Wrestling's Top Twitter 2022

[RedRooster]

1 hour ago, Accident Prone said:

Ariel is a see-through bought-and-paid-for WWE shill on par with Ryan Satin, and Tony has every right to be pissed off when you compare Ariel's interview with Triple H to Ariel's interview with himself, but he still really should've learnt by now that these Twitter transgressions do him no flavours.

However, I've said it before and I'll say it again; Vince McMahon got away with over twenty years of awful transgressions and accusations of misconduct, so I doubt TK's forum posting habits will bring AEW to it's knees.

I don’t think you’re denying this at all, but Tony Khan has clearly benefitted from the buddy-buddy nature of wrestling journalism also. For example - he signs Jay Lethal, and not one reporter asks him about the allegations against him at the post-PPV scrum. CM Punk trashes the company, and the reporters barely touch the allegations while quizzing Khan. 

Don’t get me wrong - I don’t think his Twitter habits alone will fuck the company up (although I do think they’re damaging) - Khan seems to have entered a headspace in which he dismisses legitimate criticism of AEW as being made in bad faith, choosing only to listen to the most sycophantic of AEW fan. And that’s a real shame, as initially, adapting to feedback was one of the company’s strengths. 

[Nick James]

'Wrestling 'journo' in being bias shock!'

Most wrestling 'journos' have been rather pro-AEW throughout their existence, looks at King Dave for example. I see people like Satin and Helwani getting pelters quite often, but they're no different to the likes of Meltzer, WhatCulture and the likes. It's a fake fighting soap opera, people are bound to lean one way or the other naturally.

Helwani giving HHH an easy ride on a BT Sport puff piece promoting a show on BT Sport is hardly akin to Fiona Bruce laying up easy goals for the Tories in a hard hitting political debate. 

[Keith Houchen]

7 minutes ago, Nick James said:

'Wrestling 'journo' in being bias shock!'

Most wrestling 'journos' have been rather pro-AEW throughout their existence, looks at King Dave for example. I see people like Satin and Helwani getting pelters quite often, but they're no different to the likes of Meltzer, WhatCulture and the likes. It's a fake fighting soap opera, people are bound to lean one way or the other naturally.

Helwani giving HHH an easy ride on a BT Sport puff piece promoting a show on BT Sport is hardly akin to Fiona Bruce laying up easy goals for the Tories in a hard hitting political debate. 

I think there’s an element of Helwani being an actual journalist, one who made his name and reputation outside of wrestling. He isn’t one of the boys, never will be, and doesn’t care. He will always be viewed with suspicion, especially after he didn’t kiss Sniffs balls. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Tsurutagun said:

Look guys, 

If I've pissed people off on here with my "fuck off" comments sorry. 

I think yesterday was my first fight with someone on here. That's probably a reason for that that only my psychiatrist will know. I try to just put the hot take, post the odd offensive joke and post on the twitter/YouTube any cool things that i think should be shared and I didn't do that last night. People caught stray bullets from a shit couple of days 

Might take a break from here, may not. 

 

 

Don’t overthink it, it’s a wrestling forum. Just post a pic of your next shit and no one will care what happened a few days ago

[Accident Prone]

11 hours ago, RedRooster said:

I don’t think you’re denying this at all, but Tony Khan has clearly benefitted from the buddy-buddy nature of wrestling journalism also. For example - he signs Jay Lethal, and not one reporter asks him about the allegations against him at the post-PPV scrum. CM Punk trashes the company, and the reporters barely touch the allegations while quizzing Khan. 

Don’t get me wrong - I don’t think his Twitter habits alone will fuck the company up (although I do think they’re damaging) - Khan seems to have entered a headspace in which he dismisses legitimate criticism of AEW as being made in bad faith, choosing only to listen to the most sycophantic of AEW fan. And that’s a real shame, as initially, adapting to feedback was one of the company’s strengths. 

Yeah, TK hasn't exactly been grilled when it comes to his own press conferences, and I think that speaks to the nature of most wrestling news outlets these days. They want the free tickets and access to interviews, so they're not going to ask the hard questions. Hell, when Tony said that ROH had no TV deal, there was little to no follow-up from the geeks cosplaying as press in the room with him.

Ariel isn't/wasn't a fake journo though, and when you compare the Ariel/TK interview with the Ariel/HHH interview, it's a stark difference, TK got grilled, whereas Triple H was barely prodded into any uncomfortable position at all, which is shite when you consider that Triple H's father-in-law had recently retired due to a mountain of abuse accusations.

 

10 hours ago, Nick James said:

'Wrestling 'journo' in being bias shock!'

Most wrestling 'journos' have been rather pro-AEW throughout their existence, looks at King Dave for example. I see people like Satin and Helwani getting pelters quite often, but they're no different to the likes of Meltzer, WhatCulture and the likes. It's a fake fighting soap opera, people are bound to lean one way or the other naturally.

Helwani giving HHH an easy ride on a BT Sport puff piece promoting a show on BT Sport is hardly akin to Fiona Bruce laying up easy goals for the Tories in a hard hitting political debate. 

