deathrides Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 No idea, but I'd like it to be. They've still only got Prime Time up until 1987 at the minute so I'd say they're more likely to get all of them on first. Apart from New shows, do they have any archive stuff that was only an hour long on there? With it only being about 40 mins of actual footage they might not bother. Nitro was only an hour for the first 6 months, do they not have that on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted January 22, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted January 22, 2016 No idea, but I'd like it to be. They've still only got Prime Time up until 1987 at the minute so I'd say they're more likely to get all of them on first. Apart from New shows, do they have any archive stuff that was only an hour long on there? With it only being about 40 mins of actual footage they might not bother. Nitro was only an hour for the first 6 months, do they not have that on? Raw was only an hour until 1997. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MungoChutney Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Point taken but those shows have more significance in my opinion, with the tie in to the Monday Night Wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted January 22, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted January 22, 2016 I think it's just a case of priorities being uploading Raws and Smackdowns but perhaps, as someone pointed out a while ago, they'll not bother if they've got regionalised versions of Superstars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted January 22, 2016 Moderators Share Posted January 22, 2016 Unless they use the generic edit they used for the British version where instead of localised promos they'd use generic green screen ones about the house show feuds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d-d-d-dAz Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 So, part of my recent re-interest in wrestling is because I was tasked with buying my friend and I tickets for Raw at the O2 in April. I completely forgot. So, ive just used StubHub to pick up 2 tickets. I've paid woefully over the odds (annoying, but I can live with that), but I was just wondering if StubHub is generally trustworthy, and should I be confident that we're actually going? It seems above board, and I was directed there from the O2 site. So, has anyone used it before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dart Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 I used it for Summerslam last year. It's owned by ticketmaster. If you have any concerns just be early, so if there's a problem you can phone them and they make sure you get in. They guarantee it. It's a shame most sellers on there are totally abusing its purpose for financial gain. I'm surprised more isn't done to stop it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted January 23, 2016 Awards Moderator Share Posted January 23, 2016 What's a rotator cuff? It's one of those body parts you only hear talked about on wrestling shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BigJag Posted January 23, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted January 23, 2016 Rotator Cuff Injury Overview The rotator cuff is made up of four muscles that help move and stabilize the shoulder joint. Damage to any or all of the four muscles and the ligaments that attach these muscles to bone can occur because of acute injury, chronic overuse, or gradual aging. This damage can cause significant pain and disability with range of motion and use of the shoulder. http://www.emedicinehealth.com/script/main/mobileart-emh.asp?articlekey=59257&page=1 Baseball pitchers suffer with rotator cuff injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members The Ratt Posted January 23, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted January 23, 2016 Why is the old WWF Superstars show not on the Network? Any chance that it might? I think it's partly to do with the fact that WWE don't own the trademark to "Superstars of Wrestling". I think when they've shown the odd bit of footage on DVD releases from this time period for Superstars, they've had to blur the banner that hung from the rafters. I believe some Indy promoter picked up the rights when WWE let it lapse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshC Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 Was it not the UK's own 'Double J' Matt Jarrett? I think for the good of wrestling, whoever owns it should sell it back to them. I need me some crystal clear 1991-92 angle goodness! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BigJag Posted January 23, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted January 23, 2016 Damn! Vince must have popped a vessel over that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted January 23, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted January 23, 2016 Was it not the UK's own 'Double J' Matt Jarrett? I think for the good of wrestling, whoever owns it should sell it back to them. I need me some crystal clear 1991-92 angle goodness! Shame WWE didnt pay Jarrett to take the trademark back, otherwise one of those supershows he keeps promoting might actually have happened! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Your Fight Site Posted January 23, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted January 23, 2016 Was it not the UK's own 'Double J' Matt Jarrett? I think for the good of wrestling, whoever owns it should sell it back to them. I need me some crystal clear 1991-92 angle goodness! Shame WWE didnt pay Jarrett to take the trademark back, otherwise one of those supershows he keeps promoting might actually have happened! Wouldn't surprise me if Vince refused to based on Matt’s surname. “I’m not doing business with a Jarrett!” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarTheSlouch Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 Was it not the UK's own 'Double J' Matt Jarrett? I think for the good of wrestling, whoever owns it should sell it back to them. I need me some crystal clear 1991-92 angle goodness! Shame WWE didnt pay Jarrett to take the trademark back, otherwise one of those supershows he keeps promoting might actually have happened! Wouldn't surprise me if Vince refused to based on Matt’s surname. “I’m not doing business with a Jarrett!” Especially after that Vladmir Kozlov business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts