|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2019 10:56:47 GMT -5
Good points. That's where the medical analogy had failed for me. Even Sean Oliver picked up on that.
I can't put together a match. I can't execute moves. But I sure as hell know that Russo/Hogan/Jarrett bull at Bash at the Beach 2000 was crap. It did nothing for me (and everyone else, possibly). It insulted people's intelligence. I could have come up with ten different ways to execute that story. Hogan going on hiatus and coming back as the "real world champion" to challenge whoever would have been the WCW Champion was the plan, I believe. That could have worked. But even at a young age, I could have written that better.
I respect Dave Meltzer's historical context that he brings to the table.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2019 11:01:31 GMT -5
I watched some vintage Hogan matches on the WWE Network recently.
Dare I say it, Hogan VS Andre (MSG, 22nd September, 1980) is better than their WrestleMania III encounter. Sure, WM III is more iconic, more memorable, and benefits from tens of thousands of passionate fans. Match-wise, though, the 1980 MSG match is much more technically sound, with Andre being more mobile.
Hogan VS Nick Bockwinkel & Bobby Heenan (AWA, 2nd May, 1981) is a lot of fun. There's some comedy in this - and Heenan plays the part of a "punching bag" tremendously. Very heated.
Hogan VS Bob Backlund (12th April, 1980) was reasonable, but to be honest, I found suspension of disbelief a tad impossible. Why? Because seeing Backlund take down Hogan more than once with wrestling moves, while slightly believable, didn't gel for me. It'd be like seeing a regular human being take down Frankenstein's Monster. Yes, there can be good matches where the technical wrestler breaks down the big guy (Bret Hart did it well against Sycho Sid in 1997), but every time Backlund, who looked really small next to Hogan, took him down and had him on the mat, I felt it was impossible to suspend disbelief.
Still, a reasonable match. And it was interesting seeing Hogan go at it for 29 minutes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2019 15:09:12 GMT -5
Top Ten Hogan's Matches
WWF Greatest Matches Hulk Hogan vs Ric Flair at MSG November 30 1991
This is the best Hogan's Match and my personal favorite here.
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Oct 2, 2019 22:29:08 GMT -5
I watched some vintage Hogan matches on the WWE Network recently. Dare I say it, Hogan VS Andre (MSG, 22nd September, 1980) is better than their WrestleMania III encounter. Sure, WM III is more iconic, more memorable, and benefits from tens of thousands of passionate fans. Match-wise, though, the 1980 MSG match is much more technically sound, with Andre being more mobile. Hogan VS Nick Bockwinkel & Bobby Heenan (AWA, 2nd May, 1981) is a lot of fun. There's some comedy in this - and Heenan plays the part of a "punching bag" tremendously. Very heated. Hogan VS Bob Backlund (12th April, 1980) was reasonable, but to be honest, I found suspension of disbelief a tad impossible. Why? Because seeing Backlund take down Hogan more than once with wrestling moves, while slightly believable, didn't gel for me. It'd be like seeing a regular human being take down Frankenstein's Monster. Yes, there can be good matches where the technical wrestler breaks down the big guy (Bret Hart did it well against Sycho Sid in 1997), but every time Backlund, who looked really small next to Hogan, took him down and had him on the mat, I felt it was impossible to suspend disbelief. Still, a reasonable match. And it was interesting seeing Hogan go at it for 29 minutes. Bockwinkel and Heenan made Hogan look like a million bucks and the AWA was doing massive business, which is why McMahon wanted him. Heenan was probably the best worker in the AWA, at the time; a better bumper than anyone he managed, except maybe Ray Stevens. You need to see more of Backlund and in context. Backlund was legit freakishly strong and regularly did spots where hs opponent would do a short arm scissor on him and he would lift them into the air. WWF fans knew how strong he was; so it was believable to them. here's what he looked like, as champion.....  In the 80s, he changed his workout routine and stopped weight training and concentrated more on stamina, cardio, and calisthenics. He ran stairs, did endless Hindu squats, used his roller gymn contraption (a wheel that forced you to use other muscle groups) and such. He was still freakishly strong; he just didn't have the heavily defined muscle mass. On top of that, Backlund was a shooter. he had legit amateur credentials. He was a 2-time All-American, an NCAA Division II champion, at 190lbs, and finished 5th when he moved up to heavyweight, the following year. Here are examples of his strength...   