He deserved to be ejected regardless of his reputation Chris Broussard rips Draymond Green for

August 27, 2024

Draymond Green’s ejection has stirred up a controversy in the league with opinions being polar opposites. Chris Broussard, in his take, was quite straight forward to find the call accurate and deserved. But not all agree.

Draymond Green becomes the discussion of the night

The first game of the western conference semi-finals but the Dramond Green ejection saga steals the spotlight. Chris Broussard went as far to say that, even if Draymond’s reputation is not taken into account, the foul is nothing short of a flagrant 2.

The Golden State Warriors and Memphis Grizzlies matchup lived up to its hype and more. The game was an absolute feast to the eyes for the fans. 48 minutes of game time and 48 minutes of uncertainty. The lead was being exchanged through out the game, with Dubs taking home the win in a game that went down the wire.

Despite the thrill the game provided, Draymond was the first topic for everyone to discuss. Draymond is the key to Warrior’s defence and offence. His ejection surely did turn the tables. But along with thrill, the game also served a massive plate of controversy. And its that one plate that everybody wants a taste of.

Many NBA analysts, players and former players have come to the defence of Draymond and have called the officials ‘inconsistent’ and ‘soft’. They are not wrong either as while they were in the league, a play like Draymond’s would usually cost 2 free throws. And had it been an another player other than Green, the ruling surely would not have had been the same. Flagrant 2 to most seems excessive as it does not quite meet the circumstances of the situation in this case.

Chris Broussard on Draymond Green’s ejection

"Draymond deserved to be ejected. It was a flagrant 2 & it was deserved without the reputation. When you add Draymond's reputation onto it that does add & that's true in everything, not just basketball. Reputation always factors into how we judge an action." — @Chris_Broussard pic.twitter.com/HnfZw7IvUe

— First Things First (@FTFonFS1) May 2, 2022

Chris Broussard on the other hand feels that the call was correct. From his perspective, Draymond did pull Brandon Clarke down. According to him there was unnecessary contact and because Brandon was airborn when Draymond ‘slapped his face and pulled his jersey’ the play was dangerous.

Draymond, in his defence, stated that he attempted to block the shot so that he could stop a ‘bucket and one’. He did not intend to pull the jersey and rather tried to save Brandon from getting hurt. Draymond pointed out that he still had his hands on Brandon’s jersey so that he could help him up. Draymond’s veiwpoint has been widely accepted by NBAA players and former players, with them all agreeing Draymond by stating that playoffs are more physical than the easy going regular season.

There's no way Draymond Green should be ejected for that.

That is one of the worst calls I've ever seen in an NBA playoff game.

— Bonta Hill (@BontaHill) May 1, 2022

Draymond Green gets ejected for a grab and yank of Brandon Clarke's jersey. Warriors bench is stunned. Steph Curry to the referees: "That's f****** crazy." They thought it'd be a flagrant 1 maximum.

— Anthony Slater (@anthonyVslater) May 1, 2022

Been ejected for less

— Draymond Green (@Money23Green) April 27, 2022

Chris Broussard feels that reputation too had its role to play in the ruling. Taking Draymond’s history into account, Chris surely is not wrong. Draymond has built quite the reputation of himself over course of multiple fights, fouls and ejections.

But Chris argued that even if Draymond’s history was not taken into account, the foul he committed deserved an ejection.

"You told me! You f*cking told me!"

Draymond Green to Stephen Curry after the Warriors win despite his first-half ejection 🔥pic.twitter.com/ZGCHvCrJir

— ClutchPoints (@ClutchPointsApp) May 1, 2022

The topic is one that has polar opinions and relies a lot on the perception of the viewer. As for the NBA experts, they have gone on record to say that flagrant 2 is not appropriate for this case and expect an action to revert the call.

ncG1vNJzZmiemafAtb%2FPqKmtsl6YvK57zZuYZqaVrMBur8eroKxlkqe8tr%2FSmqmdZaKevbR5w6uYsqWfo7Fus9GenKdllqS%2FbsLInKCoraOhxm6t062YnKOZo7RurtGapZ2nnmKwra3RpJxo