King Pitcos Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 Why did The Giant never do the moonsault on anyone? I can't imagine that everyone refused to take it, because there'd have been lads desperate to do anything to get a memorable moment on telly. And I can't imagine WCW banned it, because no fucker was running things there to pay attention to outlawed moves anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ColinBollocks Posted September 16, 2010 Paid Members Share Posted September 16, 2010 What happened for the relationship between WWE and Spike TV to get do bad? I remember somebody posting both companies hated each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doog Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 Just watching RAW's from 1999 and does anyone know the story behind the mess that was the SummerSlam main event? They were building it for a few weeks Triple H vs Stone Cold, then all of a sudden 2 weeks before the event Undertaker suddenly wants a shot, then Chyna gets put in a no1 contender match and wins. Week after on the go home show Mankind randomly shows up and ends up in another no1 contender match and we end up with a main event of Austin v mankind v hhh and mankind ends up bloody winning the thing! Â Triple H vs Austin was looking like a cracking main event and was bring built up nicely then it just went ridiculously crazy! Really don't know what they were thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TildeGuy~! Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 Just watching RAW's from 1999 and does anyone know the story behind the mess that was the SummerSlam main event? They were building it for a few weeks Triple H vs Stone Cold, then all of a sudden 2 weeks before the event Undertaker suddenly wants a shot, then Chyna gets put in a no1 contender match and wins. Week after on the go home show Mankind randomly shows up and ends up in another no1 contender match and we end up with a main event of Austin v mankind v hhh and mankind ends up bloody winning the thing! Â Triple H vs Austin was looking like a cracking main event and was bring built up nicely then it just went ridiculously crazy! Really don't know what they were thinking. Â Austin didn't want to drop the belt to Triple H. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_mole Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 Just watching RAW's from 1999 and does anyone know the story behind the mess that was the SummerSlam main event? They were building it for a few weeks Triple H vs Stone Cold, then all of a sudden 2 weeks before the event Undertaker suddenly wants a shot, then Chyna gets put in a no1 contender match and wins. Week after on the go home show Mankind randomly shows up and ends up in another no1 contender match and we end up with a main event of Austin v mankind v hhh and mankind ends up bloody winning the thing! Â Triple H vs Austin was looking like a cracking main event and was bring built up nicely then it just went ridiculously crazy! Really don't know what they were thinking. Â Stone Cold didn't want to drop the title to a heel clean, especially with the babyface Jesse Ventura as the guest ref, so they brought in Mankind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doog Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 Ahh I see. Thanks for that. Still it was a ridiculous way to get to it with Chyna being no1 contender at one point etc, just turned into a mess. Â Dissaponted with Austin though, triple h had alot of momentum and even tho it ultimately didn't matter for Triple H's career In the end, a first title win beating Austin in the Summerslam main event would have been massive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaktree500 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Ahh I see. Thanks for that. Still it was a ridiculous way to get to it with Chyna being no1 contender at one point etc, just turned into a mess. Dissaponted with Austin though, triple h had alot of momentum and even tho it ultimately didn't matter for Triple H's career In the end, a first title win beating Austin in the Summerslam main event would have been massive. Although that is true, i would have to agree with austin. At that time Austin Was THE man in WWE, but not only as champion, but as the charecter as well. If i remember rightly he would of beaten rock/kane/undertaker ......bascially all the top guys. That and again, at the point in time triple h was a mid-card getting a title match......so on paper it was "up and coming HHH" vs "HARD AS F'ING NAILS Austin". Plus with a babyface ref. it would make austin look like a complete loser. Yes triple would get decent nod for winning, but it would also devalue austin for getting beat by triple h, who again was on the up......and no where near the level of some guys austin had allready beaten.  Foley on the other hand was another top guy, former champion, and i na 3 way situation it would of worked out fine. I think Foley dropped it to H the following night on raw, and because foley was at the level hes always been at (the loveable type who isnt amazing, but can tak a beating), he was a perfect candidate for HHH.  