bazhsw

Ricky Steamboat and Mick Foley's confrontation at ROH Joe vs. Punk II where Foley 'shoots' on Flair - awesome

In a year with plenty of bad matches Tyson Tomko vs. Steven Richards was a much higher level of shit than everything else.I don't suppose it will get many other nominations but I'd also nominate El Drunko vs Zach Gowen at IWA East Coasts debut show. Truly shite.

Rob Feinstein

Mick Foley's anti Flair promo at RoH Joe vs. Punk II

CM PunkKenta Kobashi

Low KiHomicide

I accept your point Stevon, it just seems a little easier to have each poster make one nomination only. I've thought long and hard about my 'Match Of The Year' and I'd hate to see the runners-up not on the nominations board. My point is it would be tempting for me to throw in about 10 nominations just to get them out there as there are bound to be people who post 10 WWE matches, which already have the advantage of more people seeing them (nothing you can do about that obviously) Seeing as it's the top 10 nominations that get on the short list I think this is a fairer way of getting to the top 10. Perhaps I'm thinking baout it too much lol!

Does it make sense to allow a poster more than one nomination in any given topic? I'm referring to the UK wrestler of the year topic. I'm concerned it could lead to manipulation of the nominations. For instance someone could post their ten mates they wrestle with and that's not really fair on the other posters who've made nomination (you know what some of the people on here are like bigging up their promotions and co-workers). In some topics it is going to be hard to make just one nomination but surely that's the point of year end awards. I hardly watch any WWE for example and I think I'd be really annoyed if in a match of the year section after whittling down all the top matches to just one a few posters then go on and list teir top ten WWE matches. It's going to be hard to get any puro or indie matches in the finals anyway due to the fact that much more people only watch WWE anyway. This isn't having a go at WWE fans or the MOTY award, just something I was thinking about.

Nigel McGuiness

Minx vs. Roxi (GPW Hostile Takeover, 24/4/04, Darwin)

Name: BazhswWebsite: no website but PM me for listDelivery time: I aim to deliver within a few daysTrades taken? Yes, trade onlyI've a decent list of US indies, puro and MMA as well as everything in between from Joshi to lucha etc.

Well Kenny McBride got in there before me. Extreme sports, whilst being a collection of smaller sports ahve a common thread. I know loads of skateboarders who snowboard and BMX too. People are into extreme sports as a group so Herb's argument isn't that strong. People who watch extreme sports watch a variety of different 'extreme' sports. Comparing sports with fans in the millions like football and rugby to rock climbing and bungee junping is ludicrous. Likewise when you compare ITV's World Of Sport to Combat Zone you can see they are two totally different companies. Personally I'd watch both programmes as I enjoy all kinds of wrestling from MMA to puro to garbage style to sprts entertainment. However, you only have to read this forum for a few days to see that many wrestling fans only watch a certain style.Earler in the thread Classics Guy commented on my original post. After reading throughout all this thread it seems like Classics Guy is rather blinkered in his view regarding the deal. Although he did backtrack regarding the length of the deal, he has still refused to consider wether an FWA exclusive deal is good or bad for wrestling. He has not considered the future possibility of comapnies being ready for TV in the future. Your comment that companies should be ready now and if they are not it's tough shows a disregard for the issues and criticisms that posters on here have been trying to be address. I hate to say it but you do come across as someone who is so pro-FWA that they cannot consider other posters concerns.I have read Alex Shane's recent release and I thought he came across as a bit of an idiot. First of all the implication that we were being worked as we are all 'negative' I found to be embarrassing and insulting. Who on earth does Alex Shane think he is to basically make something up to make his next news seem better? Personally I think FWA have had a climb down but don't have the honesty to address it as such. If Alex Shane sees the ukff as a negativity based forum then perhaps he should move his forum and not bother with it. Just bear in mind how many of his target audience actually post in here. As for FWA being a benchmark for other promotions. One, FWA's production really isn't all that great and the wrestling although decent is not exactly what I would have as a benchmark for other promotions. What if a promotion produces a product which draws and has a following yet is entirely different ot FWA's vision of wrestling? The FWA come across as smug and once again their notion that they are 'leading the British wrestling revival' shines through.

