|
I liked that Undertaker didn't use the Tombstone on Rey because he's so small that it would have looked ridiculous.
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 00:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:55 |
|
|
Timby posted:Of course, now when Undertaker does the Tombstone, the opponent's head is practically at his nuts when the impact hits. MIND GAMES!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 01:35
|
|
|
Von Linus posted:HBK piledrove Cena at a Wrestlemania. Shawn's allowed to use the piledriver with, IIRC, the understanding that he uses it exceptionally sparingly and that it's his opponent's call whether or not it happens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 03:30
|
|
|
Didnt dreamer continue to use piledrivers?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 03:33
|
|
|
I know of at least one instance where RVD took a piledriver from Tommy Dreamer. Couldn't find video of any other time though, but it's been tossed around here that it was actually Taker, Kane and Dreamer who were allowed to do the move.
maniacripper fucked around with this message at 04:29 on Feb 10, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 04:25
|
|
|
Sionistic posted:Didnt dreamer continue to use piledrivers? Granted I'm not very familiar with his time in WWE-ECW, but I feel the amount of matches Tommy was in that even showcased more than 2 or 3 actual wrestling moves was an incredibly small percentage, let alone how many matches he got to piledrive someone in. I just youtube'd some of Tommy's piledrivers. At least in WWE he seemed to lean back as he fell so his butt took almost all of the impact. They were probably okay with that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 06:14
|
|
|
LightsGameraAction posted:Granted I'm not very familiar with his time in WWE-ECW, but I feel the amount of matches Tommy was in that even showcased more than 2 or 3 actual wrestling moves was an incredibly small percentage, let alone how many matches he got to piledrive someone in. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfAfDozERMc
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 06:23
|
|
|
Yea, Tommy's butt is taking the impact there. I guess it also helps that it's RVD, who is very good and taking and (over)selling bumps. Anyway, people who were talking about how ridiculous the Tombstone is now: You seem to forget the most bullshit piledriver ever, the Rikishi driver: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNzTZCCpPq4&feature=related I don't think I've ever seen him do this where the opponent's head was less than a foot away from the mat when he came down.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 06:44
|
|
|
People seem to be saying "the piledriver is banned, except when they feel like doing one." Well that's not really a "ban" then. It's just something they like to save for special occasions. In a way, I'd put it in the same category as the "steal the opponent's finisher" spot - it's not a spot that's used very much, but it gets a real "OHHHH no he didn't!" reaction any time it happens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 06:52
|
|
|
Minidust posted:People seem to be saying "the piledriver is banned, except when they feel like doing one." Well that's not really a "ban" then. It's just something they like to save for special occasions. No, that is a ban. You have to get permission to use it. It is against the rules. Banned, you might say.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 07:04
|
|
|
Minidust posted:In a way, I'd put it in the same category as the "steal the opponent's finisher" spot - it's not a spot that's used very much, but it gets a real "OHHHH no he didn't!" reaction any time it happens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 07:11
|
|
|
Atticus Finch posted:By the way, this doesn't happen nearly enough anymore. Well, it shouldn't, but it's still a super cool spot. I always liked when they did it in long matches where the opponent has already kicked out of the guy's finisher/signature moves at least once or more. Kinda like a "gently caress it, I'll see if your move works!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 07:29
|
|
|
