sports illustrated article

[oc]

interesting article:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ees/index.html

here is part of it-
"This isn't the referees' fault. There is so much contact on every possession that they would wear out their whistles nightly if they called every foul. In the Pacers-Pistons game Sunday night, Indiana's Ron Artest drove to the basket and crashed into Detroit's Corliss Williamson, knocking him to the ground. The hit was more NFL than NBA, and it had to be either a blocking foul on Williamson or a charge on Artest, but nothing was called. What's more, no one -- not the players, the coaches, the broadcasters or the fans -- seemed the least bit surprised at the no-call. Everyone seems to have accepted the idea of selective refereeing, where refs decide which muggings to call and which to ignore."

Anybody see this play and agree whether or not it should have been a no call? Forget about the NBA. IF it was a HS game with HS refs-What do you think the call should have been? Although the writer may have a point-I've seen similar plays where a no call was the right call. (I did not see this particular play)