Post-game Reactions

The Celtics just learned that Perkins won’t suspended for Game 4.

Obviously a huge break for the Celtics. Although, I’m sure will hear it from Magic fans for the rest of series (and if we win the series, dare I say, a new tuck rule gripe?).

The NBA also downgraded Ron Artest’s foul from a flagrant-2 to a flagrant-1, so it appears that he won’t be facing a suspension (at least yet anyway).

I think the NBA is handling these situations pretty well considering the other way things could have gone.

The following two tabs change content below.
Share →
  • The league got this one right.

  • magic fan

    total BS, had that been a magic player, see Dwight's elbow while battling in the paint against Phili, Perkin's foul would have been an auto suspension. I have no problem with the NBA letting the game get rough. Let the boys play… But at least keep things fair. When they suspended Dwight and Alston (deserved by Alston I might add) the NBA came out and said the rules are very clear about contact above the shoulders. An elbow into the throat I guess from a Celtics is OK huh?

    Keep things fair at least. Seems like preferential treatment to me!

  • Jack Sprat

    I'd much rather see a more competitive series with all the players who can play playing (especially in this instance where Perkin's intent isn't clear one way or the other). It's the same reason I was happy to see Ben Gordon come back after his after his injury. Besides, if Howard plays like he did last night, you don't have anything to worry about, do you?

  • PJ

    Yeah, I think it was the right call, too — but I'm a Celtics fan, and I'm sure this will feed the "Celtics get all the calls" fire raging since Rondo's rough fouls got light treatment.

    Briefly, I will say that the big difference between Perk's foul and Howard's (and Alston's, for that matter) is that Perk's foul occurred within the flow of play. Howard's, if I recall, was after a shot went in right? Or after a rebound? In any case, it appeared to be _after_ a play, like Alston's was, which makes the foul seem clearly vidictive, rather than a byproduct of physical play.

  • PJ

    I should add that I'm not sure that Howard should have been suspended. The only suspension I've been totally on board with is Fisher's, because his foul was egregious.

  • Jason

    Not BS at all.

    Let's see

    1) Elbow didn't actually hit the throat. Stop listening to Jon Barry (about everything, btw) and watch the tape. He hit the very top of his chest, not the throat.

    2) Pietrus flopped. Clearly. Deal with it.

    3) Perk had his elbow up and moved his body. Pietrus was moving into him, too, as it were. He didn't swing his elbow at all like Howard did to a guy whose heads was turned.

    The only thing BS is magic fans who are clearly showing their bias and ignorance by continuing to call this BS or to equate it to Howard/Dalembert in the slightest.

    This was completely different and I believe the league got it right. And I also agree (surprisingly) they've been getting most of them right.

  • The Howard and Perk incidents were completely different. Howard's was a freaking UFC forearm aimed at Dalembert's head.

  • Tony N

    Celtics don't deserve sucess. I used to be a fan, but Rondo, Garnett, House, and Perkins are so full of themselves that it really is hard for anyone – not from Boston – to like them. They play dirty and call it "toughness"??? Their fans are just as bad and have no class.


  • Tony N

    This call was right, but the ones by Rondo vs. the Bulls were horribly incorrect and that's why this topic now has become such a conspiracy. Looking at that closed fist causing 7 stitches, and calling it a play on the ball is rediculous. And then to throw Hinrich into the scorer's table deliberately – no play on the ball this time and no suspension either; it's hard not to think that Stu and Stern are giving preferential treatment with ratings as their motivator.