I'll agree on the chyna thing, but although im not sure what they were doing, i would of loved to see austin stunner chyna. But than again maybe thats just me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted September 17, 2010 Paid Members Share Posted September 17, 2010 (edited) Although that is true, i would have to agree with austin. At that time Austin Was THE man in WWE, but not only as champion, but as the charecter as well. If i remember rightly he would of beaten rock/kane/undertaker ......bascially all the top guys. That and again, at the point in time triple h was a mid-card getting a title match......so on paper it was "up and coming HHH" vs "HARD AS F'ING NAILS Austin". Plus with a babyface ref. it would make austin look like a complete loser. Yes triple would get decent nod for winning, but it would also devalue austin for getting beat by triple h, who again was on the up......and no where near the level of some guys austin had allready beaten. Foley on the other hand was another top guy, former champion, and i na 3 way situation it would of worked out fine. I think Foley dropped it to H the following night on raw, and because foley was at the level hes always been at (the loveable type who isnt amazing, but can tak a beating), he was a perfect candidate for HHH. None of that makes any sense. Triple H beating Austin would have done so much for him. The Rock's star was rising above Austin's at the time (plans were set in motion for Austin to turn heel at WrestleMania 2000), and he'd lost to Triple H countless times. Instead, HHH beating Mankind (a match we'd seen a million times before) on free TV made it look like a midcarder getting the belt. Austin had the "bad knee" storyline going into the match and was taking a few weeks off anyway. Triple H was an established draw (and he wouldnt be until Mick Foley put him over throughout the first half of 2000), but to say he was a midcarder is completely short-sighted. He had the look, he had the promo ability, he had the ringstyle but Austin didnt want to put him over for whatever reason. Edited September 17, 2010 by Ian_hitmanhart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doog Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Its an interesting one thinking about it properly but i definently agree with Ian. Â Ive been watching the whole of 1998 and 1999 over the last few months, and Rock was getting much bigger reactions around the time of SummerSlam than Steve Austin. The WWF were no longer relying on Stone Cold, back in '98 he was THE man, but also there wasnt that many massive babyfaces around at the time. By the time SummerSlam rolled round, Rock was no1, X-Pac and Kane were getting massively over, even Test was getting good reactions, Mankind was just returning and as ever was very popular. Then we had the emergence of Triple H on the heel side, Mr. Ass was getting over by fueding with The Rock, the Undertaker/Big Show tandem was gathering momentum etc. Â Point im making is the WWF was overloaded with top quality stars that were massively over, wheras back in 1998 a lot of wrestlers were over, but Austin was one of the only ones mega over. As other babyfaces stars were starting to rise over Austin, this was probably his last chance to give a massive rub to the heel Triple H before ultimately his career started to wind down. He missed the majority of 2000, and only wrestled on PPV again at No Mercy of 1999. It really harmed Triple H by only beating Mankind, a star who was good, but I dont think he was ever really percieved as a mega star, so the title win lost a lot of impetus at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 I think the change came from a mandate from Ventura's office that the Governor had to be raising a good guy's hand at the end of the match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted September 17, 2010 Paid Members Share Posted September 17, 2010 I think the change came from a mandate from Ventura's office that the Governor had to be raising a good guy's hand at the end of the match. That does seem likely because Austin lost to Triple H on PPV only a couple of months later. However, they could have just had Austin win if that was true and let him drop it to HHH on Raw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Tommy! Posted September 17, 2010 Paid Members Share Posted September 17, 2010 Mr. Ass was getting over by fueding with The Rock, Â Thats a lie and you know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doog Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Mr. Ass was getting over by fueding with The Rock, Â Thats a lie and you know it. Â I dunno man, he was definently getting a reaction. The crowd were responding and the feud was a decent summer program. It was clear the WWF at the time were very much behind Billy and a singles run and pairing him with Rock was a good idea. Shame it went to pot after The Rock beat him, they clearly lost faith in Billy as a singles star. Â I've always liked Billy Gunn though I'm s little biased but he was over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dart Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 Assuming he says the same thing each week, does anyone know what Alberto Del Rio's ring announcer's introduction translates to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikey Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 Bret Hart -> Bob Backlund -> Diesel. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts