The British wrestling business

[cattle mutilation]

Imagine you are a Sales person and one of your clients or customers came on a public forum like this dedicated to sales people, where he knew clients and prospectiv employers read the posts, and made comments like "He cant sell, he doesnt know how to", all due to one bad incident.

But if the sales person continually made the same mistake over a number of years that criticism would be perfectly valid.I find that when wrestlers bash the internet in response to comments they've read they don't do it in the form of a carefully constructed argument, but do so in a venom spewing diatribe with arguments no more constructive than "...because I'm a wrestler, you're not" I wish they'd put some thought into things like this instead of lashing out at the fans who LOVE wrestling enough to discuss it in depth.I think sometimes people get confused between 'criticism' and 'critique'. There's nothing wrong with analysing a match in minute detail and offering pros and cons because it shows that you care enough to do so. That's one of the reasons I love wrestling.

[MoChatra]

This thread is now Mo v Terje, Mo to win

He's already won, due to me tapping out. I wanted a thread of discussion, not a flame war.Hope you put good money on him

Terje,I have made a number of points relating to the discussion, and I also pointed out that your title was perhaps unfairly/incorrectly titled. However, because I was the one who made that point, you see it as flaming.I won't even bother next time.

[cattle mutilation]

I own my own business, I dont need the money, I wanted to Wrestle infront of as many people as i could, i trained to do so, worked hard, got in shape (well sort of ) and was given the chance to wrestle for the FWA.I did and the slagging i got was unbearable. Dont get me wrong i welcomed any criticsm with open arms good or bad, but comments like "Bishop didnt deserve to be in the same building as the FWA guys" and "Bishop was the drizzling sh**s" cut deep.Left me thinking "is this a business I REALLY want to be part of?"The answer was yes, but not as an active worker.

How would YOU rate those performances?As heavy handed and as those criticisms were, and as much as it must have hurt reading them, on reflection were they correct?If you want to wrestle why not stick at it (it takes the best YEARS to reach any sort of proficiancy) instead of becoming a referee?

[Majik]

Thats a good point there CM. I've had some matches which rules all in my opinion but after chatting to fans, they considered them mediocre, and conversely had some matches that I've come backstage and kicked the wall out of frustration that I was so crap, but the fans have absolutely loved it. The trick is to realise that what you consider, as a worker, to be a good match, is not necessarily correct, and thats a hard thing to do.Likewise with any criticism - you have to step back, watch it all again, and maybe admit to yourself. Yep, I was crap. Then work on it. Its the only way to improve in my opinion - hence I tape almost every single match I work.Majik

[MikeBishop]

I own my own business, I dont need the money, I wanted to Wrestle infront of as many people as i could, i trained to do so, worked hard, got in shape (well sort of ) and was given the chance to wrestle for the FWA.I did and the slagging i got was unbearable. Dont get me wrong i welcomed any criticsm with open arms good or bad, but comments like "Bishop didnt deserve to be in the same building as the FWA guys" and "Bishop was the drizzling sh**s" cut deep.Left me thinking "is this a business I REALLY want to be part of?"The answer was yes, but not as an active worker.

How would YOU rate those performances?As heavy handed and as those criticisms were, and as much as it must have hurt reading them, on reflection were they correct?If you want to wrestle why not stick at it (it takes the best YEARS to reach any sort of proficiancy) instead of becoming a referee?

To be honest 50% of the reports i got back were good, not just from Fans but also people in the business who were there and i took it to for critiscm. But the severity of the "bad" and "harmful" reports i got back completley overshadowed the good bits. I myself was pleased with the match, i was pleased with my performance. However upon relection i am no James Tighe, James Mason or Jack Xaiver, i know my limits, and at the age of 27, time is not on my side. I know i will be a very good referee and my "performances" so far suggest that. But deep down i know that i do not have the ability nor the inclination to perform to a level the smarts expect, and quite honestly, that level is beyond me. Who knows times may change. But for the moment I am more than happy with my identity as a referee in what i consider an excellent place to work. To be honest there is a distict lack of good up and coming referees in the UK game. It is a role i will be comfortable with and will get the same buzz from it too, whilst not putting my life on the line everytime. Thanks for your comments though.

[Terje Rindal]

Cattle Mutilation & Majik makes some good points here.If I were to give my honest thoughts on a wrestling match, which the wrestler would actually listen to, he could a) agree with me and tell me that he's working on improving those specific points, or b) tell me he disagree with them. To me, a good up-and-coming wrestler listens to the fans as well as his fellow wrestlers, because at the end of the day, you're wrestling to please the fans.

