and as I told him, there had to be some reason that TJ had done that check. 

Was it a foul?  Yes.  Flagrant?  I can only agree with what the refs concluded as they saw it.  ESPN's David Flemming (play-by-play) and Sean Farnham (analyst) immediately felt it was as a minimum a flagrant 1, and possibly a flagrant 2, which would have changed the whole dynamics of the game as TJ would then have become a spectator.

I'm not an expert by any means and as I saw it, I feared the latter and was totally stupified when the refs came away from the reviewing table with no foul called.  

Dave Flemming, after the next time out, noted that he had questioned the refs and was told that it was a foul, but they could not review a play to call a foul, only a flagrant 1 or 2 infraction, and therefore, at that point, it was a no call, because they didn't deem it a flagrant 1 or 2. 

Flemming and Farnham were as surprised as I was, but that conclusion came more into frame as the game soon cut to halftime and back to the ESPN sport center.  Flemming/Farnham asked the 3 hosts about their opinions of TJ Haws's foul.  I was expecting them to pile on as well, but again was totally taken by surprise when they all said they agreed with the refs, and said that such actions were part of standard "east coast" basketball.

Thanks for your compilation of those clips.  It brings more into light what was going on and help me to understand that TJ Haws didn't suddenly just lose all his marbles.  He wanted to check off Petrusev to let him know he was there, but instead of tapping on his shoulder, he smacked him with a baseball bat.