I watched a Backlund match around 1982, where he faced Big John Studd, who had him in a back breaker. Backlund kicks off the corner turnbuckle and flips over, then lifts Studd over his head for a backdrop, without Studd doing much work. Backlund doesn't get near enough credit, thanks to Vince McMahon revisionism and modern fans thinking steroids equals strong and size means money. Backlund drew regular sellouts at MSG and big houses throughout their territory. Fans loved him. He was a legit All-American babyface and the WWF formula was her champ facing monster heels and defeating them one after another. Vince Jr just changed it to monster hero defeating monster villain, rather than skilled hero (and ethnic hero) defeating monsters. Backlund and Snuka's matches were off the charts. By 1983, though, the formula was stale and Vince Jr was taking over. He wanted bigger guys and he wanted Hogan. he wanted Backlund to dye his hair black and urn heel. Backlund refused, but he dropped the belt to Iron Sheik, did a few more matches for a month or two, then left. Then, he turned up in the Pro Wrestling USA cooperative effort (Mid-Atlantic, AWA, Memphis and Georgia) reminding fans that he never submitted to the Camel Clutch; his manager threw in the towel. He did a few matches for them and some in Japan, for UWFI and WAR, before returning to the WWF. Here's a return bout for Snula and Backlund, which led to their steel cage match, for the blowoff. Note the crowd response when Backlund is introduced. Tell me he wasn't over with the MSG crowd. They are right there, on every move. This was my first look at Backlund, on an otherwise rather boring card (WWF undercards left a lot to be desired). Main event was Andre vs Blackjack Mulligan. This was also my first time seeing the WWF and it wasn't pretty. The same card had Ivan Putski over Mr Saito (Saito was way better in new Japan; Putski was better in Texas), Tony Atlas vs Greg Valentine, in a double countout; Bob orton Jr beating Steve Travis, with the Superplex; Tony Garea beat Swede hanson (DQ finish), Pedro morales successfully defended the IC title against Mr Fuji (ugh.....), Strongbows (Chief Jay and Jules Strongbow) vs East-West Connection (Adrian Adonis and Jesse ventura) with the babyfaces winning, and Moolah & rookie Sherri Martel defeating Judy Martin & Penny Mitchell in a boring match (anything with Moolah was boring). Atlas & Valentine worked arm stretches forever and little else. Match was only 8 minutes and Valentine didn't get going until the 20 minute mark. Atlas was way better in georgia and Valentine the same in Mid-Atlantic. Garea was dull, period. Worked better in tags, with more charismatic partners. Putski was over with the crowd; but was not a top worker. All strength spots. Morales was over (ex-WWWF Champion and Puerto Rican hero) but Fuji was hardly a credible opponent. Fuji and Saito were tag partners then and held the titles around this time. They would drop the belts to the Strongbows at the end of the month. They traded them again before the Strongbows lost to the Samoans, who lost to Atlas & Rocky Johnson, leading into the Hulkamania era. Back in the early 80s, the MSG matches would be broadcast on the USA Network, on Monday nights, monthly. Undercard was usually pretty boring, though I did catch Tiger Mask vs Jose Estrada, in Nov of that year, which easily stole the show. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Oct 2, 2019 23:20:59 GMT -5
ps Backlund could take Hogan down at will and make him pee his trunks. Backlund was a pro, though, and made Hogan look good. Hogan was one of the least dangerous guys in the business: al size and muscle and that's about it. he could work, when motivated; but, he could not hang on the mat.
You have to remember the context of these matches. Backlund was champ from 1978 to 1983, the second longest title holder, after Bruno (Hogan's longest run was 4 years). Longer runs meant you were over with the crowd and drew consistent business. If you look at the list of champions, the duration of title reins drops after Hogan loses to Andre with the twin referee finish. After that, there is at least one title change per year, until CM Punk, in 2011, who held it for 13 months.