[MikeBishop]

Cattle Mutilation & Majik makes some good points here.If I were to give my honest thoughts on a wrestling match, which the wrestler would actually listen to, he could a) agree with me and tell me that he's working on improving those specific points, or b) tell me he disagree with them. To me, a good up-and-coming wrestler listens to the fans as well as his fellow wrestlers, because at the end of the day, you're wrestling to please the fans.

Terje, I agree with everything you just said, and i have to a degree on this thread. I agree that an up and coming worker should listen to EVERYONE and take on board EVREYTHING that is said to them. In my case i realised that i didnt have the ability, which beleive me is a jagged pill to swallow, when you love something this much. So i reassessed the situation and thought to myself, i can play the game, but in a different way. This way for me was the way i wanted to go and make a "name" for myself, if that is possible in British Wrestling. Majik and anyone else who does work regulally then i have the utmost respect for you and what you do.I even have respect for the "educated" marks who put forward critiscm and comments in a constructive manner. What i dont have time for is the "uneducated" individuals who want to bring down the people who are busting their asses to entertain them. Cheers.

[Majik]

Cattle Mutilation & Majik makes some good points here.If I were to give my honest thoughts on a wrestling match, which the wrestler would actually listen to, he could a) agree with me and tell me that he's working on improving those specific points, or b) tell me he disagree with them. To me, a good up-and-coming wrestler listens to the fans as well as his fellow wrestlers, because at the end of the day, you're wrestling to please the fans.

And therein lies the comprimise which seems to escape some workers and fans.If a fan comes up to me and makes some good points about my match, I listen and digest, thank them sincerely and hope that they come back to maybe see the improvements.If a fan comes up to me and explains why I should never wrestle again due to the fact that my fujiwara arm bar weight placement was too far below the shoulder blade, I look like I'm listenening, thank them insincerely and hope their Mum walks in on them wanking, and joins in.On the flipside, if a fan came up to me and made some good points and I disregarded them completely, had a pop at them for not being a wrestler, and eventually told them to get stuffed, I'm not going to improve, and I deserve all the flack I get.Now transpose the fan coming up to me at a show to the internet, and the same system works. I personally will never have a pop at anyone unless majorly provoked as I have too much respect for the fans, as I am more than aware that most fans have respect for the workers.I'd never tell Mo Konjic how to defend as I don't play football, but as a fan, I'm entitled to tell him he didn't have the best game in the world and hope he gets back to his usual violent self next game. If I start explaining how the curl on his left isn't up to scratch and if he simply turned his foot in more he would improve, I would expect to wake up in hospital in the year 2007. Same applies.Majik Edited October 2, 2003 by Majik

[Truth]

I have made a number of points relating to the discussion, and I also pointed out that your title was perhaps unfairly/incorrectly titled. However, because I was the one who made that point, you see it as flaming.I won't even bother next time.

Terje limited the discussion to the British wrestling industry. I don't find any rules against limiting discussions. Science always have limitations, i.e. ways to simplify the world. It could have been a discussion about the wrestling industry in general but I guess Terje can limit the discussion to British wrestling if he wants to. Why not? Afterall, he started the thread. He came up with a few examples from Scandinavian wrestling. Those examples were to illustrate what he was looking for in the discussion, i.e. to give the forum members examples of what he was thinking about.I believe some wrestlers respond to internet critics because some of these critics are very narrow-minded and very harsh. Most critics are either overly positive or negative. Some critics are very negative even though 99% of the LIVE crowd have enjoyed themselves. Wrestlers do not have time to respond to all critics but they choose a few, mostly negative ones, and respond to them. If someone writes that you are bad wrestler and should die, I guess you have the right to write that this keyboard geek doesn't know what he is talking about. There is at least one member of this forum who has written in essence that one particular British wrestler should die because he is bad.

[Guest NothingElseMatters]

And therein lies the comprimise which seems to escape some workers and fans.If a fan comes up to me and makes some good points about my match, I listen and digest, thank them sincerely and hope that they come back to maybe see the improvements.

