As I predicted on Twitter yesterday, the NBA did absolutely nothing to Rajon Rondo for his flagrant foul on Brad Miller in the Celtics-Bulls playoff game Tuesday night. Gutless is all I can say to that. This was not only a flagrant foul but also a BOW. Here's what NBA executive vice president of basketball operations Stu Jackson had to say to defend this ridiculous decision:
"We felt Rondo was making a basketball play and going for the ball after a blown defensive assignment by the Celtic team. In terms of the criteria that we use to evaluate a flagrant foul penalty one, generally we like to consider whether or not there was a windup, an appropriate level of impact and a follow-through. And with this foul, we didn’t see a windup, nor did he follow through. So for that reason we’re not going to upgrade this foul to a flagrant foul penalty one."
You gotta be effin' kidding me! Let's analyze a few of the things Jackson said piece by piece:
-- "We felt Rondo was making a basketball play and going for the ball."
REACTION: Really? A basketball play? Going for the ball? How can this be the conclusion. I don't remember being taught in Basketball 101 that it was OK to knock somebody in the face without actually going for the ball and it's CLEAR Rondo is NOT going for the ball. He's doing anything he can to prevent a shot because the last seconds are ticking off the clock and the mood on th court is one of desperation. This was ANYTHING but a basketball play. Try football clothesline maybe.
-- "... we like to consider whether or not there was a windup..."
REACTION: This isn't a baseball pitcher. Basketball players don't have enough time to "wind up." But when you look at Rondo, he certainly comes from high above and swipes downward. It's not as if he waited for the contact to come to him. He sought it out and that is the definition of something that is done intentionally.
-- "... an appropriate level of impact..."
REACTION: When you knock a guy's teeth loose and spill blood everywhere, that usually rises to a point BEYOND an appropriate level of impact, don't you think? Perhaps Rondo's intent was not to injure, but it certainly was to stop Miller dead in his tracks. And what better way to do that to someone than by knocking them in the face?
-- "...and a follow through."
REACTION: The only reason it didn't appear Rondo followed through is because the human skull is a rather solid object and therefore absorbed the blow and stopped the impact of Rondo's hand from "following through." Shouldn't the more relevant question here concern the force with which Rondo delivered the blow?
-- "And with this foul, we didn’t see a windup, nor did he follow through."
REACTION: Funny how they left out the "appropriate level of impact" part, which basically is the most important factor of the whole play.
Lastly, just watch the video and decide for yourself.