Official Bulls VS. Celtics Game 5 Post....

[inine5]

Originally Posted by Seymore CAKE

Originally Posted by Nasty Mane23

Do you really think he's gonna get fired Come on man First Year coach made it to playoffs Giving the defending champs the fight of there lives. Im not defending him he has definitely made costly blunders such as not calling timeouts Not Doubling PP Leaving Tyrus Thomas out of the game

He deserves to be fired... this team made it to the playoffs off talent alone, it had absolutely !%!@ to do with coaching. I've watched 70% of the bulls games this yr and I have never seen him make a coaching decision that mattered. He has never made any defensive adjustments when someone is absolutely TORTURING someone(see Lebrons back to back 40 in the span of 4 days I believe or Wades 50+ or his failure in allowing Shawn Marrion to give us 30 on several occassions and countless other examples), he often calls t.o for plays that go away from what is working, and he's horrible at managing the flow of a game. He got lucky this yr, I'd be content if we made an offer to Jeff Van Gundy. this man is the *@+$$!! worst.

Originally Posted by Shaq DIESEL 34

If they called the Flagrant, it would be automatic bulls win. 2 shots and the ball with 3 secs left. On a debateable call, would we really want NBA REFS to decide the outcome of a playoff game. The game was in Brad Millers hands, make two freethrows, and we head to OT. If that's Rose or BG at the line, we're probably in the 5th OT right now still.

DEBATEABLE CALL?

Wheres the debate??? He didn't hooked off on him???


Whats debatable about Rajon taking a clean shot at his head??? There was no play on the ball what so ever, He wasn't even in a position to make a play on the ball. Given that the NBA has had a strict "No Head Shots" policy this yr the fact that they didn't call that was an autrocity. Everybody keeps saying how back in the day that would have been a regular foul, however the NBA specifically made rules to remove that play thus they should adhere to the precident they started.

Do I agree with the changes they've made... No.

Has play adjusted to those changes??? Yes.

Thus that should have been called according to their rules.

it was flagrant and they should have had the FT and the ball.... but regardless, the refs will never make that kind of call at that point in thegame unless someone deliberately punched or elbowed him in the face.... the rules are there but they get overruled in the last seconds. same kind of thinghappened last year between the spurs/lakers. not a flagrant but recall brent barry had the ball, was fouled by fisher and nothing called.... refs are just notgonna decide the game like that. it won;t all of a sudden start happening this year. what will likely have to happen is there's enough controversy overthis that stern publicly declares that fouls that can decide the game will be called in the final seconds.....

 

[shuges]

You guys keep insisting he made NO play on the ball.....

Whatever man. Y'all just seeing what you want to see. To say he made NO play on the ball when all he was doing was looking at the ball the entire play?

All I know is that if this were the Bucks vs the Wolves (2 teams nobody really cares about on here), and a flagrant WAS called, dudes would have been *****inghard saying stuff like:

"oh man, how they gonna end the game on a call like that??"
"yo, the league is soft now"
"stern's orders!"
"they should have just called a regular foul and not a flagrant"

 

[JD617]

So everyone just wants to talk about the flagrant and no one wants to mention that atrocious call to foul Ray out of the game? They've been calling Perkfor those same moving screens all series, and then they just decide that it's suddenly a double foul?

Like Cake said, don't blow an 11-point lead when the Big 3 is down to 1. It's as simple as that.

 

[inine5]

Originally Posted by JD617


So everyone just wants to talk about the flagrant and no one wants to mention that atrocious call to foul Ray out of the game? They've been calling Perk for those same moving screens all series, and then they just decide that it's suddenly a double foul?

Like Cake said, don't blow an 11-point lead when the Big 3 is down to 1. It's as simple as that.

they called no fouls on perkins, 40+ minutes and no fouls

but they were transferred those moving screen fouls over to ray....

Vinny better have the Bulls knock Rondo on his +%@ repeatedly in Game 6.
they won't, not all game anyways, everyone knows the league will be keeping an eye on the game, making sure things don;t get out of hand....expect Game 6 to be very ticky tacky in the calls.....

 

[seymore cake]

iNiNe, There wasn't a visible blow to the head in that play last year between Brent and Fisher either... It was more like the Tony Allen foul a few playsbefore, and yes even though I was rooting for the Lakers in that series, they should have called that foul too

Shuges, are you telling me that Rondo had a chance at making a play on the ball when he took that swipe? Brad Miller wasn't already past him when Rajoninitated his jump? The ball wasn't already extended way past his reach? Seriously??

Is this what you're telling me Shuges? And for the record, I personally think we deserved to lose this game due to our poor coaching decisions, but to saythat play didn't warrant that call given the state of the NBA is just being a homer G

 

[gunna get it]

Originally Posted by SHUGES

You guys keep insisting he made NO play on the ball.....

Whatever man. Y'all just seeing what you want to see. To say he made NO play on the ball when all he was doing was looking at the ball the entire play?

I think ur seein it how u wana.
the rules have been added that blows to the head are flagrant fouls.
a flagrant foul doesnt have to be intetionally meant to do harm, its about wrecklessness and puttin players in harms way.
who cares if he was looking at the ball, like its not possible to flagrantly and wrecklessly foul someone cus ur looking at the ball.

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--penalty (1)

b. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpret-ed 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. a flagrant foul--penalty (2)


thats why there are two types of flagrant fouls, one for intent and one for unintentional wrecklessness

 

[JD617]

they called no fouls on perkins, 40+ minutes and no fouls

I know, I've never seen that before in the 6 years he's been here. I didn't even think that was possible.

Up until last night though, they've been watching him like a hawk.

 

[i nasmatic i]

Rondo have Miller the rip on the back of someone's neck circa 1998

 

[shuges]

Originally Posted by Seymore CAKE

Shuges, are you telling me that Rondo had a chance at making a play on the ball when he took that swipe? Brad Miller wasn't already past him when Rajon initated his jump? The ball wasn't already extended way past his reach? Seriously??

Is this what you're telling me Shuges? And for the record, I personally think we deserved to lose this game due to our poor coaching decisions, but to say that play didn't warrant that call given the state of the NBA is just being a homer G

Y'all gonna make me late for work.

But in MY opinion, he WAS playing the ball. Whether he had an actual chance to make the play or not is a different story.

And if he was NOT playing the ball, then that too is a different story.

 

[S4L]

Don't really matter to me if it was a flagrant or not, no excuse to lose a lead like that.

Rose really looked like a rookie out there. That alley pass to Noah was just terrible.


We coming back to Boston though. Book it...

 

[inine5]

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--penalty (1)

b. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpret-ed 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. a flagrant foul--penalty (2)


the key words are "interpreted" and "unnecessary" and "excessive".... so here's the thought process......

consider the ref interpreting the play:

1. the rule says "with or without the ball" so Rondo not going after the ball is irrelevant in this case

2. now we determine if the play was "unnecessary" or "excessive". i see rondo trying to prevent a basket so he grabs at whatever he can,he's 6'2, Miller is 7 feet..... little guy needs to put more into the foul attempt to stop the play..... i see him grab his face, what was the intent?the play happened so fast. it's inconclusive that it was deliberate to cause harm. when in doubt, i cannot call a flagrant especially if it may determinethe outcome of the game. player is just grabbing at whatever he can. therefore, i cannot quite consider the play to be "unnecessary" or"excessive".

result = regular foul

if rondo was 7 feet and miller was 6'2 and the face was grabbed, it may be a different outcome. or if rose was the one driving to the basket and rondofouled him in that manner.

 

[duba169]

as a knick fan who has no love for the bulls or celtics

that was a flagrant. Honestly, It's not debatable. Rondo looked like he was giving him a gill as he was going up.

how you gonna say he was going for the ball when he smacks the **** out of someones head lol, this isn't a pick up game. As a smaller dude I know exactlywhat he did because I've done it before. Rondo knew what was about to happen when he went up.

 

[mez 0ne]

I still wouldn't call that a flagrant, this is playoff bball man.

 

[shaq diesel 34]

Originally Posted by JD617

they called no fouls on perkins, 40+ minutes and no fouls

I know, I've never seen that before in the 6 years he's been here. I didn't even think that was possible.

Up until last night though, they've been watching him like a hawk.
To his credit though.. he didn't foul. He knew they were basically running with just him and Scal. Dude played a hell of a game. 16, 19 and7 blocks in 48 minutes.

 

[jaygunna]

Inine, so u think he just "GRABBED" at miller's face? Not swing hard enough and to bloody dudes face?

Like a dude said in this thread, if he got hit like that hoopin runnin a pick up game, he comin up tryin to punch peples lights out. and I don't know notone person who wouldn't react like that, that was flagrant, excessive and wreckless. Playoff ball or not, swingin and conecting to dude's face isreally out of bounds.

 

[inine5]

Originally Posted by JayGunnA

Inine, so u think he just "GRABBED" at miller's face? Not swing hard enough and to bloody dudes face?

Like a dude said in this thread, if he got hit like that hoopin runnin a pick up game, he comin up tryin to punch peples lights out. and I don't know not one person who wouldn't react like that, that was flagrant, excessive and wreckless. Playoff ball or not, swingin and conecting to dude's face is really out of bounds.

after looking at it like 100x, yes, he deliberately grabbed his face.... but if you were the ref and it happened split second.... it;s hard totell. there were 3 guys there and bodies flying all over. and when they viewed the replay, i bet they already decided not to change the call.... the replayviewings was to determine time left.

 

[mez 0ne]

I think if the Bulls reacted more adamantly, the refs would've changed the call to a flagrant.

There wasn't much protest on the Bulls part.

 

[CP1708]

Didn't Ariza get a flagrant and he actually got ball on his foul of Rudy?

Ariza clipped the back of Rudy's head, but also put his palm SQUARELY on the ball in the same millisecond.


Rondo never got near the ball and drew blood. Tough call there.

 

[duba169]

honestly just imagine this in a pick up game. There would have been a real problem after that play....

playoff basketball don't mean you can take someones head off as much as i still wish the nba was like that, it isn't

 

[memp2atl85]

i hate how folks say "The refs don't want to decide the game by make a late call" Rondo decided the game with the flagrant...the refs just bailedhim out.

 

[peteweezy]

I still wouldn't call that a flagrant, this is playoff bball man.
That sounds good until its your team.� I wouldn't have called it flagrant either but let that have been the other way around it would havebeen people crying.� Miller should have made the ft's though and we gotta stop doing like Denny Green said

Hell this series should be over but we keep getting big leads mucking it up.�

 

[brandnew21]

^getting big leads and mucking it up? haha you were up by what, 11? for the record, as a celtics fan, i will say that it was a bad call and should have been aflagrant. i understand the ref didn't want to decide the game, but i think the officiating for this entire game was awful. ray allen was almost taken outof this game completely, he had 4 fouls at the beginning of the 3rd and had to sit out the rest of that q, comes back for a few mins and is ejected in thefourth? he was called for a foul on ben gordon flopping his way around screens and thats no diss to ben gordon, but the refs should know which fouls to call ina playoff game. and that specific example wasn't even a foul, gordon flopped. there were 2 calls like that on him and thats not even considering the millerdouble foul that they have consistantly been calling on perkins for two years. but moving on. the bulls should have won this game. the c's were down rayallen AND garnett, pierce has been off all series, and at this point u cant call gordon's shots lucky cause he always makes them. paul pierce has drawnfouls on 3 pters in pivotal times in this series and gotten no calls so its also frustrating to see the bulls get bailed out on those as well. yes. miller gotfouled. but you're acting like the bulls didn't get ridic calls this game. if it WAS a technical or flagrant or w/e and the bulls won, celtics fanswould be *****ing about the favorable calls on the bulls end. that just means it was terribly officiated. but there were enough calls that favored the bullsfor me to safely say they should have won this, i think what they need to do is focus on getting paul pierces #!!+ out of salmons mouth, b/c salmons gotworked.

 

[chitown4eva]

Originally Posted by Mez 0ne

I think if the Bulls reacted more adamantly, the refs would've changed the call to a flagrant.

There wasn't much protest on the Bulls part.

That's my thinking process. I was watching the game and intially I didn't think it was flagrant, neither did the refs and apparently the Bulls playerson the court. If I remember correctly, there was really no talk of a flagrant until the announcer mentioned Vinny lobbying for one. Doug Collins joked thatit would've been flagrant if 2 teeth were knocked out. It just didn't look that serious initally, and no one wants to admit that.

And yeah, if this was pickup ball, it would be crackin right now, but that's what made old playoff series great to watch. Teams developed a genuine hatefor each other and it made for better competition. The NBA today is too damn Hollywood for my taste.

 

[antbanks81]

this game is over! lets just hope we can play a WHOLE game 6. as bad as refs were, our beloved bulls choked. we were winning despite refs, vinny and co.coaching and bens poor shooting. time management and defensive adustments are necessary and we didn't execute.

 

[doyung9]

The Bulls had AT LEAST 10 minutes (last 5 of regulation/OT) to keep the Celtics at bay, AND the last shot ofregulation to win the game. They HAD THEIR OWN DESTINY IN THEIR HANDS, because regardless of the foul call, they still got a foul call,which if Miller makes the free throws, they're in OT.

Was it a flagrant? By definition, yes. and I'm a Celtics fan. But the referees did the right thing by LETTING THEPLAYERS DECIDE THE GAME.