Was Smart's groin punch intentional

None of us can read minds to know whether a play was intentional, but that goes for all players, not just guys on the home town team. It seems inconsistent to me to say that Dwyane Wade's foul on Isaiah Thomas was intentional but then say no one can know for sure what Smart's intention was on this play. I get it -- you want to defend the hometown guy -- but if we're going to make a stand on principle and say that we can't read minds, that principle has to extend to players on other teams, even the loathsome Dwyane Wade.

I can't stand Wade, I think he's one of the dirtiest players in the league, and I strongly believe he has intentionally tried to injure players. He has certainly reveled in the fact that he has injured players. It's ridiculous that he he hasn't been suspended for the stuff he's pulled in the past. But I didn't see "intent" in his foul on Thomas. He reveled in Thomas's injury afterward, but that's a different story.

Maybe Smart's explanation that his arm got caught up on Banes and that he was just trying to rip through Bonner's screen is possible. I'd like to think so. I also think that if a guy built like Smart intentionally wanted to hit a guy in the groin with a windup like that, that Bonner would've been down on the court for a while. But man, that windup and swing sure looked bad.

As far as the league goes, intent doesn't generally enter into it. Based on the action that occurred, regardless of intent, a suspension was the easy call.

Posting on a message board is often a rapid-fire proposition.  Who among us has ample time to massage all of his/her posts over and again to ensure there's minimal possibility that the interpretation of a single word or phrase could possibly differ between writer and reader?

For example, to say something is absolutely true could be interpreted by some people as meaning there can be no doubt that it is true OR it could be interpreted by other people as a shortcut way of intending, "I absolutely believe it's true."

Because of potential multiple interpretations of hurried posts, feathers can be ruffled and feelings hurt.  I guess there's no foolproof way of preventing that from happening.  But a couple of thoughts seem to make a certain amount of success:

On the part of a writer of a message:

• Even in a fast-paced posting environment, give at least a cursory glance over your post in an effort to spot highly "charged" words or phrases that could be open to more than one interpretation.

• If you do receive an angry or sarcastic response that you believe stems from a misconception of your post, rather than answering anger with more anger, consider attempting a way to diffuse the situation by explaining civilly that you might have been misunderstood.

On the part of a reader of a message:

• When faced with a temptation to get riled up over a certain post (and especially a certain word), give some thought as to whether your immediate interpretation might not be the only possible one.

• Before shooting off an immediate retort challenging what you think is the meaning of the word or statement, consider instead asking a question to clarify whether the writer intended to convey the same thing you believe it conveys.

There's often no reason just to drop the gloves based on the initial impression a post makes.

Thanks.

Sam

frankly I thought the NBA would give him 2 games myself.

trouble now is Smart can't get physical with Wade later this week, without big trouble form the NBA.

so who is next man up?

we all know Wade will try some of his thug crap, especially if we are beating them. Most likely on someone smaller than him ( it IS his MO after all).

so WHO on this Celtic team will say..NO more!

Crowder maybe?

in fact I think if I were Brad I would let Crowder bang on Wade form the start of the game.

and if he touches IT at any point in the game...all bets are off. a good old fashion hockey game like the old days, I say.

boy do I miss the old NBA game....LOL.

Guys,

Whether or not it was intentional, and I didn't see the game, so I don't have any insight into that, intention doesn't play into the rule. From the rulebook, section IV - Flagrant Foul: 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. Hitting the guy in the junk can be ruled unnecessary and excessive without being intentional. A flagrant 1 is deemed to just be 'unnecessary'.

Agreed that the refs would need to interpret the situation here. Were there any issues between these two players or between the teams already in the game? Did Marcus seem to aim for the other guys nuts, or did his arm end up there as part of the play? What was his reaction afterward? All of these could go into the interpretation.

-V

kdp,

I might qualify as one of the bigger board fans of Crowder.  And I do think he possesses a load of toughness.  But I also believe that he is one of the most controlled players on the team.  That's one of the things about him (of many) that intrigues me.

One of the elements he controls is the ability to play fierce defense and very energetic offense without over-fouling and without turnovers (lowest turnover rate per minute of anyone on the team and in a virtual tie for fewest fouls per minute on the team).

He sets loads of picks—seemingly on nearly every occasion when he spots an available opposing defender.  But his picks tend not to be bruisers; rather they're more likely of the "brush" variety.  What BobH and I used to seethe about, Vitor's refusal to set solid picks, actually becomes a pretty good weapon in the hands of Jae.

And the secret to the difference, I believe, is that Jae has impeccable timing in setting picks and just about everything else.  Just brushing off an opponent for a brief period can often have as much impact as setting a jolting pick if the brush pick is executed at just the right moment rather than what seemed (in the case of Vitor) to be set on a more random basis.  Jae has an instinct for doing things (including brush picks) at the optimal time to facilitate good things for his teammates.

I'd gladly submit to being accused of going overboard on Crowder, especially because he certainly commits errors (such as (1) the lazy inbounds pass that drove BobH to the Shady Rest Repository for the Unbalanced a few games ago and (2) an excessive number of attempted threes that makes me want to join Bob in that facility.  But the number of REALLY good (not just showy) things he does on the court at one time or another (perhaps even the majority of the time) infuse me with a good feeling about his consistency.

I don't believe I'd expect Jae to be a policeman type of player.  It could be argued that he's too smart and too controlled to fill that role because his first instinct is ALWAYS, ALWAYS what will be best for his team.

Go Jae!  Go Celtics.

Sam

Sam does Sally know of you mancrush on Crowder? LOL

Cow,

She has her bags packed, just in case!

Sam

Intentional or not Smart has a responsibility to be in better control of his body. One Dwayne Wade in the league is one too many.