 

I think the idea that most wrestling outlets are mostly positive about AEW is a little off-base. From my experience, AEW gets roundly praised and fairly critiqued, even from Meltzer and WhatCulture. If anything, WWE is often graded on a curve these days whilst AEW has a constant high bar to hit.

I don't expect hard hitting journalism for a fake sport, but I do expect fair coverage from those who perceive themselves to be legit.

[Infinity Land]

8 hours ago, Accident Prone said:

Ariel isn't/wasn't a fake journo though, and when you compare the Ariel/TK interview with the Ariel/HHH interview, it's a stark difference, TK got grilled, whereas Triple H was barely prodded into any uncomfortable position at all, which is shite when you consider that Triple H's father-in-law had recently retired due to a mountain of abuse accusations.

I don't know the history of it, but one point people have made during this that differentiates Ariel from the rest is that he comes across as a hypocrite based on his UFC experience.

Quote

The catch was that, for the pre and post fight shows, the check has to be signed by Zuffa. So, UFC Tonight is one contract, and that is a Fox production, Zuffa has nothing to do with that, but, even though Fox is paying the UFC for those broadcasts, weigh-in shows, post-fight shows, all that stuff, the money is going from Fox, to Zuffa, to the talent. ... The first class I ever took at [Syracuse University’s] Newhouse [School], in journalism, was journalism ethics, and they hammer that down your throat. There is like a rule that you can’t take anything above $30. I kid you not. Because you can’t owe them anything if you want to be unbiased.

 

[Devon Malcolm]

Tony Khan is a billionaire and total cunt, HHH had just had a heart attack and is trying to make a somewhat coherent product out of what was left to him by a complete lunatic. Maybe that explains the 'bias'.

[Accident Prone]

I didn't know that a powerful, millionaire executive having a heart attack means that he is exempt from answering questions about his CEO father-in-law who resigned in disgrace to multiple allegations of misconduct. I'm not here to argue about which mega-rich pro wrestling booker is the bigger cunt either, although your assertion that Triple H is some wholesome, all-loving sympathetic protagonist in all this is quite confusing.

Edited February 20, 2023 by Accident Prone

[Devon Malcolm]

3 minutes ago, Accident Prone said:

your assertion that Triple H is some wholesome, all-loving sympathetic protagonist in all this is quite confusing.

I never said that or asserted that, don't be so daft.

[Keith Houchen]

4 minutes ago, Accident Prone said:

although your assertion that Triple H is some wholesome, all-loving sympathetic protagonist in all this is quite confusing.

He didn’t assert that. 

[Accident Prone]

40 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said:

Tony Khan is a billionaire and total cunt, HHH had just had a heart attack and is trying to make a somewhat coherent product out of what was left to him by a complete lunatic. Maybe that explains the 'bias'.

 

24 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said:

I never said that or asserted that, don't be so daft.

"This one here is a total cunt, whereas as this one here just had a heart attack..." to me reads like that. I apologise if I am wrong though, and I'll now open the floor to you calling Triple H a total cunt.

[Devon Malcolm]

5 minutes ago, Accident Prone said:

I'll now open the floor to you calling Triple H a total cunt.

One minute you want me to be calling him a "wholesome, all-loving sympathetic protagonist", the next a total cunt. Something of a stretch, isn't it? What are you playing at here at all?

[Keith Houchen]

Wasn’t the HHH thing a promotional piece for BT Sport? He was a presenter for a segment where a TV channel was promoting a show it carried. It’s more like when they got Royal correspondent Jennie Bond to big up the Royal Rumble, or when the star of a show goes on The Graham Norton Show to promote their latest series. It’s hardly David Frost interviewing Richard Nixon or Emily Maitlis interviewing the sweaty nonce. 

[Accident Prone]

3 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said:

One minute you want me to be calling him a "wholesome, all-loving sympathetic protagonist", the next a total cunt. Something of a stretch, isn't it? What are you playing at here at all?

I think there's been a simple misunderstanding here, I don't want you to call Triple H anything. I misinterpreted your post, and it snowballed from there.

[Nick James]

6 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Wasn’t the HHH thing a promotional piece for BT Sport? He was a presenter for a segment where a TV channel was promoting a show it carried. It’s more like when they got Royal correspondent Jennie Bond to big up the Royal Rumble, or when the star of a show goes on The Graham Norton Show to promote their latest series. It’s hardly David Frost interviewing Richard Nixon or Emily Maitlis interviewing the sweaty nonce. 

Thats how I have always thought of it, it was a puff piece mainly to promote Clash, but with a little more questions and crumbs thrown out. Helwani works for BT Sport so is hardly going to take the company to task about their seedy nature and recent allegations on a promotion interview a day before a PPV BT Sport are promoting.

The TK interview was on Helwani's own channel / show if I recall correctly. Different settings, different interviews, same interviewer. If both interviews were on the same platform, I would agree that he was softer on HHH than Khan. Alternatively, if Pat McAfee interviews TK and gives him a hard time after bowing down at Vince's feet, I would also agree that there is bias there.  

Edited February 20, 2023 by Nick James