During the Monday Night Wars Sept 1995-March 2001), it changed hands 31 times. That's an average of 5 1/2 changes per year. By contrast, between April 1963 (Buddy Rogers named first WWWF champion) and Feb 1988 (when Hogan first dropped it) it changed hands 12 times (if you count the switch with Inoki), for an average .48 changes per year; less than 1 change a year! The only reins of less than 2 years were by the heel champs: Ivan Koloff (1 month), Stan Stasiak (9 days), Superstar Billy Graham (10 months), and Iron Sheik (1 month). Inoki held it for one week, though the switch was not recognized in the US and Backlund was considered to have never lost it, though he had a match with Bobby Duncum, in MSG, 11 days later, for the vacant WWF title, as it was then-billed. there was an angle in 1981 where a stunned referee awarded the belt to Greg Valentine, despite Backlund getting the pin. Backlund defeated Valentine in a rematch. So, even back then, they used controversial finishes to draw houses for a rematch, though they would then ignore the break in the title rein, unless it was a clean finish. The cover story for Inoki was that there was a controversial finish and a non-WWF referee, so the change wasn't recognized.
Similar things had been done in the NWA. Lou Thesz wanted to work a disputed angle with Edouard Carpentier, where Carpentier defeated Thesz, when he couldn't continue the match, after a back injury. The plan was for a rematch for the undisputed title. However, things went south between the NWA and Montreal promoter Eddie Quinn, who left the Alliance. Carpentier was still recognized as champion in Boston, Nebraska and Los Angeles. Carpentier then dropped his version of the title in each town. In Boston, Killer Kowalski defeated him to be the champion there. In Nebraska, it was verne gagne. In Los Angeles it was Freddie Blassie. Thesz was still considered champion by the NWA board and would later lose it to Dick Hutton, when he wanted to get off the road. Kowalski's version became the Atlantic Athletic Commission World title and was used in Boston, from 1957 to 1975, when the promotion shut down. The Nebraska version was used only in the Omaha region, from 1957 to 1963, when verne Gagne defeated Fritz Von Erich to unify it with the AWA title. The Crusher (Larry Lisowski) had one the AWA title, then won the Omaha title and held both, in 1963 and bother were defended together, until the unification. The Los Angeles title became the NAWA title (North American Wrestling Alliance) then changed its name to the WWA (Worldwide Wrestling Association) and was used until 1968, when Los Angeles rejoined the NWA.
Flair swapped the NWA title with Harley Race, in New Zealand, for promoter Steve Rickard, so they could ave a title change, then swapped it back at the end of the tour. it was not recognized in the US until after WCW was its own promotion, to add to Flair's reains. Flair also dropped it to Jack Veneno in the Dominican Republic, to avoid a riot. Then regained the belt in a rematch, which was also not acknowledged in the US, since it wasn't approved by the Board. Giant Baba's wins weren't approved, either and were done as a favor, by Harley race and Jack Brisco, though the NWA did officially recognize them, to give the world title more international cache.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2019 7:25:58 GMT -5
The more I watch the vintage stuff, the more I realise how wrestling was presented to us as real in a pre-sports entertainment age.
Little things like referees being 100% convincing in, say, checking shoulders. I know they do that now, but the magic of the business has gone.
I think it definitely helped, having the announcers treat it like it was a real sport. Seeing a "Board of Directors" commenting on something or having a promoter, smartly dressed, presenting a title belt is all part of giving wrestling that legitimacy. I know we can't go back to those days of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Oct 3, 2019 11:33:36 GMT -5
Wrestling was always presented as a sport, in the US, until the Monday Night Wars. It mirrored the presentation of boxing, as you had many early promoters who ran matches for both. It was governed by state athletic commissions who collected taxes and licensed wrestlers, managers and referees. In some states, they actually appointed the refs for matches and many of them were not smart to the business. So, the wrestlers had to work the referee in the ring, as well as the crowd outside. That's part of why old school looks so legit compared to later years, when promotions had their own "smart" referees.
Many top sports announcers had called wrestling matches, at some point in their career. Chicago White Sox announcer Jack brickhouse used to call the Chicago wrestling matches, promoted by Fred Kohler (which dominated the NWA and were presented on the Dumont Network). Joe Garagiola, the former baseball player and NBC announcer used to call matches in St Louis, for Sam Muchnick. Bob Costas had worked for KPLR, which broadcast Muchnick's Wrestling at the Chase, which was taped at the Chase Hotel Ballroom. In the old days, the fans would be dressed in tuxedos and evening gowns, watching the matches just like prize fights.
