DiJonai Carrington’s Flagrant 2 foul on Sophie Cunningham automatically resulted in her ejection from the game. She will also be facing a $1,000 fine and possible additional sanctions for her “White Privilege” social media post following the ejection. But for Fox News columnist Joe Concha, all of that falls far short of what the situation demands.
Watch What’s Trending Now!
Speaking on Fox News’ The Big Weekend Show, a clip of which they shared on their X page, Concha addressed the incident from a very different angle, describing the foul as deliberate and politically motivated.
“This was targeting Sophie Cunningham,” Concha said, “And I don’t care if the player is white or black, it does not matter. When you do this to somebody, this is horrible for the league. Obviously this was done because Sophie Cunningham stood up for women, saying that men shouldn’t play against women in sports.
“She [Carrington] should be suspended for the rest of the season because this wasn’t a whoops. This was intentional. This was targeted.”
Like Concha pointed out, Sophie Cunningham has been at the centre of a league-wide controversy that has now stretched for nearly three weeks. In July, ESPN published an article in which she expressed clear opposition to transgender athletes competing in women’s sports. And since then, the backlash has been widespread and sustained, taking the form of boos at road games, counter-rallies, and pointed public criticism from players, coaches, and commentators across the sport.
As it turns out, DiJonai Carrington has been openly on the other side of that debate. In fact, just days before their on-court physical altercation, Carrington explicitly aligned herself against Cunningham’s views.
Specifically, when USWNT soccer legend Megan Rapinoe published a video heavily criticising Cunningham and anti-trans political activism in women’s sports, Carrington responded in the comments with three words: “Clock it, Megan.”
For Joe Concha, such prior public alignment is not coincidental. It is a direct line, connecting Carrington’s disagreement with Cunningham’s stance to the foul she committed against her on the court. But whether that connection is real and provable remains to be seen.
What is not in dispute, however, is the nature of the foul itself. Carrington struck Cunningham from behind, making contact with her face and neck area while she was airborne and vulnerable on a fast break. And fairly enough, officials handled the call correctly, assigning a Flagrant 1 initially and upgrading it to a Flagrant 2 after video review. The rulebook definition was met. The ejection was warranted.
Sophie Cunningham, however, does seem to agree in part with Concha’s claim of the action being intentional and motivated by some pent-up frustration.
“Clearly, I think it was unnecessary,” Cunningham said after the game. “I’ve never really spoken to her, and I have no beef with her, but I guess she has some pent-up stuff.”
Ultimately, the fact here is the severity of Carrington’s foul, and the punishments that have followed. The suggestion that it was specifically motivated by Cunningham’s stance on transgender athletes, however, remains an allegation rather than an established fact.