DiJonai Carrington ejected after Flagrant 2 on Sophie Cunningham; posts "WHITE PRIVILEGE" on social media

DiJonai Carrington was ejected after being assessed a Flagrant 2 for making contact with Sophie Cunningham’s head and neck during Saturday’s WNBA game between the Chicago Sky and the Indiana Fever, and Carrington later posted the words "WHITE PRIVILEGE" on social media. Cunningham’s coach, Stephanie White, said she did not believe Carrington intentionally went out to hurt Cunningham, and Carrington said she was making a play on the ball while acknowledging she should have been penalized.

The confrontation revived comparisons with a June 2025 incident in which Cunningham committed a Flagrant 2 against Connecticut Sun guard Jacy Sheldon, was ejected and fined by the WNBA, and subsequently received a very different public reaction. As Etan Thomas notes, both players were ejected in their respective incidents, but the aftermath diverged: Cunningham’s 2025 foul drew a segment of public commentary that cast her as an "enforcer," while Carrington’s 2026 ejection prompted debate and criticism.

Carrington’s two-word social-media post became as contentious as the foul itself, drawing attention to how incidents are framed in and beyond sports coverage. Commentators immediately framed Carrington’s foul as part of a larger cultural story in which Cunningham was portrayed not simply as the recipient of a Flagrant 2 but as a white player being victimized, a narrative Thomas links to similar rhetoric applied to Caitlin Clark.

Thomas and his co-host on The Collision podcast, Chuck Modi, pointed to the contrasting public responses after Cunningham’s 2025 foul: rather than being vilified, Cunningham was lauded by many as a protector of teammates, a portrayal that coincided with a rapid rise in her marketing profile. Cunningham’s TikTok following grew from 300,000 to over one million, and she secured advertising opportunities, including a Ring partnership whose campaign copy stated: Cunningham protects her teammates; Ring protects her home.

The piece contrasts that outcome with how Black players have been described for similar actions, asking whether language such as "dangerous", "dirty" and "thug" would be applied if a Black player received comparable attention and endorsements. Thomas recounts that Florida’s attorney general, James Uthmeier, said he would be willing to charge players with assault and battery for hard fouls in Florida, and he notes that no comparable political outcry accompanied Cunningham’s 2025 ejection.

Thomas highlights other moments that fed the debate, including an instance in June when Cunningham pointed at Phoenix Mercury’s DeWanna Bonner during an on-court confrontation; that image, Thomas writes, accumulated tens of millions of views and was widely described as hilarious, petty and iconic. Thomas also says he posted an image on social media of Cunningham depicted as a Black WNBA player to pose the question of how the same behavior might be received if roles were reversed.

To move beyond headline reactions, Thomas proposes a comparative review of flagrant fouls involving contact to the head or neck: separate incidents by the race of the offending player and the recipient, and examine headlines and social posts to measure how often terms like "hard foul" are used versus "cheap shot", "brutal", "assault", "targeted" or "clobbered." He also reminds readers that, under WNBA rules, officials consider severity, contact to the head, and potential for injury; a legitimate attempt on the ball does not prevent a Flagrant 2, and that white privilege does not require conscious intent—"She’s white, so I’m going to treat her differently" is not necessary for privilege to operate.

Rather than dismiss Carrington’s use of the phrase "WHITE PRIVILEGE," Thomas urges examination of why those words provoke more anger than the double standard they aim to expose and asks: How much more evidence do people need before they’re willing to admit that it does?