Some wrestlers are too afraid to admit they are less than perfect and perhaps slightly green. With all the money they spend (and probably lose) I can imagine the criticism they get to be a frustrating experience. However, without listening to their peers, the wrestler comes across as ignorant and with a 'holier than thou' attitude. Often however, that criticism can be unfair though, its down to the way things are phrased and not necessarily what is said. Many wrestling fans lack the ability and social function to not make a generalisation, instead commenting that a match was 'fucking boring' and the wrestler was 'shite' without ever really saying why. So, to a degree, I can understand the frustrations of a performer.However there is the other end of the spectrum, the fans truly pull apart a performance in a way that expresses a total negative attitude. Being negative gets a response, its gets a rise, they argue a point whether they are right or not, just to get people talking. Its become 'en vogue' to have a negative attitude (NME magazine has employed this tactic). Some of the comments made about WWE are totally unjust and with such negativity being thrown around, its become more difficult to see whatever good there can be amongst the less-than-good.Part of the negativity and fan attitude comes from a new breed of fan I like to call the 'Casual Smark'. A casual smark buys tapes on occasion, stuff like CZW and ROH (and im not saying there is anything wrong with either, right?) and digs all the high risk and flippy spots because its so much different to anything they have ever seen before. But they can't apply logic to the risks, in that not everybody wants to put their body at risk, and those that do, they want the spot that tops the last.Fewer fans actually respect the wrestlers these days. Matwork is now 'boring' and its all about oneupmanship. I think all the wrestlers are asking for is respect. As long as I can see a wrestler trying his best, performing at a level that is his best, then im happy, but fewer fans share that way of thinking.(forgive me if none of that made any sense, im really quite tired)

[thepigmanandyhogg]

I believe that by putting myself out their in the ring, I accept whatever criticism, praise or abuse I get, because by stepping through those ropes I am making myself a focal point, or an attraction, therefore I believe every person is entitled to their opinion, whatever they may think.However perhaps sometimes people should use a little tact or diplomacy or even a little bit of class when expressing these opinions, but it is still their right to do so.God knows I have broad enough shoulders to have coped with everything everyone has ever said about me, but any publicity is good publicity in my opinion!

[RMC420]

I find wrestling to be similar to acting in this respect.Actors go out to please the audience. Critics say their performance was crap, everyone believes the critic, actors career takes a turn for the worse. Same with chefs for example. One point is that the critic will be a fan of the genre, and they are merely expressing their opinion which everyone is allowed to do. So, it could be argued that wrestling fans expressing their opinion on the net is the same deal as AA Gill doing so in The Times. It's up to the wrestler to proove that the fan/critics opinion isn't indeed fact. Bitching and moaning on the internet merely lowers the wrestlers credability. Imagine Ryan Giggs telling all the Man Utd fans that they were wrong last season and that he was actually playing well at that time. But at the same time calling them arseholes which wrestlers tend to do when they rant - further alienating themselves from the fans. The difference between AA Gill and wrestling fans, is that most of the critics of art and sport write in newspapers meaning that the actors can't respond. The fact is that the British wrestling business is so small means that the internet is a big medium of communication. As the internet is a two-way medium, the wrestlers have a chance to respond. Obviously, there are still reviews of actors performances on the net, yet even if an actor reads a review on the net, I doubt that they would respond. That is because they know that it would further harm their career. Directors would think, I'm not hiring this guy, he can't take criticism, he's not professional. One fact is that the UK wrestling business is so small, that the wrestlers feel the need to respond on the net. If they are good enough, their career won't suffer from criticism. They could have 1,000 bad reviews, but it takes just one awesome performance to turn their career around. Look at an actor. They are wooden in their first 10 shows. Obviously that affects their "bookings", but if they have just one performance that connects with people then suddenly they have found their "role". Same with a wrestler, whether that role is "comedy", "hardcore", "babyface" etc. OK, maybe the above was a bit optimistic, but you get my drift. People can live on the legacy of one performance for a long time. Many footballers are examples of this. Naturally, if a wrestler is good enough, they will rarely get a bad review. That's common sense right? I suppose one issue I have failed to cover is that do you honeslty think that enough people believe the opinions of internet smartasses that it makes a difference? It's taken a lot of writing for me to say that, but it's true. If wrestlers honesly think that the opinion of internet smartasses matter then more fool them. On the internet, the people who matter are the people who have build reputations from honest reliable reviews. Of course, if they think your show was bad and they express that, then people will believe them. However, if you inturn put on a good show next week, these are the people that will write that. I suppose there in lies the difference between AA Gill and casual fans. It's about who you believe.There is no qualification required to have an opinion, but qualifications help people to believe what you are saying is at least plausable.IN MMY OPINION....The problem with British Wrestling is that it is still trying to compete with American Wrestling. Of course if they copy that style, fans will realise that the WWE does it a million times better and criticise British Wrestling. It's my opinion that British Wrestling will only succeed when it re-discovers its roots.

[Guest Chris32]

Interesting discussion. A point that hasn't been strongly picked up on yet is the huge availability of tapes from different countries, all across the world. The explosion of the internet has opened up the market for trading tapes and it has become quite popular. Since wrestling in the UK commands a small fanbase, a relatively high percentage of that base are wrestling enthusiasts who watch WWE on a weekly basis and may also watch independent US wrestling, and even Japanese wrestling. The result is inflated and contradictory expectations when these fans attend UK events. If you go to a Third Division football match then you know the standard isn't going to be the same as the Champions League match you watched the night before. But this philosophy of relative expectations doesn't seem to apply so well to wrestling. The fact that WWE continually choose ridiculous soap-opera-esque storylines with little emphasis on proper suspension of disbelief with realistic characters and situations has probably had a big effect on the way people watch wrestling, the way they treat it as fans. Similarly, the US indies and the often stupid stunt-based styles employed by the likes of ROH have the effect of causing a demand for a style that should not be replicated. And when the inevitable demand is quenched by wrestlers like Jody Fleisch there is another backlash from the fans who enjoy a more realistic story based style. So these expectations and perception of wrestling and the way it should be performed and viewed have a massive effect on the way the fans perceive a match. You have a wrestler like Drew McDonald moving very slowly and trying to tell a story - but the problem is that he's doing so in front of a crowd who are more interested in ladders and tables and moonsaults. So there is a negative reaction to someone like McDonald because he doesn't really satisfy a demand that has eminated from the United States. That friction causes animosity. Then you have Jody Fleisch who wrestles the US indy/Hardy Boyz style that has became popular. The result is increased popularity for Fleisch, but criticism from those who see his act as shallow. I guess, therefore, the great friction between the wrestlers and the fans in the UK scene comes from different ideological perspectives, different visions of what wrestling should be due to the changing direction of American wrestling. And in that sense I suppose it could be said that British wrestling has an identity crisis.

[CracktonMoj]

Hey, hello there.I don't know how this is going to be recieved in this debate, but oh well.As a fan, I spend a decent amount of money travelling to and paying for admission to wrestling events. If I then see wrestlers blatantly not trying, or putting together Formula Match #2, or promotions not providing the stars advertised as appearing (without a good reason such as injury) or booking decisions such as 'let's run the same match twice in a row', I feel as if I'm not getting value for money. It's not a case of 'oh this wrestler is no good so I hate him', it's usually a case of 'hey, this guy just can't be arsed, I hate him'. I have no problem with wrestlers of limited ability or what-have-you being on shows, as long as they seem to be trying to entertain rather than 'going through the motions'. Of course, there's limits to this (Drew McDonald wrestling while his back was being held together with matchsticks and flour-water paste), but meh.That is why I enjoyed the UCW show in Trowbridge I went to last month - despite the booking being total Russo and the wrestlers being, for the most part, 'unpolished', they all looked to be trying their hardest to put on a good show. The whole internet thing - someone said earlier that it's no different from going to a pub and discussing it with your mates - exactly my sentimonies.

I guess, therefore, the great friction between the wrestlers and the fans in the UK scene comes from different ideological perspectives, different visions of what wrestling should be due to the changing direction of American wrestling. And in that sense I suppose it could be said that British wrestling has an identity crisis.

See, I read it slightly differently. As far as I'm aware, the only people who criticise the modernisation of the British scene seem to be the people who have most to lose from it happening - as in, old style promoters who care more about lining their pockets than the state of the business, and wrestlers who are in it for whatever payoff they can get rather than providing good entertainment or advancing wrestling's perception.

[Linus]

The way I see it is this:If you are in the wrestling business you forfeit your right to respond to criticism. The wrestling business is entertainment, pure & simple. Like theatre, music & football. I want to criticise you, I can. You've put yourself in the public arena.Now if I say you're a rapist, or have ginger hair, then you can put me right. If I say you're shit, or that your booking is cliched & derivative, you should shut the hell up and get on with what you do.There are certain people who are influential. Their reviews or comments or insults may be taken up by others, sometimes even as gospel. If you have found yourself on the sharp end of their barbs, pick yourself up and try to change their minds. Or just cater to the 90% of fans that don't slaver over the internet. Elisar's differentiation between "smart fans" and "smart arses" is unhelpful, I feel - an unclear way of backtracking over an unfortunate comment by Alex.I certainly don't want to hear "you've never been in the ring" or "you don't know what goes into booking a show". It doesn't matter. As it happens, I have & I do, but that's besides the point. Even if I'm Joe Schmoe from Allegapoe, I can say what the hell I like and you take it. Like a man.This is the wrestling business, not some fag drama queens' right to reply. Did smart marks kill the business? No. The business is killing the business by forgetting the lessons of the past.