Doog Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 I suppose, I see where you're coming from but it seems like just a way of getting him on the PPV. How in storyline terms would it make sense for him to be the referee though? He's retired, not been seen in months, it'd be an incredibly heelish touch if Triple H appointed him as the ref, maybe thats where they will go, have Triple H as a full fledged in power heel? Â Besides, it's not like Triple H wants the streak because of what Taker did to Shawn, he just wants it for himself, all Shawn is is Hunter's mate who's lost to Undertaker at WrestleMania too. If the story was Triple H trying to get revenge for what Taker did to Shawn it'd make a bit more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members stumobir Posted January 24, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted January 24, 2012 Personally, I hope HBK is nowhere near Taker Vs HHH match if it does happen at Wrestlemania this year. Having Austin as a special guest ref at last years WM kinda lowered my opinion of him, mainly because he was playing second fiddle to The Rock's appearance and just seemed completely overshadowed, I thought it was quite damaging to his image as I'd always viewed him as the more over guy. Don't want to see HBK make a return to a show just as special guest ref as he'd just seem irrelevant in it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ColinBollocks Posted January 24, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted January 24, 2012 Shawn Michaels is a big star. Having him on WrestleMania not only makes sense, but it makes the show more appealing and also adds to a possibly stale storyline thats already been done. Its not like they are making Jesse Ventura the referee. Michaels ties in with the past 3 WrestleManias. He's as much apart of the history of this match as the other two. It looks like thats definitely the way they are going. I hope it is as well. Hopefully they play off the interaction all three men had last year. With Triple H calling Michaels weak and 'Taker saying HBK is now a shell of his former self. Â Raw was alright. Cena/Kane/Ryder/Eve is so cheesy and poorly acted that it's impossible to take seriously. It's a shame, as this "embrace the hate" thing has a lot of legs. The problem is they've decided against subtle things (like in the excellent Daniel Bryan/Big Show feud) and instead we're getting OTT stunts and Cena squeezing one out in front of the camera. Â I personally don't mind Punk, right now. dAZ summed up why the dynamic works (Ace is an awful human being). I disagree about them giving us too much too soon with the GTS. People are right to point out that Austin Stunned Vince a good few months before their feud started to get big, the feud then went on for nearly 18 months after that first Stunner. It really depends on when they want to end this, if it's next week then they're daft. Â Not sure this Jericho thing is working, the crowd have yet to really turn on him. I guess we'll see how it turns out though. Â Can't say the show got me excited for the Rumble, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Nexus Posted January 24, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted January 24, 2012 Not sure this Jericho thing is working, the crowd have yet to really turn on him. I guess we'll see how it turns out though. Can't say the show got me excited for the Rumble, however.  Really? I thought the crowd was fairly indifferent to him and there were a few boos when he first came out, and so his pandering wasn't quite as bad as last time. There was a distinct upturn in the crowd cheering for him when he brought out the t-shirt gun, now they had something that they could've got out of it. They quietened down again when he failed to talk for a while, before cheering the highlight video and his first words. There was a lot more of a mixed reaction to him this week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 I'm really not as convinced about it being Punk vs Jericho as everyone else... there would have been something surely last week in that 6 Man Tag Match to hint at it? Aye, Jericho should've abandoned Punk's team during the match or something.  Personally, I hope HBK is nowhere near Taker Vs HHH match if it does happen at Wrestlemania this year. Having Austin as a special guest ref at last years WM kinda lowered my opinion of him, mainly because he was playing second fiddle to The Rock's appearance and just seemed completely overshadowed, I thought it was quite damaging to his image as I'd always viewed him as the more over guy. You mustn't have watched wrestling since about 1998 then. For one thing, Straight-to-DVD Austin turns up in WWE every few months for something or other. Movie Star Rock hadn't been back in seven years.  Besides, it's not like Triple H wants the streak because of what Taker did to Shawn, he just wants it for himself, all Shawn is is Hunter's mate who's lost to Undertaker at WrestleMania too. If the story was Triple H trying to get revenge for what Taker did to Shawn it'd make a bit more sense. The story is whether Shawn wants to help his mate take the streak or whether his ego means he'd play the "if I couldn't break it, nobody will" card. I don't see why the match needs a special referee though, it's not like the one last year ended on a dodgy decision.   Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ColinBollocks Posted January 24, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted January 24, 2012 Not sure this Jericho thing is working, the crowd have yet to really turn on him. I guess we'll see how it turns out though. Can't say the show got me excited for the Rumble, however.  Really? I thought the crowd was fairly indifferent to him and there were a few boos when he first came out, and so his pandering wasn't quite as bad as last time. There was a distinct upturn in the crowd cheering for him when he brought out the t-shirt gun, now they had something that they could've got out of it. They quietened down again when he failed to talk for a while, before cheering the highlight video and his first words. There was a lot more of a mixed reaction to him this week. The strongest reaction has been cheering, rather than jeering. As I said, I'll wait until he does turn before I form a full opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hartleyno9 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 In one of the Rumble vignettes the voice-over said that for the first time ever every WWE Superstar is eligible to compete. What was meant by this?  