Jump to content

Wrestlemania London?


RedRooster

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Healy52003 said:

Incorporating was suggesting keeping the events around the same area for the full weekend

A summer WrestleMania would be an intresting move and completely reshuffle the PLE calender. Could see the Rumble in March in that case 

Even If Wrestlemania was at Wembley there is no way they'd use Wembley Arena for Raw and Smackdown over the o2 due to the much smaller capacity, since the o2 arena opened in mid 2000s I don't ever recall them using Wembley Arena over it for a TV taping.

The location close to the Stadium really doesn't matter, I mean it's London you can get anywhere in 30 mins and the o2 and Wembley are even on the same Tube line and it's not like 90,000 people will all be staying around Wembley anyway they'll be scattered all across the city, using the o2 would likely be much more beneficial to fans overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, The Gaffer said:

Outside of Michael Cole not wearing enough layers, was night one this year really a disaster?

I've read somebody point out the average temperature in London for that time of year is slightly higher, and I imagine both travelling fans and the company would be better prepared. 

It was about 3.5 degrees this year with 10mph winds whistling through the stadium.  I don’t think I’d fancy sitting in it for 6 hours.

I would almost certainly be wearing shorts too, and at best a hoodie that my wife had forced me to take…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, MVP RULZ said:

Even If Wrestlemania was at Wembley there is no way they'd use Wembley Arena for Raw and Smackdown over the o2 due to the much smaller capacity, since the o2 arena opened in mid 2000s I don't ever recall them using Wembley Arena over it for a TV taping.

The location close to the Stadium really doesn't matter, I mean it's London you can get anywhere in 30 mins and the o2 and Wembley are even on the same Tube line and it's not like 90,000 people will all be staying around Wembley anyway they'll be scattered all across the city, using the o2 would likely be much more beneficial to fans overall.

Nothing much craic around the area after All In last year even with the bank holiday Sunday 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/26/2024 at 3:53 AM, Supremo said:

He remains absolutely rubbish at this type of stuff.

Genuinely starting to believe he hasn’t read the lawsuit.

He's certainly been poor in some of his responses during the post PLE pressers, but what exactly is the issue here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming @Healy52003 is Irish, it's completely ordinary for us to remark "Wasn't much craic, was there?" on the drive home from a wake. 

Edited by The Gaffer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, MachoLibre said:

He's certainly been poor in some of his responses during the post PLE pressers, but what exactly is the issue here?

Brock Lesnar’s been named in a lawsuit against the company for sex trafficking. Come up with a real, proper, professional answer as to why he’s not a member of the current roster beyond, “would love to have him back, great guy, happy to send him videos of women pissing if it helps get him signed.”

Edited by Supremo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Supremo said:

Brock Lesnar’s been named in a lawsuit against the company for sex trafficking. Come up with a real, proper, professional answer as to why he’s not a member of the current roster beyond, “would love to have him back, great guy, happy to send him videos of women pissing if it helps get him signed.”

Vince and John Laurinaitis are named in the lawsuit and the only ones currently potentially facing the consequences as such, to my understanding. The question didn't reference the lawsuit. He gives a nothing generic answer, could have left it at just "Why don't you ask Brock?', I guess, but that would raise further questions. He's not going to bring attention to the lawsuit himself, without being properly probed about it, particularly in this scenario where he's promoting the prospect of the company's biggest event occurring in London for the first time and where most people watching have no idea of any potential Brock incrimination or would have read the lawsuit either. You're reaching with this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
3 hours ago, MachoLibre said:

Vince and John Laurinaitis are named in the lawsuit and the only ones currently potentially facing the consequences as such, to my understanding. 

Brocks already faced consequences and didn’t need to be named, he was removed from the Rumble and Mania plans and not used since. Just because the law isn’t going to drop the hammer on his involvement doesn’t mean the company can’t choose to wash their hands of him. Paul should have a better answer on standby than “Brock comes and goes as he pleases, it’s up to him when he comes back” when we all know it isn’t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, air_raid said:

Brocks already faced consequences and didn’t need to be named, he was removed from the Rumble and Mania plans and not used since. Just because the law isn’t going to drop the hammer on his involvement doesn’t mean the company can’t choose to wash their hands of him. Paul should have a better answer on standby than “Brock comes and goes as he pleases, it’s up to him when he comes back” when we all know it isn’t.

I think you're probably rather overestimating the "we" there. I'd wager more of the audience isn't aware of anything potentially involving Brock within the lawsuit than is or simply doesn't care of doesn't believe it. Paul Levesque is going to be aware of that and isn't going to bring attention to it when not specifically pressed about it, especially here where he wants the attention to be on 'We might bring WrestleMania to your country like you've been longing for, Brock might even be there'.  Of course they could and maybe should wash their hands of him, but realistically they're not going to. Likely happy for him to come back when they consider it blown over, like everything else ever in wrestling. They may consider that the case now, so it might well be up to Brock if he fancies bothering or not at this stage. Not to mention, Paul may very well be of the belief and/or knowledge that he considers Brock an entirely innocent party regarding any allegations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They definitely should have had a better answer prepared - even ‘we don’t have any update on this at the moment, but thank you for your question’ would have been fine.

I imagine there are legal reasons that make dismissing Brock difficult and potentially expensive, and it wouldn’t shock me if it was cheaper for the company just to let his contract expire. If I were to guess, I’d imagine there’s an agreement in place for that to happen, with an understanding that it will be framed as mutual; and Brock won’t take legal action against the company, while WWE won’t say anything to damage his reputation.

Hence the odd answer from Triple H.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
38 minutes ago, MachoLibre said:

I think you're probably rather overestimating the "we" there. I'd wager more of the audience isn't aware of anything potentially involving Brock within the lawsuit than is or simply doesn't care of doesn't believe it.

Anyone (a) interested enough in WWE to watch Uncle Paul answer the question and (b) who has access to Google knows why Lesnar wasn’t used at Mania 40.

39 minutes ago, RedTwoster said:

‘we don’t have any update on this at the moment, but thank you for your question’ would have been fine.

Give the man a goldfish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
1 hour ago, RedTwoster said:

They definitely should have had a better answer prepared - even ‘we don’t have any update on this at the moment, but thank you for your question’ would have been fine.

IMG_8971.thumb.webp.ec285b12e9b45675542b09af4b5de349.webp

I can only ever hear that in Tony’s voice! It’s his go-to response whenever he doesn’t want to talk about something.

Yeah, more than anything I’m always just amazed Hunter seems so unprepared. Like it’s a constant surprise to him that journalists might ask him something potentially related to the huge, public lawsuit against his company and father in law.

Someone needs to hand him a script to read and memorise, so he’s got answers in the chamber whenever this stuff inevitably keeps coming up. Practice some spots on the jet. His ability to call this in the ring is woeful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Supremo said:

Yeah, more than anything I’m always just amazed Hunter seems so unprepared. Like it’s a constant surprise to him that journalists might ask him something potentially related to the huge, public lawsuit against his company and father in law.

I wonder if it’s a degree of arrogance, or a general unwillingness to listen to the PR team they undoubtedly have. There’s just no way that they wouldn’t at least attempt to prepare him for questions like that, and while WWE is doing as well as it is, his bosses probably don’t feel bothered enough to force him to.

 

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...