Video: Shaq's 'laws of physics' flagrant foul on Rodney Stuckey

Home
NFL
MLB
NBA
NHL
College
NASCAR
Golf
UFC
Boxing
Soccer
Tennis
Action Sports
- GrindTV Home
- Skate
- Surf
- Snow
- Wake
- BMX
- Motocross
More
- Australian Football (AU)
- IRL
- CFL
- MLS
- Cricket (IN)
- Olympics
- Cycling
- Rugby(UK)
- Formula One(UK)
- WNBA
- High School
- World Cup Skiing
- Horse Racing
- All Sports

Here's what everyone and their grandma are talking about this morning. Pistons guard Rodney Stuckey rises toward the hoop with the ball extended, only to be met by Mr. Shaquille O'Neal and his tree trunk arms. Crash. Bang. Flagrant '2' foul. Bye, Shaq.

Was that foul "unnecessary and excessive"? I definitely don't think so — as you'll soon see/hear on today's TBJ vidcast — but hey, you be the judge. But before you decide, check out Shaq's hilarious Sir Issac Newton explanation of the collision:

"The law of physics states that a body in motion stays in motion," O'Neal said. "And if you have two objects that meet in the air, the smaller object is going to fall much harder at the same rate of speed it was going. I've never been the type of player to take anyone out. I was going for the ball."

Yes, Shaq knows not how he may appear to the world; but feels like a boy playing on the seashore, diverting himself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before him.

« Prev Behind the box score, where the Mavs enjoy teamwork
Next » Photo: Ronald McDonald watching, plotting, waiting ...

NBA

More NBA News

123 Comments

Post a Comment

1 - 25 of 123

First
« Previous
Next »
Last

1. Posted by Josh I Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:35 pm EDT
Report Abuse

as far as some flagrant 2's go, this is pretty clean. he's not trying to hurt the dude, and he didnt swing his arms at him. hard foul, but only because of shaq's beast-like gorilla size. he can't help it. his explanation is pretty funny though.
2. Posted by Silas Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:30 pm EDT
Report Abuse

That was an overreaction - but Shaq could have helped himself by being a little more contrite. The whole "what did I do?" attitude didn't read well, given how hard Stuckey landed.
3. Posted by Skye Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:26 pm EDT
Report Abuse

He didn't go for the ball plus he followed through and threw Stuckey to the floor after he had passed... there probably wasn't any intent, but you can't officiate intent. I think honestly a flagrant 1 and an accompanying fine would have been more appropriate.
4. Posted by Justin Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:44 pm EDT
Report Abuse

What an acting job by Stuckey on the "bounce".
5. Posted by denmark240 Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:41 pm EDT
Report Abuse

Shaq reminds me of one those old guys at the gym that cant get in the right defensive position in time an ends up hurting somebody because theyre too old and slow. If shaq was going for the ball, hes really lost a lot of athletisism
6. Posted by Orville V Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:46 pm EDT
Report Abuse

this is an easy call. he got contact with the head and kinda threw stuckey to the ground. that's generally a flagrant 2. shaq's been called for some dubious flagrants in his career but this doesn't qualify.
7. Posted by va Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:31 pm EDT
Report Abuse

So shaq actually sat through his Physics class. good job fella. I had an A in Physics class back in college and can't even remember what that law is all about
8. Posted by fishonmyplane Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:00 pm EDT
Report Abuse

Clearly a flagrant 2. This wasn't a body-to-body "collision". Shaq swung both his arms out to the side and hit Stuckey right in the head. It was basically a flying, 2-armed clothesline. If that's not a flagrant 2 I don't know what is.
9. Posted by dookie Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:47 pm EDT
Report Abuse

No, it's conservation of momentum.
m1v1 + m2v2 (initial) = m1v1 + m2v2 (final)
Jay
10. Posted by Robin L Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:26 pm EDT
Report Abuse

it looks like shaq wanted to make a play on the ball, but completely missed and ended up grabbing stuckey's arm.
11. Posted by alexcool1979 Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:50 pm EDT
Report Abuse

Respect the middle, little man !!!
12. Posted by Craig Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:30 pm EDT
Report Abuse

The more I watch this, the more I think Shaq deserved what he got...he made sure he wasn't dunked on...that was his concern
13. Posted by Vincent M Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:49 pm EDT
Report Abuse

i don't really follow basketball, but after watching that a few times, stuckey definetely added more to it then there was. his head didn't even hit the floor. and i thought shaq went to college for basketball, not to learn
14. Posted by Ivan Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:25 pm EDT
Report Abuse

poor stuckey got the 'hack of shaq'
15. Posted by pzp Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:35 pm EDT
Report Abuse

i think shaq woulda been fine had he not used both arms...how many shot blockers drive with both arms they always reach one which kinda is a give away that his first intent was stopping stuckey..I think had he only went up with his right arm to the ball it wouldnt have been any flagrant foul regardless of how stuckey fell
16. Posted by kilgannon Thu Sep 03, 2009 6:54 pm EDT
Report Abuse

Stuckey definitely played this one up.
17. Posted by yas Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:01 pm EDT
Report Abuse

no flagrant, he was trying to grab the ball. Stucky shouldn've used his brain and got out of the way
18. Posted by pzp Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:35 pm EDT
Report Abuse

and definately a classic flop by stuckey that im sure will play over and over on sportscenter as everyone debates if his head does make contact with the floor...i spose a good job by stuckey to get shaq kicked out after he was destroy them early on
19. Posted by G C Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:17 pm EDT
Report Abuse

yeah, i do think that head "bounce" was fake, and his head only jerked up because he was trying to avoid hitting his head on the floor. So, the fall really isn't as bad as it appears to be.
20. Posted by familydojo_buff Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:58 pm EDT
Report Abuse

I think it was a good foul he wasnt tryin to hurt dude, When you come into the paint you'd better eat ur spinach shaq is a beast so that what happens when u run into a beast. People say it was a hard foul cus he didnt jump, wake up people he didnt have to jump to block the shot, thats why say the take it hard to the whole huh!
21. Posted by George C Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:04 pm EDT
Report Abuse

lakers fan who can't stand shaq and yet here i say: there's no way that's a flagrant 2... i'm not even sure it's a flagrant 1. he fouled him. that's all. stuckey's a big boy, he can take it, although he rolled around like a soccer player for 5 minutes after, then got up and seemed just fine to me...
22. Posted by willwiz Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:45 pm EDT
Report Abuse

pretty sure given how shaq's body moved afterward the contact, he was actually going for the ball, it looks like his arm got caught with stuckey's. given shaqs ages and the lack of atheleticism at this point, anyone who takes physics should be able to tell thats whats gonna happen using the, ya, law of conservation of momentum, (shaq was pretty close, except its not the falling but the torque exerted on stuckey was much greater result in the swing to the floor and the bouncing action
23. Posted by Jovan Da Ny ReP Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:10 pm EDT
Report Abuse

I'm gonna admit, i do no like shaq at all, but he was clearly going for the ball, no way is that flagrant.
24. Posted by jizguy-jif690 Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:34 pm EDT
Report Abuse

little man should of known better.shaq will defend the basket,that's his freaking job.hear that nba players?ya'll better think twice before attacking the basket when Shaq's patrolling the court.not on his beat..
25. Posted by Controversy Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:25 pm EDT
Report Abuse

That was a biased call anyway. Players have been fouling Shaq like that for years and the Refs dont call flagrants. You have to let the players play because Shaq gets beat up everynight.