Jump to content

Petty Annoyances


Recommended Posts

  • Paid Members

It's really interesting seeing what gets a big pop from "non-wrestling" audiences.

It quite often is very simple, old-fashioned stuff. Some moves are too complex or too flashy for an audience not schooled on wrestling to fully understand what they just watched, whereas holding someone up for a bodyslam and letting their panicked face register with the crowd before slamming them to the mat, is a guaranteed winner with a casual or family audience, but would barely get a peep out of a PWG crowd.

I remember being at a show where no one did a dive until six or seven matches in, and the pop for it was huge, because it was a largely "non-wrestling" audience, so they'd never seen anything like it and, crucially, nothing in the show thus far had conditioned them to expect it. 

Ultimately, it's the same as with finishers - you can get any move over as a finisher if you're good enough, you can get any spot over as meaningful if you're good enough and know your audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WWE seem to have a thing about “that move was new and looked cool, plus the crowd really liked it, let’s do it all the time!”

Like when Kevin Owens first came to NXT and did the powerbomb on the ring apron. It was a devastating move and would write someone off with an injury. Now it’s done every other match. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
7 hours ago, BomberPat said:

I've always felt that there's an ideal structure to booking a wrestling show, and I use dives as one of my examples when explaining this to people. I think the first match should take place entirely in the ring, while the second might feature someone getting knocked to the floor, or the heel leaving the ring to get a breather.

 

2 hours ago, GeronimoJacksBeard said:

What i saw from a recent JR gripe with dives in relation to "not knowing how to work" wasn't merely the frequency of the spot being performed on a card, but how it is performed  - basically everyone grouping together and watching and waiting for someone to jump on them.

Agreed. Dives have been massively diluted by the loss of their sense of urgency, especially stuff from the top rope to the floor which used to be feast or famine. There were great spots involving those type of moves in Kids matches, for instance against Bret (the famous one) and Razor (not the famous one) and if you go back a little further, Randy Savage obliterating himself on a guard rail attempting his flying double axe handle was directly responsible for him dropping his career-ending match (stakes!!) to Warrior at Mania VII. Fast forward to today and you essentially can’t watch a multi-man between anyone with even slight proclivity to going to the top rope, without every one of them jumping onto the rest playing crash mat. Maddeningly, this usually involves someone clambering up the ropes who was dived onto about two minutes earlier, showing the dives to look spectacular but barely actually hurt anyone. It amounts to a hardly-remembered mid-match spot that will have no bearing on who wins an opening match. I’m going to blame this shift almost entirely on awful Six Man Mayhem openers on ROH cards in 2006 involving Irish Airborne.

Edited by air_raid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
On 6/7/2020 at 10:21 AM, CavemanLynn said:

Second the love for Heineken-rana. And Sandman in general really.

I don't mind gimmick names for moves, but it annoys me if they don't fit the gimmick of the wrestler. Not that I could think of a better name. I never liked F5, and if someone can tell me why Shawn Spears' running death valley driver is called a C4, thanks.

Just been catching up with this thread, hence why I'm replying to such an old post.

The F5, if I remember correctly, is named after the highest rating for the force of a tornado.

The C4 (which, coincidentally, was also the name of Burchill's finisher in the UK back in the day, was a one-man Spanish Fly) is most likely named after the plastic explosive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I’m with you on the moves. I’m fine with them having generic names but what annoys me at the moment is how they keep the attitude era names of some moves. Kevin Owens is using the Stunner, the Fiend the Mandible Claw. Why not rename the moves for those characters. 
 

I don’t think any move should be named after the wrestler as for that reason it makes it odd when someone else uses it, because the name of the move is so engrained with the previous wrestler. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
5 hours ago, boshealecta said:

I’m with you on the moves. I’m fine with them having generic names but what annoys me at the moment is how they keep the attitude era names of some moves. Kevin Owens is using the Stunner, the Fiend the Mandible Claw. Why not rename the moves for those characters. 
 

I don’t think any move should be named after the wrestler as for that reason it makes it odd when someone else uses it, because the name of the move is so engrained with the previous wrestler. 

I don't agree tbh, its inevitible that some moves will forever be associated with some wrestlers and there's nothing wrong with that.

Renaming certain moves at this stage would be somewhat insulting people's intelligence, there's no point pretending that Willie Mack popularised the stunner for instance.

In the same way there's nothing wrong with the Lou Thesz press etc. Whenever I see someone perform a "cutter" I just think of DDP and a Diamond Cutter, for instance.

Edited by garynysmon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Watching the Reigns V Owens cage match from this week's Smackdown reminds me of an annoyance of mine:  Being able to win a cage match by going through the door.

The moment a door is opened in a cage match and a competitor takes an unfeasibly long time to walk towards and out of the door instantly kills all suspension of disbelief and thus enjoyment of a match.

The only benefit I can think of for the cage door being in play is the spot of slamming it into someone's head, but its done every cage match now to the point of having no meaning.

 

Edited by bbabba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree about the cage. Just no point. The door should only open because the heel manager unlocks it as a way to cheat. 
I’m not a fan of the title being defended in the Elimination Chamber. That should be to determine a number one contender. Or if the title is on the line, the Champion should enter last. Otherwise what’s the Champions advantage? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
20 hours ago, boshealecta said:

I’m not a fan of the title being defended in the Elimination Chamber. That should be to determine a number one contender. Or if the title is on the line, the Champion should enter last. Otherwise what’s the Champions advantage? 

The same is truer of triple threat/fatal four way matches where the champion doesn’t even have to drop a fall to lost their title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...