Someone care to explain why Boozer's elbow to Landry's face wasn't a flagrant 2 warranting suspension? This was the exact same "unnatural" basketball move that got Kobe Bryant suspended last year: <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y6FOsBjD3ik&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y6FOsBjD3ik&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> If you watch the NBA recap (http://boss.streamos.com/wmedia/nba/nbacom/recaps/recap08_p173_houuta.asx) it is pretty clear to me that this was intentional. Nobody who is going for a rebound that is ABOVE them is going to swing their arms to the SIDE, away from the ball. Its even clearer that the motion isn't natural or accidental because only Boozer's RIGHT arm swings (the one smashing Landry's grill), while his left arm stays relatively still. I understand not catching it during the game because it was very quick, but any reasonable interpretation of this action HAS to conclude that it was intentional. Big men like to clear space when they are rebounding and that's fine, but a foul is a foul and when it is unnecessary, it warrants a flagrant; when it's excessive (i.e. taking a key player out of the game) it warrants suspension. I know Landry wasn't upset about it after the game because he's a good sport, but he also didn't see the hit in slow motion. Sometimes the Rockets are just too nice and rarely complain about calls, but their respect for officials sure hasn't been currying any favor. I'd love to see them lobby for this foul to get upgraded to at least a Flagrant 1 just for the principle of recognizing that Landry was fouled out there and didn't lose his tooth magically, if not a 2 warranting suspension.
Boozer isnt really the type to commit these kinda fouls. Okur I could see easily, or maybe another frustrated Jazz player. Boozer has always seemed to be above that kinda stuff, and just yells when he misses FTs. If I had to guess, that would be the only part of his game that Sloan isnt fully in love with. Boozer is the least floppy of the Jazz, so I dont really see this as intentional. I think he MAY have been trying to impede Landry's progress (similar to what Scola did to AK47) by making himself wider. I wouldnt add anything sinister to it. Guess if Landry had thrown himself to the floor the call would have been made?
I honestly don't think it was intentional. Probably should have still been a foul, but intentional? Nah. Though you've got to commend Landry for sticking with the play, even though he threw the ball away. He could've threw himself onto the floor unnaturally, like, oh I don't know, Kirilenko or Okur. That goes to show how ridiculous flopping is getting in the NBA. You can take a shot to the mouth (Which by the way is one of the most stunning things I've ever experienced when I've been hit playing basketball, it took me awhile to even regain my composure) like Landry and keep going, but if another player puts any extra pressure posting up or with a forearm, it'll send you flying. Hmm.
just to be clear i'm not saying Boozer "'intended"' to smash Landry's face and knock Landry's tooth out. Flagrant fouls don't require that the end result be matched by the player's intent; just that a player makes unnecessary contact (i.e. play that need not have been made, accidental or not). When I say intentional, I am saying that Boozer intentionally threw his arm out: for what reason is debatable, but it wasn't a natural action. He swung his arm of his own volition. I like Boozer and normally don't anticipate malicious action on his part, so his intended purpose was likely just to clear space, but the fact is he hit Landry. At the least, its a foul. Then consider that the contact was unnecessary (flagrant 1). Then, even though it would be hard to anticipate injury resulting from that action, it did, consider that the result (bloody mouth, missing tooth, key player leaves the game) was excessive. Malicious intent or not, Boozer made a bad play that is punishable by the rules. At least that's my argument and I'm sticking to it. http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_b.html?nav=ArticleList A flagrant foul-penalty (1) is unnecessary contact committed by a player against an opponent. A flagrant foul-penalty (2) is unnecessary and excessive contact committed by a player against an opponent. It is an unsportsmanlike act and the offender is ejected immediately.
I don't think Boozer was doing anything more than blocking out. BUT.....it was EXACTLY the same kind of deal that Scola did to AK47 in the previous game....... DD
Good grief... I was laughing so freaking hard looking at the recap. First Rafer kiss and Landry expression after the kiss. Second, Landry's smile with the missing teeth. LOL, I laughed so hard.
It was much worse than Scola's "foul" on AK47 in Game 2. Boozer knew he was there, he didn't aim to knock a tooth out, but a face blow? A throat blow? Certainly within the realm of conception. What it was was Kobra Kai tactics. The Jazz play to injure. They sweep the leg. Their coach runs the Kobra Kai dojo. And we can't do anything about it because we're the good guys. We have to do it the right way. Utah fans outside the stadium showed public support for the illegal polygamist commune. What more ammunition do we need? Everything the Jazz stand for is evil.
I didn't have an issue with the elbow. It seemed very incidental. How about Boozer's jump spin for a layup? There is absolutely NO WAY he can physically make that move without traveling. The fact the Rockets won despite a lot of just plain horrible calls by the refs makes it even more impressive. But hey, that's what to be expected in Utah and the reason they have barely lost there.
I also thought the hit was a little suspect. Fantastic analasys, dookiester. suspend bozer for game 4
that move Boozer did was similar to Scola's move he did I believe in the 1st quarter where he spun one way and then the other.... From a distance it certainly looks like a travel but on closer inspection neither of the players move their pivot foot.... its just pure skill on both Scola's and Boozer's part.
It looks like a borderline call considering there are a lot more things the Jazz are doing, like AK47 hooking people and falling over, that should be called.
Are you kidding me? I don't remember the Scola play you are referring to, but there is no way that Boozer spin was not a travel. Like I said, it's physically impossible to do without, not only picking up your pivot foot, but moving it somewhere else all together. His feet switched places. Anyway, who cares. They won and I wasn't trying to whine about the officiating, just something I was just pointing out.
Jazz treatment at home is crazy. I can't understand why Jazz performs so well on road except for ref treatment.
It was intentional IMO. Did he see Carl and think "ooh I'm going to elbow him in the grill!" I doubt it but I do think he made a move that he has been conditioned to make in hopes that it will make "incidental" contact and cause harm to opposing players. He wasn't boxing out or doing anything to secure the ball. It was an unnatural motion that every once in a blue moon lands and hurts another guy. The league should at least review it. If I'm Carl I'm looking for some "incidental" payback down the road.
I think we have a great argument...Boozer is a douche and its been proven over and over again...Why this wasn't a foul is beyond me and punishment should be handed down...
You know what? I DVRed the game and am watching it again...Boozer had his hands out in front of him then violently swung his right arm back. I think you have a point....it looks dirty to me. DD
