Paid Members tiger_rick Posted July 3, 2007 Paid Members Share Posted July 3, 2007 Was BBB a junkie before wrestling? When a guy dies of recreational drug abuse, the fault needs to fall in the wrestling community because promoters have turned a blind eye to it for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Stevie C Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 What sounds better for them?"Benoit his son" or "Benoit choked his son to death"or"Benoit used his trademark wrestling move the "Crippler Crossface" to kill his son"They both sound the same because they both translate as "Benoit killed his 7 year old son"Oh shit did he? I didn't notice.Nice one Einstein.You asked a question and I answered it. What else do you want me to do? Fuck off and die a horrific death you absolute cunt.Completely missing the point I was trying to make.Thanks for the abuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayfabeusmonkeyus Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Was BBB a junkie before wrestling? When a guy dies of recreational drug abuse, the fault needs to fall in the wrestling community because promoters have turned a blind eye to it for years.Oh that's ridiculous, no but I've heard nothing to say he was a junky in wrestling either. He left the business, got himself a habit, died. Blaming that on vinny is fucking insane. Promotors of all entertainment turn a blind eye to drug use from stars, in telly music comedy whatever avenue you look at. Just cos you watch alot of wrestling you think it should be drug free and you're using an example of a guy who died from an overdose after his career? Drug use happens, and some people die. Stopping that happening to ex-wrestlers is just as hard as stopping that happening to people who've never been involved in wrestling, it's impossible, hence the world wide failure to stem the tide. Do talk sensibly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parkamarka Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Hey mick managed it, for quite some time, suck it up or get off the road their choice. You know full well what a wwe contract is when you sign it.And yeah, it's entirely down to the wrestlers as to how many pain pills or juice they take. You can kinda notice it by how, some do and some (a minority, but some) don't. Simple as that. If you want off the juice, come off the juice, if it affects your push but you live another 40 yrs great. If you figure fuck it take the risk and stay on it, great too. Their choice. And they've chose to stay on it after seeing eddy die, after seeing all the 80's guys hearts pop, fine good for them. And bear in mind the wellness policies already there, if they all decided to stick to it.....The argument that if wrestlers don't want to fuck themselves up with steroids then they shouldn't be wrestlers is ignorant and redundant.Read the actul words small foolish child. I said if they didn't wanna take steroids they shouldn't take steroids.You're basically calling us all fools for giving a shit about the health of these guys we watch every week and hoping that a bit of public outrage might lead to some systematic change.Yeah pretty much, it's their bodies and there choice, and watching em on the telly doesn't give you the right to try and control their choices. We've had ample proof that vinny ain't gonna change the way he does business and (most) wrestlers ain't gonna stop juicing. You can't see a problem with a system whereby Chris Masters is openly ridiculed and buried on television for coming off steroids, and is subsequently back on them within weeks? You think this is a black-and-white case of free will, and not maybe a teeny tiny bit about a negligently unhealthy work environment? Your argument is basically that to be a top wrestler, you have to be willing to risk your life for it, and if fans have a problem with that and would like to see the system made safer, they're idiots. That's retarded.Well in the matter of chris masters you got a shit wrestler with a decent body, once he got off the juice it's just a shit wrestler - so he got buried, life goes on. And yeah, to be top of the pile of WWE you have to be juiced or unusually naturally gifted in terms of physique (very unlikely) or have something else to get you there (like mick, again very unlikely) If you're not either of these things then you have to realise that juicing is necessary to be the best, and make your choice.See it's always interesting, when challenging people's steadfast perceptions, to see them reply to what they assume you say rather than what you said. Try reading a bit more carefully this time.Wrestlers, every single one, has the choice of how many roids to do, how many drugs to do - same as you or I. Now roids will help them in most wrestling jobs, not all by any stretch, but the more prominent ones certainly. And if you want to be the top of wwe, you may need to juice alot to get the size (Benoit) or a (presumably?) much safer amount (the rock) and you weigh up the risk rewards accordingly.I'm saying if you really don't like the system, and still support it but still whinge that something must be done - then you're a fucking idiot