I'm not a fan of stealing the opponent's finisher. A wrestler's finisher is supposed to be his move that he does better than everyone else, like Jake Roberts and the DDT. Anyone can do it, but no one can do it as well as him. At least that's how I looked at as a kid. I could really get behind some super special finishers that only get used once every year or two because they're kayfabe too dangerous and could only be used in no-DQ type of matches. Isn't the Burning Hammer something like that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 09:05
|
|
|
I've been way out of the wrestlign world for awhile and just tonight read Shane Mcmahon is no longer with the company. Has it come out why he left? Some sites speculated him not getting along with the Stephanie/HHH/Vince direction of the WWE, but has anything been confirmed? *edit - Oh yeah, one other question. Just tonight found out WWE has some no blood policy now and I saw a clip of Cena/Orton getting cleaned up mid-match. Whats the general consensus regarding this policy?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 10:14
|
|
|
MyStereoHasMono posted:I've been way out of the wrestlign world for awhile and just tonight read Shane Mcmahon is no longer with the company. Has it come out why he left? Some sites speculated him not getting along with the Stephanie/HHH/Vince direction of the WWE, but has anything been confirmed? Apparently, he just wanted to do something different. Shane might've felt there wouldn't be a place for him under Stephanie/HHH, or he just had other things he wanted to do. At this point, what more did he have to do, as he couldn't advance any more. The general consensus is that the WWE is trying to clean up the product for kids. The TV rating has gone down to TV-PG, there's a big push towards a new WWE Kids magazine and action figures, there's virtually no more profanity, everything's been cleaned up. The lack of blood is a result of the move. If you didn't know, the new emphasis on kids has caused a lot of subtle changes, like making the Divas less slutty by not having anyone in Playboy for two years, a gimmick midget joining DX, DX becoming a family-friendly shill machine, et cetera.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 10:21
|
|
|
MyStereoHasMono posted:I've been way out of the wrestlign world for awhile and just tonight read Shane Mcmahon is no longer with the company. Has it come out why he left? Some sites speculated him not getting along with the Stephanie/HHH/Vince direction of the WWE, but has anything been confirmed?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 11:03
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:According to Meltzer, who has about as much credibility as you'd like to give him, Shane wants to make a name for himself and get out from under Vince's shadow. He hoped the company would be left to him, but it looks like it's going to be left to Steph and HHH. Shane, not being a loving retard, decided he'd likely get into MMA instead of TNA, as MMA is far more likely to show up his dad and continue to be relevant in the years to come. Meltzer has not said Shane would likely get into MMA. He's said he's more likely to get into something completely unrelated since he can't afford to buy into UFC and Zuffa probably wouldn't let him at this point anyway. On top of that he knows very little about MMA outside of UFC, so that seems to be out. And I love how Meltzer has such a credibility problem on this forum when Dana White, the President of UFC, one of the two major companies Dave covers has gone on the record to say Dave is the best at what he does, and Eric Bischoff on WOL has said several times how much he respects Dave and what he does. What has no credibility is how often completely mangled Observer reports, or just entirely fabricated ones are posted here from other sites misquoting the Observer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 11:23
|
|
|
Dude. I don't listen to Dave anywhere but The Law, as I'm not a subscriber to The Wrestling Observer, so all I can go by is what he says on that particular show. If he contradicts himself elsewhere, I won't hear it. I'm not trying to mislead anybody here. Late last year when Shane left WWE, Dave said what I just posted. He also said that Shane doesn't have the money to buy UFC, but that he could buy a sizable chunk of any other MMA company. As far as my comment about Dave's credibility, if you re-read what I said, you'll likely understand what I mean. "Who has about as much credibility as you'd like to give him" means, as far as I was saying, "Meltzer said this. You either trust him or you don't."