Wrestling would be covered in sports pages, in hot territories.
Promoters were always in suit and ties, as were announcers (usually tuxes) and wrestlers wore more standard gear, with the exception of certain gimmicks, like the Sheik or Gorgeous George. Wrestlers strolled to the ring like champions, often trotting in place, just like boxers, to get their energy up and get the crowd excited. The referee shook hands with them and their managers, checked them for weapons, gave them instructions and presented the belt to the crowd, for title matches. The announcer made formal introductions and the wrestler acknowledged the crowd. The ref would call for the bell and tell the boys to wrestle. The ref's authority was paramount. They would count on the ropes or if someone went outside. They got into the face of participants and even the meanest heels would back off. It was generally promoted that a DQ meant you didn't get paid, and fines were given high dollar amounts, to make them sound harsh. Refs would count to three if a wrestler didn't get his shoulder up, even if it wasn't the planned finish; so, guys knew they had to stay active.
Promoters only appeared during big matches or angles. The NWA President appeared for major stuff, adding extra authority. Often, the Athletic Commission rep would be announced to the crowd. This kind of stuff continued into the 1980s. At the end of the decade, Vince McMahon got tired of paying taxes to athletic commissions (especially New Jersey) when performances like Ice Capades and the circus did not and petitioned the state of New Jersey to deregulate pro wrestling, admitting it was a worked performance, not a competition. He had made big contributions to key politicians and got his way. That was then used to get deregulated in other states. Some states did it anyway, due to budget crunches and to attract more events to arenas. Some never bothered.
In places like the South, pro wrestling and NASCAR were the only sports they had, apart from college athletics and high school. Most states didn't get pro teams until the 80s and 90s, as migration away from higher land prices and bad economies swelled populations in many southern and southwestern states. For generations, it was weekly or monthly "rasslin'".
Japan still treats it that way (Well, New Japan, All Japan and Noah), where the belts are presented to the crowd, they have trophies for champions, official presentations and the like, mirroring sumo bashoes.
Also, look at it this way; when it was presented as legit sports competition, you had virant promotions across the US, Canada, Mexico, parts of Latin America, the Caribbean, New Zealand, Australia, Japan, India, parts of Africa, Germany, Italy, France, and Great Britain and Ireland. When it was presented as entertainment, many of those promotions dried up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2019 11:45:15 GMT -5
This all helps make it seem legitimate. Your final paragraph is very telling!
In a shoot interview conducted here in the UK, Jake Roberts talked about how a referee added authority to the match - and that without that authority, things were meaningless. He talked about how it's meaningless if the heel breaks rules in front of the referee. And I agree. It's much more effective if the heel does things when the referee is distracted.
In some of these vintage bouts, the likes of Heenan are waiting for the referee to be distracted - and then when the referee is distracted, he would choke someone like Hogan with a towel.
Wrestling is a quasi-sport, a form of entertainment, but there's no harm in presenting itself as real. I can't compare it to a show like ER or Arrow as wrestling is neither fish nor fowl and occupies a space between real sports and episodic television. But it could and should present itself as real - and little touches like referee authority and "Boards of Directors" added an authenticity. That's why I always appreciated the gravitas that Jack Tunney brought to the WWF - or Nick Bockwinkel brought to WCW.
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Oct 3, 2019 11:59:45 GMT -5
That's the thing; wrestlers these days will break the rules in front of the ref and nothing happens. The ref is only there to count the pin. No over the top rope DQs, no count outs; nothing. It's no wonder heels are crowd favorites because they do what they like. They rarely get their comeuppance. It's also why crowds don't get into matches and spend more time entertaining themselves, with chants and things. It used to be they would be cheering, booing and screaming through an entire match. Whole arenas, with thousands of fans. Now, its, at best, a couple of hundred, at an indie show, talking among themselves while some annoying announcer is covering the silence with endless chatter and wrestlers can be heard calling spots and doing goofy stuff in front of the audience to get a reaction. No wonder Omega and the Young Bucks refer to themselves as performance artists. They sure aren't pro wrestlers and they aren't presenting much in the way of "art." Arn Anderson presented art. Ricky Steamboat presented art. Ric Flair was genius. No wonder Cronette calls them cosplay wrestlers. It looks like cosplay at a comic or sci-fi convention, rather than the real thing.
