Barford tripping himself secured the game for us. When he fell the refs had to review it, when they reviewed it, it’s not doubt about it being a flagrant 1. Had he not fell they would have just called it a common foul, because of course people foul like that all the time at the end of games. But, once it got reviewed they have to go 100% by the book, and the book says a push in the back with no play on the ball is a flagrant 1.
Barford tripped because a 230 or so guy hit him in the back with both hands and knocked him off balance. Anyway, the call was not based on JB ending up on the floor but because he was pushed (with the perp making no play whatsoever on the ball. Flagrant 1, by definition!
The other guys foot hit Barford’s foot and Barford tripped himself.
I watch a lot of basketball, and guys do a little push all the time when fouling at the end of games to stop the clock. Had he not fell I don’t think it would have been called a flagrant. You got NBA guys arguing on twitter that they foul like that all the time. Regardless, my point is, by him tripping and them having to review the call, they had to go 100% by the book, and by the book that’s a flagrant foul. Refs made the right call, I’m just not sure they would have made it without the review.
You may be right that they would not have called it without the fall, but that was an obvious foul with zero attempt to play the ball so I would hope they would have made the call, because it was the right call with or without the trip.