cos you're funding it.If it's as bad and evil as you think and you're even watching it on sky sports and giving em their add revenue then you're an actual part of the process, you're a tiny part of the reason eddy's dead now. You helped.Okay, now I know you're trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayfabeusmonkeyus Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 (edited) Hey mick managed it, for quite some time, suck it up or get off the road their choice. You know full well what a wwe contract is when you sign it.And yeah, it's entirely down to the wrestlers as to how many pain pills or juice they take. You can kinda notice it by how, some do and some (a minority, but some) don't. Simple as that. If you want off the juice, come off the juice, if it affects your push but you live another 40 yrs great. If you figure fuck it take the risk and stay on it, great too. Their choice. And they've chose to stay on it after seeing eddy die, after seeing all the 80's guys hearts pop, fine good for them. And bear in mind the wellness policies already there, if they all decided to stick to it.....The argument that if wrestlers don't want to fuck themselves up with steroids then they shouldn't be wrestlers is ignorant and redundant.Read the actul words small foolish child. I said if they didn't wanna take steroids they shouldn't take steroids.You're basically calling us all fools for giving a shit about the health of these guys we watch every week and hoping that a bit of public outrage might lead to some systematic change.Yeah pretty much, it's their bodies and there choice, and watching em on the telly doesn't give you the right to try and control their choices. We've had ample proof that vinny ain't gonna change the way he does business and (most) wrestlers ain't gonna stop juicing. You can't see a problem with a system whereby Chris Masters is openly ridiculed and buried on television for coming off steroids, and is subsequently back on them within weeks? You think this is a black-and-white case of free will, and not maybe a teeny tiny bit about a negligently unhealthy work environment? Your argument is basically that to be a top wrestler, you have to be willing to risk your life for it, and if fans have a problem with that and would like to see the system made safer, they're idiots. That's retarded.Well in the matter of chris masters you got a shit wrestler with a decent body, once he got off the juice it's just a shit wrestler - so he got buried, life goes on. And yeah, to be top of the pile of WWE you have to be juiced or unusually naturally gifted in terms of physique (very unlikely) or have something else to get you there (like mick, again very unlikely) If you're not either of these things then you have to realise that juicing is necessary to be the best, and make your choice.See it's always interesting, when challenging people's steadfast perceptions, to see them reply to what they assume you say rather than what you said. Try reading a bit more carefully this time.Wrestlers, every single one, has the choice of how many roids to do, how many drugs to do - same as you or I. Now roids will help them in most wrestling jobs, not all by any stretch, but the more prominent ones certainly. And if you want to be the top of wwe, you may need to juice alot to get the size (Benoit) or a (presumably?) much safer amount (the rock) and you weigh up the risk rewards accordingly.I'm saying if you really don't like the system, and still support it but still whinge that something must be done - then you're a fucking idiot cos you're funding it.If it's as bad and evil as you think and you're even watching it on sky sports and giving em their add revenue then you're an actual part of the process, you're a tiny part of the reason eddy's dead now. You helped.Okay, now I know you're trolling.See now I thought I was responding to a fearsome amount of hypocrisy amongst quite a few of the chaps on here. Pointing out that if you truly believe that wrestling's to blame for these guys deaths and are still supporting it. Well it is supporting, well these guys deaths, the cause - call it what you will.Granted it wouldn't be a very popular opinion on here, cos it points out that regardless of whining on message boards many of you guys still support the thing that's killing these guys. Now can you honestly tell me that's not true?But of course, if having an opinion that's not agreed with on here is trolling, I guess you could call it that. I tend to prefer to think of it as educational, but fear you may not be sufficiently advanced mentally to benifit from it. There are people on here bright enough for me to engage in discourse with, and I have attempted to do so. Edited July 3, 2007 by kayfabeusmonkeyus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 But of course, if having an opinion that's not agreed with on here is trolling, I guess you could call it that. I tend to prefer to think of it as educational, but fear you may not be sufficiently advanced mentally to benifit from it. There are people on here bright enough for me to engage in discourse with, and I have attempted to do so. No.You've ignored any valid