Movie stuntmen don't take bows. They don't show them hitting the airbag. You don't have the green screen visible in the movie. The magician doesn't show you the mirror in the box that makes the assistant's body disappear. Wrestling shouldn't be explaining that the chair was gimmicked but it slipped. Opponents shouldn't be hanging out together in front of the crowd. The crowd wants the illusion; that's why they are there. or at least, why they used to be there in huge numbers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2019 12:34:10 GMT -5
Although wrestling is neither fish nor fowl, and does occupy that space between sport and episodic television, I completely agree with your stuntman/movie/magician analogies.
These vintage matches I am watching show believable, credible refereeing: checking the boots, warning managers, telling the wrestlers off about closed fists, etc. And it makes it so effective when Heenan has to wait for the referee to be distracted before he'll choke Hogan with a towel. All these things matter to me, even moreso since I've taken the plunge into watching vintage wrestling.
Things like pulling tights and hair also matter. One vintage match had a heel pulling the face's hair - and the referee's vantage point wasn't a good one. So there's the drama of the face getting angry and trying to tell the referee what is going on, the heel denying it, the referee warning the heel, etc. These things, which may seem small, absolutely matter.
It's like the ingredients in a cake. All that matters. And the "Board of Directors" or promoters holding belts and talking about the prestige of a title are all ingredients in what should be a wonderful cake.
Small though they may appear to be, it mattered to me seeing the referee check the wrestler's boots or a manager going to choke a wrestler but having to move away because the referee turns around and spots him. What's the point of a referee if the heels and their managers are gonna do all this in plain sight?
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Oct 3, 2019 14:42:06 GMT -5
The rules give tools for the heel to get "heat." They break the rules, behind the ref's back and the crowd gets angry and screams at the ref. The ref gets suspicious, then catches the heel at it and makes him break the hold. Remember, this is a morality tale; good vs evil. The evil heel has to have rules to break to be evil. The babyface needs rules to uphold to be virtuous.
All good stories have rules. If you introduce a gun in Act I, someone should have used it by Act III; otherwise, why bring it up?
Wrestling used to educate fans about the rules, so they would pay attention to the details of a match and respond accordingly The heel gets away with dirty tactics again and again. The babyface fights through the cheating. the babyface finally gets stipulations that prevent the cheating, such as a cage match, to keep an interfering manager or partner out of the match. The babyface defeats the heel and good triumphs over evil.
Announcers would remind you, when the ref starts counting, that you had a 5 count to break when in the ropes and the fact that you had to break when in the ropes. When they were on the apron they had a 5 count to get back in the ring; on the floor, a ten count. The announcers reminded you of this while calling the action. They also emphasized the referee's authority and character. There were usually enforcer refs, who took no nonsense; or, a special referee who neutralized the cheating. You also had authority figures step in, review events and deliver judgements, like stripping someone of a title (such as the twin referee angle and the buying of the title being negated by Tunney and a tournament mandated). They might order a match with special stipulations, they might render a fine. They could suspend a wrestler, setting up a mask angle, where the suspended person returned under a mask (Mr R, Yellow Dog, The Masked Rider, etc...). All of these are storytelling techniques in wrestling, which are mostly gone, which is part of the reason why crowds don't react.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2019 14:52:39 GMT -5
Yep, they seem to be extinct.
One of my least favourite concepts in wrestling over the last 15-20 years is the charismatic heel general manager. For me, an authority figure should be neutral. Jack Tunney laid the law down towards the likes of Ted DiBiase and Andre, but he also stripped Hulk Hogan of the WWF Championship in late 1991 after a match with the Undertaker (This Tuesday In Texas) was marred by controversy, thus setting up the 1992 Royal Rumble. I also seem to remember a storyline where Bret Hart was fined for pummelling Jerry Lawler (1993/94, I think) on the "King's Court". So the authority figure was definitely an equal opportunity authority figure.