I presumed it was a que for wrestler who wrestled earlier on are officially allowed in the match. But yeah, it didn't make fucking sense  My guess is that it'll be used to put Ziggler or Bryan in the Rumble after one or both of them lose their title matches.  For the first time ever though? Both Orton & Ziggler, who lost there title matchers earlier in the evening entered last years Royal Rumble.  The only thing it could really mean, is that both World Champions are allowed to enter The Rumble this year, which unless they are planning to have one of them win the thing and have a unification match at Mania, is stupid.  This was my immediate thoughts when I saw the promo. It all points towards the World Champions entering, and as mentioned, it would be pointless if neither of them won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gold76 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Really good go home show  Loved R Truth before the match Loved Regal on commentary Loved Jericho's one line teaser  Good to see Dean Malenko, helping Zach on to the stretcher  Sets things up nicely for the Rumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew "the ref" coyne Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 In one of the Rumble vignettes the voice-over said that for the first time ever every WWE Superstar is eligible to compete. What was meant by this?  I presumed it was a que for wrestler who wrestled earlier on are officially allowed in the match. But yeah, it didn't make fucking sense  My guess is that it'll be used to put Ziggler or Bryan in the Rumble after one or both of them lose their title matches.  For the first time ever though? Both Orton & Ziggler, who lost there title matchers earlier in the evening entered last years Royal Rumble.  The only thing it could really mean, is that both World Champions are allowed to enter The Rumble this year, which unless they are planning to have one of them win the thing and have a unification match at Mania, is stupid.  This was my immediate thoughts when I saw the promo. It all points towards the World Champions entering, and as mentioned, it would be pointless if neither of them won.  I disagree. I've always felt that both world champions should be in the rumble regardless of whether they win it or not for years now. That way, even if neither of them win it, each year people may tune in to see if this is the year a world champ finally wins it. It just adds to the intrigue and unpredictability of the rumble... However they don't ever have to pull the trigger on it. In fact it would be beneficial if they don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollthedice Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Quite enjoyed Raw this week but there were some bad moments, they being the following:  Eves acting Cenas face Swagger on the mic Johnnys GTS face  Dunno what the hell they're gonna do with the Ryder story.  I'm intrigued by what Jericho had to say, I'm thinking maybe he wins the Rumble but doesn't want the champion at Mania, instead he wants Taker.  Regal on commentary was great!  Looking forward to the Rumble, I don't watch Smackdown an awful lot so I hadn't realised the World Title match was a cage match!  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted January 24, 2012 Moderators Share Posted January 24, 2012 I disagree. I've always felt that both world champions should be in the rumble regardless of whether they win it or not for years now. That way, even if neither of them win it, each year people may tune in to see if this is the year a world champ finally wins it. It just adds to the intrigue and unpredictability of the rumble. Â Hulk Hogan already did in 1990. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil is brill Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 I disagree. I've always felt that both world champions should be in the rumble regardless of whether they win it or not for years now. That way, even if neither of them win it, each year people may tune in to see if this is the year a world champ finally wins it. It just adds to the intrigue and unpredictability of the rumble. Â Hulk Hogan already did in 1990. Â I think the point Andrew was trying to make is that if one of the two world champions wins, then he'd have a chance to unify the titles, provided he survives the Elimination Chamber. Back when Hogan won it, the only prize was getting your arm raised, there was no ticket to Mania back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted January 24, 2012 Moderators Share Posted January 24, 2012 I put something similar forward in the fantasy booker competition where a heel champion enters, wins, and then declares he's going to take WM off. That's always seemed like an interesting angle to me, of course then there's all the hard work of actually finding a way to get him to defend the title at WM, but a champ winning and saying he's not wrestling at WM has come to my mind several times as an alright way to start an angle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted January 24, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted January 24, 2012 The runner up would then get the shot, I believe. When Vince won the Rumble in 1999, he gave the Rock the night off at WrestleMania and Commissioner Michaels did his "you checked yourself out of the main event at WrestleMania and Stone Cold Steve Austin ... has been checked in!" line, which they replayed on every Austin VHS released in that period. It was in the WWF Rule Book! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew "the ref" coyne Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 I disagree. I've always felt that both world champions should be in the rumble regardless of whether they win it or not for years now. That way, even if neither of them win it, each year people may tune in to see if this is the year a world champ finally wins it. It just adds to the intrigue and unpredictability of the rumble. Â Hulk Hogan already did in 1990. Â I think the point Andrew was trying to make is that if one of the two world champions wins, then he'd have a chance to unify the titles, provided he survives the Elimination Chamber. Back when Hogan won it, the only prize was getting your arm raised, there was no ticket to Mania back then. Â Thank you mr. Mask. Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.