points people have come up with and argued them down with non-relevant opinions.You've used a sarcastic "I know better. Your opinion is an opinion - mine is fact" tone the entire time.You have criticized others for not understanding you and needing to "Read what I wrote properly", while putting words into other people's mouths and ignoring the points they made that were right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayfabeusmonkeyus Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 But of course, if having an opinion that's not agreed with on here is trolling, I guess you could call it that. I tend to prefer to think of it as educational, but fear you may not be sufficiently advanced mentally to benifit from it. There are people on here bright enough for me to engage in discourse with, and I have attempted to do so. No.You've ignored any valid points people have come up with and argued them down with non-relevant opinions.You've used a sarcastic "I know better. Your opinion is an opinion - mine is fact" tone the entire time.You have criticized others for not understanding you and needing to "Read what I wrote properly", while putting words into other people's mouths and ignoring the points they made that were right.See that suprises me, I've answered every point made and justified my answer. I've put no words in anyone's mouth. I have asked for people to read what I write properly, as on a fair few occasions I've had people wildly misinterpret very simply points. And when I've had part of my argument pointed out as wrong (like JNLister stating wwe owes no moneies from merch in the event of death) I've accepted it graciously and moved on.Now if my theory that things won't change, that you're more than a bit foolhardy for thinking there's a chance they might, and that wrestlers do have a choice in whether or not to take (or how many to take) roids comes out as being untrue, then I'll apologise.And if you can show me that supporting the WWE while bemoaning the fact that it's killing it's wrestlers isn't hypocrisy of the highest order I'll apologise again. Seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayfabeusmonkeyus Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Actually, can you show my some evidence of me putting words in peoples mouths and ignoring facts that proved any of my arguments wrong? Cos I'd like to see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parkamarka Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 (edited) Okay, now I know you're trolling.See now I thought I was responding to a fearsome amount of hypocrisy amongst quite a few of the chaps on here. Pointing out that if you truly believe that wrestling's to blame for these guys deaths and are still supporting it. Well it is supporting, well these guys deaths, the cause - call it what you will.Granted it wouldn't be a very popular opinion on here, cos it points out that regardless of whining on message boards many of you guys still support the thing that's killing these guys. Now can you honestly tell me that's not true?If yBut of course, if having an opinion that's not agreed with on here is trolling, I guess you could call it that. I tend to prefer to think of it as educational, but fear you may not be sufficiently advanced mentally to benifit from it. There are people on here bright enough for me to engage in discourse with, and I have attempted to do so. You're right, I couldn't possibly hope to engage with a man of such unshakeably "steadfast perceptions". And please, if you're going to go on about how intellectual you are, please learn to spell. See, I can take unnecessary cheapshots too! If you genuinely think you can draw as simple a line as choosing between a) watching WWE/not caring about the wrestlers; and b) caring about the wrestlers/not watching WWE - and that any crossover between the two positions is sheer hypocrisy of the highest order - then I'm just gonna have to agree to disagree with you on this. Edited July 3, 2007 by Parkamarka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayfabeusmonkeyus Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 See now I thought I was responding to a fearsome amount of hypocrisy amongst quite a few of the chaps on here. Pointing out that if you truly believe that wrestling's to blame for these guys deaths and are still supporting it. Well it is supporting, well these guys deaths, the cause - call it what you will.Granted it wouldn't be a very popular opinion on here, cos it points out that regardless of whining on message boards many of you guys still support the thing that's killing these guys. Now can you honestly tell me that's not true?Seriously, can you honestly tell me that's not true? Just by saying it's not that simple a question.Ok let me ask you a different one, well the same but phrased differently. A. Do you believe wrestling is too blame for the death of eddy Guerrero and a host of other wrestlers. (If you're one of the guys on here who doesn't, fair enough)B. If the answer is yes, do you not feel you have to take some of the responsibility as you have continued to support the product despite this, knowing that the combined support of you and many others is the reason the practices you believe killed these men still occur? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parkamarka Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Ok let me ask you a different one, well the same but phrased differently. A. Do you believe wrestling is too blame for the death of eddy Guerrero and a host of other wrestlers. (If you're one of the guys on here who doesn't, fair enough)B. If the answer is yes, do you not feel you have to take some of the responsibility as you have continued to support the product despite this, knowing that the combined support of you and many others is the reason the practices you believe killed these men still occur?Your question is absurdly reductionist, but since you think you're being so insightful I'll - against my better judgement - humour you.A. Largely, yes, allowing for arguable predispositions to addiction.B. No. Not in the sense that you're trying to apportion blame on fans merely for watching, and trying to imply a deep hypocrisy in all of us for caring while not switching off something we love. Arguing that the machine may be fucked up, but the fans are a part of that machine so they should take responsibility - I don't think even Vince McMahon at his most irrationally defensive would offer that as an argument. I will, in all likelihood, always watch wrestling - WWE in particular - because I love it. I will watch it if steroids are eliminated completely and we are left with smaller, more natural-looking performers. I will watch it if it continues to be riddled with steroids, although I will continue to worry about the wrestlers like I worried about Eddie Guerrero - who I'd been a fan of since 1993 - ever since he stepped out on Nitro in 1998 looking far too big for his frame. And yeah, I'll continue to complain on my little message board because I don't believe it's my responsibility to switch off something I love in order to save lives, it's the responsibility of Vince McMahon and his staff to try and undo some of the damage we are seeing from the system he has perpetuated.I can confidently say I didn't get into it because of the physiques, but even if I had, your argument that just by watching I endorsed a system of steroid abuse is piss-weak at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny McBride Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Actually, to a certain extent I agree with the troll. People have to stop watching and make it clear why they've stopped watching if they expect anything to change. That's the only way things may change.And for the record, with the exception of the last two Wrestlemanias (which I watched in a pub) and one show on a tour last year (for which someone else bought me a ticket so I could take her kid along), I've not watched any WWE in well over two years. And yes, that was largely a moral decision. Now, most of my wrestling spending is on the SWA, and I get the feeling that not much of my money is going into a high-roller's cocktail of juice, pills, powders and weed there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parkamarka Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Actually, to a certain extent I agree with the troll. People have to stop watching and make it clear why they've stopped watching if they expect anything to change. That's the only way things may change.So, what, did you write Vince a strongly-worded letter when you switched off, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny McBride Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 No. I probably should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigBoot Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Didn't see this posted in here but an update on Doctor Astin and the possible implications of this - http://www.wrestlingobserver.com/wo/news/h...t.asp?aID=20061This bit in particular stood out: The announcement that Benoit passed his 4/10 steroid test, even if he did, is one that can't hold up to public opinion with the revelation in this indictment, because it covers a period well into the Wellness policy. A key point of this is unlike with Balco, where they were using designer drugs that could beat the tests, Astin was prescribing Benoit regular steroids, so either the testing is incredibly flawed, Benoit had a way to easily beat the tests, or the tests themselves were a sham. I strongly believe the latter is not the case, but I also believe the latter will be the conclusion most will come to. This is the first time when I truly fear that wrestling as we know it not only will be undergoing great changes, but that as bad as Vince McMahon's reputation is in some circles, and even with his history of rebounding from negatives, this will tarnish it to a level that he may never live to fully turn around. There will be a far increased number of cries in the media over the next week, which have already started, to do something about the industry. Between the advertisers, sponsors, and those action figures with the muscular physiques, this is not a story going away soon.Credit: wrestlingobserver.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts