Watch it again. The foul comes a second before Griffin begins to elevate. However Haywood hung on to prevent the "and 1". Hard foul? Yes. Flagrant? I don't think so. If you're going to continue your motion to the basket, you should expect the contact to continue. I don't think the contact was unnecessary on Haywood's part since it was Griffin's motion of continuation that caused the hard fall.
Some people take too much pleasure in debating calls. This wasn't malicious, it happens, you move forward. Done.
I definitely prefer the old school way of playing rough but Haywood's foul was clearly a flagrant by the rules of the NBA. A flagrant 1 is defined as unnecessary contact committed by a player against an opponent and criteria used to judge those fouls are: 1. The severity of the contact; 2. Whether or not the player was making a legitimate basketball play (e.g., whether a player is making a legitimate effort to block a shot; note, however, that a foul committed during a block attempt can still be considered flagrant if other criteria are present such as recklessness and hard contact to the head); 3. Whether, on a foul committed with a player's arm or hand, the fouling player wound up and/or followed through after making contact; 4. The potential for injury resulting from contact (e.g., a blow to the head and a foul committed while a player is in a vulnerable position); 5. The severity of any injury suffered by the offended player; and 6. The outcome of the contact (e.g., whether it led to an altercation) Haywood chopped Blake on the head, tried to pull him from behind as he was going up for a dunk(vulnerable position), and followed through(didn't let go) after pulling his arm down - all of which ended in the likely result the NBA is trying to prevent - injury to the fouled player. That's definitely a good foul in the old school days, but by definition in today's game, it's absolutely a Flagrant 1. ...and I think Haywood probably doesn't have much room to offer Blake any advice given the level of mediocrity Haywood performs at. If he hustled all the time and gave 110% on every play, maybe he would be a star too....but Haywood doesn't and thus he is another underachieving 7ft bench player.
That was stupid. Should not have been a flagrant. I hate how the NBA has double standards, Blake Griffin's already on the receiving end of some favorable whistling now.
The only thing I don't like is the way they call the flagrants. If he had not fallen then it wouldn't have been called a flagrant. They need to call every foul a flagrant when there is no play on the ball and that just doesn't happen. It is the NBA referees after all, so this type of inconsistency will always occur.
absolutely hate the Mavs.. but that was no flagrant. Seen AB get mauled a whole lot worse with no call.
It is impossible for referees to be 100% consistent on how they call flagrant fouls because, to some degree, they must consider what ends up happening to the player being fouled. If there was a strict, legal definition for flagrant fouls that was clear to everyone, players would adapt by either pushing it to the uttermost limit on a regular basis or by finding loopholes. That would be dangerous. I think the uncertainty causes restraint.
haywood is a moron, if ur gonna foul, make it a hard good one, get ur money's worth! u have plenty, u have not even earned that money hayass
That's because many NBA players know that the reg. season is not a sprint. It's a marathon. Blake is different. He definitely can ball, but season-long endurance is a key factor. He might hit that wall and really take a hit later on that season. That being said -- if he can keep this up and not show any signs of fatigue later on... I am very optimistic about his future in the NBA.
that was a flagrant, holding his arm a second or so after the original foul is pretty hard to not be considered excessive, and the result could have been catastrophic.
I love it when the big guys bang inside. Aggressive pushing and shoving to fight inside for post position is just awesome to watch. You should be able to use your body (by pusing and shoving, not pulling or holding) to improve position anywhere on the floor, whether on offense or defense. Scrap the charging and offensive foul rule. I love it when guys setting the screen use their body to bump a dude off, I love it when the guy uses his body to get past a screen too. You should be able to do that - all the pushing and shovinig is cool. The only time when pushing or shoving a guy should be banned is when the dude is in the air. If the pushing and shoving was allowed to go on and its best man wins (no elbows) - than you would see all this flopping dissappear. The guys would know the whistle aint gonna blow. I dont even mind slapping of hands when you are trying to steal or block a shot. This "all ball" crap is soft, it should be hand is part of the ball. But come on dude, pulling or holding on to a guys jersey or body as he goes past you is cheap, weak and cheating. Just the way I see it anyways.
I agree, they can't always get it right, but there are too many instances where someone doesn't go for the ball and holds the opponent's arm and it's not considered a flagrant. In this instance, Griffin went up without control and as a result came down hard, fueling the notion that it is a flagrant.
As I said before, the refs have to consider what actually happens to the player being fouled. If "not making a play on the ball" doesn't result in excessive contact or doesn't have a nasty effect on the person with the ball, it is a regular foul. They cannot call it a flagrant foul unless it's really flagrant, if you know what I mean.
I agree with 100% of the things you say about Blake Griffin. I LOVED watching his workouts during the offseason before he got drafted. This guy you could tell had ridiculous amount of heart. Would've been nice to steal that #1 pick .
I see what you're saying, but too much of that depends on the person with the ball and his reaction to the contact rather than the foul itself.