I'll just throw my hat in regarding production values. As long as I can see the action I really don't care about the production. I don't want pyro, lights ramps etc. I just want to see entertaining wrestling. My girlfriend who previously had only watched WWE and the occasional puro match said that when she watched some of TWC test broadcasts that it looked awful and amatuerish. Now I know my gf is not going to be a regular viewer but if TWC are hoping to pick up some of the WWE production values are going to be important.Which brings me to the FWA, a few poxy fireworks and a ramp doesn't make them vanguards of high production values - they may well look better than the rest of the British promotions but at the end of the day it will still look shit next to WWE so it's a ridiculous point for the FWA to insist that companies match their production values. It's still nothing like their original statement of having an exclusive deal though.

I'm pleased that FWA have been given a slot on The Wrestling Channel. Nevertheless it is clear that in the process of getting on the channel they have shit on the rest of the British wrestling scene. What they are saying is that no-one who can come near thenm for the next five years. FWA got big because fans who watched WWE etc. heard about great shows and went to check out this new British promotion for themselves. The same will happen for the rest of the British promotions not on The Wrestling Channel if they pull their socks up. At the end of the day it once again shows that there is not one big UK wrestling 'family', just various relatively small promotions ewach trying to get one up on the next to be top of the 'HUGE???' British wrestling market.

Dan Maff and Samoa Joe are saying exactly what Gabe and Doug should be saying right now. My respect for these two has gone up immensely and wether RoH survices or not I will remember Maff and Joe for having the integrity to say it as it should be said.

Ring Of Honor up until the last wek or so has been my favourite promotion. After reading the interview with Gabe I really do not have any confidence that Feinstein is truly gone from the companies. It will be interesting to see the legal stuff that comes out in the next few days. I won't be supporting RoH until I am certain paedophilles are no longer involved in the company. Although Gabe must be hurt and angry and feel devasted about the actions of his best freind, he really needs to publicly condemn Feinstein and not try to sweep this under the carpet. I thought the Guargillo column was very interesting. I found it hard to believe what Feinstein said in his shoot interview regarding Guargillo in any case.

Afterr eading through all of this i am in a state of near disbelief. I am shocked and saddened with all of this. For what we know of the facts Feinstein appears to be a nonce. As with all nonces, if he is found guilty I hope they throw away the key. As yet, no criminal charges have been made and I think I'll reserve judgement if he gets charged and found guilty of anything. I'm not defending him in the slightest because as can be seen on the thread, in the internet conversation and TV show, Feinstein looks like a sick fuck who gets off on sex with children. It appears he knew full well he was having intimate contact with a young boy. Quite simply, it looks like he is a disgusting pervert.Once again, posters on here have been their usual bigoted selves. Homosexuality and paedophillia are not interlinked. There is nothing wrong with same sex relationships or indeed any kind of sexual activity between consenting adults.I feel a little selfish considering the future of Ring Of Honor. What is far more important is the exposing of paedophilles and the protection of children from them. Wrestling really is insignificant when compared to social problems like this. I agree wholeheartedly with previous posters that exposing scum is better than hiding them for the sake of wrestling.When I started reading the thread my initial thoughts were that it was a frame-up, bear in mind RoH have a huge show soon and werestling promoters will try anything to derail a show. After reading through the thread it becomes increasingly clear this had nothing to do with wrestling politics. I didn't want to believe it because RoH is my favourite company, I didn't want to believe it because the thought of my favourite promotion going under was a thought I didn't want to consider. Selfish, I know. I don't think Gabe and Doug are covering for Feinstein or knew about his liking of boys. Yes, they may be best friends but what kind of person would be friends with a paedophille? Is Rob Feinstein really gone from Ring Of Honor - the evidence is not clear here. If I was a wrestler in no way whatsoever would I work for RoH unless I was 100% certain that he wasn't involved. Would you work for a nonce? I know wrestlers work for dodgy people but I suspect the majority of the wrestlers would draw the line at that - it effects their public image too. I suspect the March 13 show will go ahead but it is going to be one hell of bad atmosphere and I suspect many fans will not go, even those who have already bought tickets. I think they need to make a clear statement assuring fans that Feinstein is gone and will not be coming back. They can't sweep this under the carpet and pretend it hasn't happened. Although I'd love the company to survive I will no longer support it until I am sure Feinstein is gone or is found 100% innocent and is vindicateed (which I can't see happening).

That Eddie Guerrero has a lot to answer for......As I haven't seen the Powerslam article I cannot comment on wether the original post had been plagirised or not. It seems pretty clear that the two articles have remarkable similarities. I guess it's a matter of judgement. In my opinion (and it is only that) I think it's a bit suss. Going off the earlier post, the way that the articles are structured it seems that Nigel Law has indeed plagirised which is bang out of order. I really hope he hasn't as I have always enjoyed his articles in the past.What I think posters have to consider is that in researching any wrestling article a variety of sources are likely to be used. Indeed, I know Powerslam writers in the past have used 'The Wrestling Observer' for information when writing articles. If I was to write an article about Eddie Guerrero's recent history the first thing I would do is jot down everything I thought was significant about his career. I would also admittadly look through others people's recent articles and his shoot interview to see if there is anything obvious that I have missed out. Then I would check the internet and resources like the observer to check my dates, venues etc. Clearly, most writers do not have an encyclopedic memory. For example, I'd mention him getting fired, his return to form on the indies and return to the company etc. Also, there is bound to be a degree of repitition when writing about wrestling because we are dealing with events, matches etc. which have already happened. I think when you see more or less identical opinions expressed in articles then you have a case for plagirism i.e. the fans reaction at the Impact show and his PPV outing against Rob Van Dam.I used to write for a number of fanzines concerning, movies, politics, music etc. and continually sought feedback. I can understand Nigel Law's feelings on the issue - 'is it all worth it'. Well, I made the decision a few years ago that it wasn't. Sometimes I am desperately wanting to get involved in wrestling journalism, not as a career but as a laugh but there are a number of reasons why I don't. First of all, to reiterate what Nigel has said - it is too serious, nobody seems to have fun when writing a wrestling article. If I was to write it would be more light hearted. Secondly, I don't consider myself to have enough knowedge about the wrestling business even though I eat, sleep and drink wrestling. Like I said earlier, I'd have to use other peoples resources. Why do something other people do better. Therefore I can really understand Law's feelings on the issue although that doesn't take away from the plagirism accusation, and the credibility issues surrounding it.

The Silva / Jackson pull apart at Pride Bad To The Bone (I think). It set up the whole tournament and had you salivating for months at the eventual match up.

Shane McMahon vs. Eric Bischoff at Summerslam. An abomination on just about every level. It didn't even attempt to look like a match. Shite, shite total shite.

Angle - Benoit at Royal Rumble

Not sure if he's eligible but I'll go for Shinsuke Nakumura

Is the Undertaker really dead?Who was the Gobblygooker?Are Edge and Christian really brothers?What happpened when XPW turned up at ECW?Is HHH really married to Steph?Did Mae Young realy go topless at Royal Rumble etc etc etc etc

I find it laughable that people are on this forum saying that the documentary shamed wrestling and harms chances of getting wrestling on TV. Where do you think TV execs get their ideas from wrestling - the WWE and old notions of World Of Sport - not some doco made for C4 late Thursday night. Furthermore 90% of people who watched it are probably into wrestling anyway - any casual viewers at that time probably have preconceived ideas about wrestling.What I am trying to get at is that perhaps we should show more concern over MAINSTREAM wrestling like WWE. Recently we've seen Guerrero spraying 'shit' on the Big Show, Vince beating up his daughter and Austin as a face beating up women who are faces. How a multi million dollar company can legitimise a convicted wifebeater for no apparant reason - the beatings of Stacy (and Moolah a few months ago) is beyond me. We',ve had the Katie Vick storyline and Bischofs sexual assault of Linda too. Need I mention the blatant rascism every week. (Tajiri, FBI, Teddy Long, La Resistance - all 'foreign heels')The amount of outrage wasted on spotty teenagers who no one gives a flying fuck about while the WWE presents the most morally repugnant product possible is laughable.I enjoyed the program, thought they were a bunch of nobheads mostly but it really isn't important in th scheme of things