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 11:36
|
|
|
I don't think that was necessarily 100% directed towards you. I mean you can't go a week here without someone indirectly crying about Meltzer or mentioning PUNK'S IN THE DOGHOUSE (which is A. almost a 3 year old report at this point and B. if you even watched ECW, it looked like it was pretty legit)
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 12:03
|
|
|
Re: Piledrivers Regal seems to get away with dropping fools directly on their skulls every other week, but maybe he's using an ancient snakepit secret to make his suplexes look dangerously unsafe without killing anybody.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 12:09
|
|
|
Theshby posted:Re: Piledrivers The secret is roaring.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 12:42
|
|
|
Theshby posted:Re: Piledrivers Regal doesn't give away his secrets very often, but I recall in an interview when asked about how he makes worked punches look so good, his response was: "I hit people very hard, in very safe places"
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 12:48
|
|
|
So how do they work the no-blood policy with something like the Elimination Chamber, where everyone is stuck inside of a cage together and bleeding is pretty much inevitable?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 17:04
|
|
|
LightsGameraAction posted:So how do they work the no-blood policy with something like the Elimination Chamber, where everyone is stuck inside of a cage together and bleeding is pretty much inevitable? Someone didn't see the Hell in the Cell PPV. There will be no blood unless it is an accident.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 17:21
|
|
|
LightsGameraAction posted:So how do they work the no-blood policy with something like the Elimination Chamber, where everyone is stuck inside of a cage together and bleeding is pretty much inevitable? Presumably, they will either avoid blood spots, and stop the match in the event of legit injuries. Or, maybe because it's a PPV, they'll let the blood go, to build up the Brutal Satan's Playground aspect.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 17:21
|
|
|
battlemonk posted:Presumably, they will either avoid blood spots, and stop the match in the event of legit injuries. They stopped the Orton/Cena match because of blood on whatever PPV that was.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 17:24
|
|
|
No one stopped the Rey vs Undertaker RR match.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 17:27
|
|
|
The A-Team Van posted:No one stopped the Rey vs Undertaker RR match. You can't exactly glue up a busted nose.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 17:29
|
|
|
They stopped Shelton/Christian, which was hilarious because Shelton should've just kayfabe climbed teh ladder.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 17:39
|
|
|
BrutusBeefcake posted:Someone didn't see the Hell in the Cell PPV. There will be no blood unless it is an accident. As much as it would make sense to only stop intentional bleeding unless it's a serious accident, from what I've come to understand they stop the match because of bleeding under any circumstance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 17:39
|
|
|
Chilly McFreeze posted:You can't exactly glue up a busted nose. There's something that cutmen in boxing/mma use, cotton swabs soaked in Adrenaline HCl; these stop nosebleeds pretty effectively in sports where facial trauma is intentional and essential—they would certainly work in wrestling, where any direct blow to the face is unintentional at best.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 17:50
|
|
|
WHILE THAT MAY BE, imagine the Undertaker sitting patiently while the doctors work on him during a match.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 18:11
|
|
|
Chilly McFreeze posted:WHILE THAT MAY BE, imagine the Undertaker sitting patiently while the doctors work on him during a match. Funny, considering isn't the Undertaker going off about Bob Orton not letting anyone know he had the 'Hep before HIAC the reason no one is allowed to bleed now?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 18:13
|
|
|
LightsGameraAction posted:Funny, considering isn't the Undertaker going off about Bob Orton not letting anyone know he had the 'Hep before HIAC the reason no one is allowed to bleed now? Undertaker is always loving things up. First no piledrivers and now no blood 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 18:20
|
|
|
LightsGameraAction posted:Funny, considering isn't the Undertaker going off about Bob Orton not letting anyone know he had the 'Hep before HIAC the reason no one is allowed to bleed now? No. That happened years before the No Blood policy, and all it led to was Bob Orton being taken off TV. Also, part of the problem there was WWE knew but didn't tell Taker, if I remember correctly. The No Blood policy is 100% Vince and because he feels it's inappropriate for a family friendly show. It's not the first time he's had this policy either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 18:50
|
|
|
When was the last time someone bladed (actually bladed, not busted open) on WWE programming?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 18:58
|
|
|
Meat Recital posted:When was the last time someone bladed (actually bladed, not busted open) on WWE programming? Not sure, but it probably involved Ric Flair.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 19:01
|
|
|
Burrito posted:Not sure, but it probably involved Ric Flair. Ric Flair doesn't need to blade. The skin on his head has about as much give as tissue paper. All he has to do is get a vein throbbing on his head and he'll start to bleed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 19:05
|
|
|
WeaselWeaz posted:No. That happened years before the No Blood policy, and all it led to was Bob Orton being taken off TV. Also, part of the problem there was WWE knew but didn't tell Taker, if I remember correctly. So WWE hosed up and endangered the Undertaker's health without telling him and Bob Orton is the one who gets punished? I'm not accusing you of lying by the way I'm accusing WWE of being terrible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 19:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:55 |
|
|
I thought it was that Bob Orton didn't tell anybody. Also, the match where this happened was pretty much the blowoff to the blowoff of the Randy Orton/Undertaker thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 19:18
|
|
