't mean to travel." It's still a travel. "I didn't mean to charge.". It's still a charge. It doesn't matter he didn't mean to hit him in the face. He hit him in the face and drew blood. That's a flagrant foul.

And sorry to offend people who mentioned this. But its the stupidest argument in the world to try to blame Miller for the incident because he tried to lay the ball up. What kind of cockamamy baloney is that?

By no means am I blaming Miller but how shot did affect the play. And since when does face contact/drawing blood automatically equal a flagrant?

Jalen Rose said it was a flagrant foul.

And other former player-turned-analyst said it wasn't.

[Jasong7777]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

You have to go for the ball. He didnt.

So he went for the head?

[TEC9000]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

As a Celtics fan...I was worried the Refs were going to adjust the call to flagrant as they reviewed the video to determine what the the clock was at when Miller was fouled. If they had...I could just see a Ben Gordon 3 dropping with .02 seconds left after the inbounds.

Did I think it was a flagrant foul...not quite. It was a very hard foul made in a last ditch effort to prevent a game tying shot with 2 seconds left.

Having said that, if the same were done to Perk or Big Baby at the other end of the court - I'd probably be screaming at the TV.

In the overall context of the game, Miller deserved to get smacked in the head. After the little game the Bulls played to draw a series of fouls against Ray Allen, I saw Miller smiling as he walked off the court. At the time, I was pissed off at his smug attitude, so when Miller got clocked and subsequently missed the first free throw, I thought there was some justice brought to the game

In the end...it added just that much more drama to what is an incredible series. The Bulls are a much better team than their 7th seed would seem to indicate.

Thursday's game should be a wild one...certainly no love lost between these team.

PhazeZero

[J0nnD0ugh]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

NBA Rule book: http://www.nba.com/media/2008-09-NBARuleBook.pdf

Section IV—Flagrant Foul
a. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpreted to be
unnecessary, a flagrant foul—penalty (1) will be assessed. A personal foul is charged to the
offender and a team foul is charged to the team.
PENALTY: (1) Two free throws shall be attempted and the ball awarded to the offended
team on either side of the court at the free throw line extended. (2) If the offended player is
injured and unable to attempt his free throws, his coach will select one of the remaining four
players in the game to attempt the free throws. (3) His coach will pick the substitute, who
may not be replaced until the ball is legally touched by a player on the court. (EXCEPTION:
Rule 3—Section V—e.) (4) The injured player may not return to the game. (5) A player will
be ejected if he commits two flagrant fouls in the same game.
b. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpreted to be
unnecessary and excessive, a flagrant foul—penalty (2) will be assessed. A personal foul is

charged to the offender and a team foul is charged to the team.


NBA Referee Guide book: http://www.nba.com/media/2008-09-RefereeGuide.pdf

These fouls are considered unnecessary and/or
excessive. There are two types of flagrant foul,
1 and 2. A flagrant foul 1 is unnecessary contact.
This is usually when a defensive player windsup
and makes hard contact with the offensive
player or makes hard contact and then follows
through. A flagrant foul 2 has the components of
a flagrant foul 1 and is unnecessary and excessive
contact. This usually has a wind-up motion,
hard contact and a follow through. Both fouls
carry a penalty of two free throws and the team
that was fouled retains possession. A flagrant
foul 2 also results in an ejection of the player
committing the foul once it is reviewed by instant
replay. A player also is ejected if he commits two

flagrant foul penalty 1’s in the same game.


Sorry for the small type from the c&p. But as you see, nowhere is "intent" in the rules on flagrant fouls.

[ehh]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

A flagrant foul 1 is unnecessary contact. This is usually when a defensive player winds up and makes hard contact with the offensive player or makes hard contact and then follows through.

There was no wind up and no follow through from Rondo. The only reason there was blood is because he caught Miller in the mouth, which there is no mention in any rulebook that "facial contact is a flagrant foul."

I really can't believe so many people think this was a flagrant foul.

[greenegt]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

Intent does not matter. "I didn't mean to travel." It's still a travel. "I didn't mean to charge.". It's still a charge. It doesn't matter he didn't mean to hit him in the face. He hit him in the face and drew blood. That's a flagrant foul.

I agree with this. Rondo didn't hit Miller's arms hard, going for the ball. He swung and smacked him in the face. Intent does not matter. Flagrant foul. Now, I don't agree with complaining about it, after the fact. You're never going to get a perfectly reffed NBA game, so as long as it is not blatantly one-sided, you have to let some things go.

[Jasong7777]

Re: Brad Miller: Celtics are cheap headhunters...

NBA Rule book: http://www.nba.com/media/2008-09-NBARuleBook.pdf

Section IV—Flagrant Foul
a. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpreted to be
unnecessary, a flagrant foul—penalty (1) will be assessed. A personal foul is charged to the
offender and a team foul is charged to the team.
PENALTY: (1) Two free throws shall be attempted and the ball awarded to the offended
team on either side of the court at the free throw line extended. (2) If the offended player is
injured and unable to attempt his free throws, his coach will select one of the remaining four
players in the game to attempt the free throws. (3) His coach will pick the substitute, who
may not be replaced until the ball is legally touched by a player on the court. (EXCEPTION:
Rule 3—Section V—e.) (4) The injured player may not return to the game. (5) A player will
be ejected if he commits two flagrant fouls in the same game.
b. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpreted to be
unnecessary and excessive, a flagrant foul—penalty (2) will be assessed. A personal foul is

charged to the offender and a team foul is charged to the team.


NBA Referee Guide book: http://www.nba.com/media/2008-09-RefereeGuide.pdf

These fouls are considered unnecessary and/or
excessive. There are two types of flagrant foul,
1 and 2. A flagrant foul 1 is unnecessary contact.
This is usually when a defensive player windsup
and makes hard contact with the offensive
player or makes hard contact and then follows
through. A flagrant foul 2 has the components of
a flagrant foul 1 and is unnecessary and excessive
contact. This usually has a wind-up motion,
hard contact and a follow through. Both fouls
carry a penalty of two free throws and the team
that was fouled retains possession. A flagrant
foul 2 also results in an ejection of the player
committing the foul once it is reviewed by instant
replay. A player also is ejected if he commits two

flagrant foul penalty 1’s in the same game.


Sorry for the small type from the c&p. But as you see, nowhere is "intent" in the rules on flagrant fouls.

Ok, according to the rules it should have been a flagrant. But rules are sometimes interpreted differently. Maybe the refs didn't think the contact was unnecessary. Or maybe its just another example of bad officiating. Or maybe they wanted the Celtics to win. I don't know.