The heel general manager is a very limited concept for me. It's a distraction. It got old. Imagine if, say, Ric Flair became the General Manager of SmackDown today. It would be about him, as the authority figure, feuding, or getting others to do his dirty work, against the top faces. And I don't think that works for me. It never has. Not really. I think Eric Bischoff sort of worked as the Raw General Manager, but he wasn't the most heelish of heels in that role, at least not for me (he did show bias, of course). I just never want to see the heel authority figure having an eternal battle of wits and waging a proxy war with a top face.
Regarding your points, that's what I am enjoying with this vintage stuff, the emphasising of rules. Gorilla Monsoon is very good at that, but he's not the only one. I like the announcers' reminders that the referee can only accept a tag if he sees it, the 5-count stuff, all of that. This is all the stuff that I feel gave wrestling legitimacy. When a referee is only there to take a pinfall, what's the point?
The crowd are very heated for these vintage matches. And I like how the heels and their managers accept the referee's authority. The biggest, strongest heel can take a chair into the ring - but if the 5-foot-4 referee tells him to put it down, he complies (except when the referee has his back to him, in which case it's anything goes).
I did watch Hulk Hogan VS Killer Khan match (September 12, 1987). I did like how that was structured. Khan brutalised Hogan badly and, logically, Hogan made a brief comeback and showed tremendous anger, even using a chair against Khan. I don't mind an angry face using a chair in retaliation, but I don't believe faces should cheat unless provoked or antagonised. I liked the ending of the match. Khan was about to spew his green mist in Hogan's face, but Hogan put his hands up; he then rubbed the mist from his hands on to Khan's face before finishing him off. Love or hate Hogan/Khan, or the match, it did tell a logical story. It did follow a formula that had much credibility.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2019 4:38:49 GMT -5
Okay, having watched some ECW stuff recently, I have to say that I am not a fan of Rob Van Dam's frog splash. I have seen it previously, including during his WWF/E tenure, but I've never liked it.
I need to suspend disbelief while watching wrestling. Any move that takes more out of the one doing it is not for me.
Some moves will take it out of the wrestler doing it. Some won't. Hogan's legdrop of doom may have hurt Hulk's butt, but the impact was felt by the recipient. Something like Warrior's Gorilla Press was felt totally by the recipient. Bret Hart's sharpshooter put far more strain on the recipient than Bret.
Whenever I've seen the frog splash, it appears to hurt RVD more than the recipient. Which is part of the drama, I guess. BUT IT MAKES NO SENSE! We've talked about suspension of disbelief here. One ECW match I watched (RVD VS Jerry Lynn), RVD did the frog splash. It took a lot out of him. So he did another one. That one took even more out of RVD.
Part of the storyline/drama? Perhaps. But there has to be logic for me. We are required to suspend disbelief. Within the context of suspending disbelief, and wrestling making sense, it makes no sense to me that *any* wrestler would do a finishing move that causes more harm to them - and possibly has them being pinned after doing it. Surely within the logic of wrestling, a finishing move should be one that wins you the match, right? If it takes more out of you than your opponent, storyline logic would dictate that although the recipient is hurt by the frog splash, he can possibly crawl over and get the pin on RVD as RVD groans in pain.
I don't know, I could be wrong. All views welcome (don't get me started on the energy required for Scotty 2 Hotty's Worm).
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2019 5:17:00 GMT -5
I was at a ECW match in Buffalo, New York and one of the fans was talking to RVD and why you do the Frog Splash and he said to him, I do that for my fans and wanting to something different that no one ever seen before. Sometimes the pain drives you and that why he does that. I admire RVD for his desires to entertain fans and do something radically different. Hogan's leg drop and RVD frog splash are hard on the human body ... they do that for themselves and their fans. I saw his Frog Splash 100 feet from it and he was soaring in the air dropping at least 8 feet or more and landed on an unknown ECW wrestler and walking away defending his ECW World Television Title that he held for 700 days and that alone takes GUTS and that's the beauty of his style and signature move. Rob Van Dam is still wrestling today and doing it at IMPACT Wrestling and wrestling at the age of 48 that's amazing and rightly so.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2019 6:44:48 GMT -5
It is a good visual spectacle. Of that there is no doubt. No-one can fault that or its execution.
It just lacks a little logic in a match. In theory, he could do that, but be in so much pain, that his opponent gets a second wind, crawls over and pins RVD.
But I appreciate his sincerity in wanting to entertain fans.
|
|
