Fans and journalists were so confused and curious about what on earth Kevin had talked to Camelo in the game
which caused such a turmoil. Camelo refused to disclose their conversation and just said he had tried to rushed into
Knicks’ locker room and stopped their bus for the sake of communicating with Kevin between two men and making
clear what Kevin meant by saying those words in the game and where it came from. Obviously, Camelo felt so
embarrassed and uncomfortable to talk about these dirty talks which hurt him so much, but under the pressure of the
press and the league, Kevin finally opened his mouth and revealed the myth. What he said was, “Your wife tastes like
Honey Nut Cheerios.”
Now, let us analyse this speech again by using Speech-act Theory as a mirror. Needless to mention the “locutionary
act” which is simply the words Kevin said, the Focus of this speech is its “illocutionary act” which implies that
Kevin “tasted” Camelo’s wife and felt it good. In another blunt language, Kevin meant that he had an extramaritalaffair with Camelo’s wife and slept with her with great pleasure. Such explosive news to any sensible man in the
world is unflinching because sexual partner’s barefaced betrayal is the most shameful and least bearable thing in the
world. Thus, extreme indignation and uncontrollable fury responded by Camelo is understandable now to everyone.
The “perlocutionary act” of the speech is multi-faceted: both players got a technical foul as a warning; Camelo lost
his mind and performed terribly bad in the remaining time of the game out of his being haunted by Kevin’s dirty
words, while Kevin laughed behind the scene and played so well to help his team finally win this tough game; after
the game, Camelo calmlessly rushed to Knicks’ locker room and then to stop the bus in order to have a duel with
Kevin as everybody thought (in Camelo’s words, he just wanted to talk peacefully with Kevin and set the record
straight); because of Camelo’s misconduct after the game by trying to make a trouble in interfering with Knicks
players’ leaving, the league penalised Camelo for 1 game suspension without fines, which could be the best result.
On the contrary, Kevin escaped from more severe penalty by his acting as the weak side without making a quarrel
after the game. Luckily, a few days later, the two sides conciliated with each other and pacified the rumors that Kevin
didn’t have an extramarital affair with Lala, Camelo’s wife, by clarification via telephone. It’s later stated that Kevin
just said these dirty talks for a joke, not truly, in order to disturb and infuriate Camelo as the original purpose. Since
everything has a limitation, so do dirty talks. Clearly, Kevin’s trash words crossed the line. No one would blame the
player for dirty talks even through they are not appreciated by civilized audience as long as they are expressed in a
humorous, civilized, accepted way such as by using an irony like the example of Zinane listed above. However, we
must defend the bottom line that these trash words should never go beyond to curse, slander, or even abuse
opponents’ loved ones, racial discrimination, sexual prejudice, religion disrespect and scorn, or any other form of
radical personal attacks. In such extreme cases, unacceptable dirty talks are no longer regarded as a strategy to help
to win the game, but are deemed as a violation and even a crime to the victim, which should be totally banned and be
punished with severe game suspension and fines.