Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Raw Discussion - 9/10/07 (contains spoilers!)
-
09-10-2007 4:55am#1That was one of the best Raw shows I've seen in a long time. Probably a key factor in that being the return of the Heartbreak Kid! Yeah baby! Here are some thoughts I have from the show...
- The Hornswoggle skits don't really do anything for me but I thought this week was pretty amusing. I love Coach in his role as the unlucky lackey. Without him these skits would suck big time.
- Great to see John Cena looking good following his surgery. He is the true champion really and hopefully he'll reclaim his title next year.
- Lillian's song was decent although the whole thing did remind me of the Eurovision with it being a rock song in a different language. It did lead to a brilliant little segment...
- Ah Santino! Oh how I laughed as he did his little song. "They tried to make me watch The Condemned, I said no, no, no!" Can't remember the last time I laughed out loud from watching WWE but I did tonight so two thumbs up for Santino! Where was Maria though?
- When I saw that Triple H was scheduled to face the WWE champion Randy Orton and the Samoan Bulldozer Umaga I thought to myself 'he's going to pull off a win somehow' and sure enough he did! Again I found myself laughing out loud (more in dismay in this instance). You have to see the funny side, right? Although since when does the savage monster Umaga use steel chairs? Can Triple H not just be beaten in normal circumstances by TWO top stars then? And how much time did they devote to him being carried away? I'd say that got more time than the women's match. Note to Umaga - STIFF THE QUADS.
- The Kennedy/Hardy match was an enjoyable bout. It did look a bit clunky at times and Jeff looked very tired from the get-go but the crowd was into it and it's always nice to see that bleach-haired muppet get beat.
- The final segment ruled. Its been a while since a Raw show got me on the edge of my seat but when HBK's music hit I was shocked! I liked Michael's look too, reminiscent of his old commissioner days being unshaven and sporting the cowboy hat. Can't wait until he gets back in the ring again. At the beginning of 2007 he was in f*cking awesome form. Might still end up the wrestler of the year. :cool:
All in all I found it the best Raw show in many, many weeks. Your thoughts?0
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
krudler wrote:HHH is superman now in case we didnt know
But isn't that what is promos leading up to his comeback were having us believe anyway?
VR!0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Mr.Nice Guy wrote:Pushing a babyface is certainly logical but having a lone babyface beating Umaga and Orton is anything but.
If it was a clean pin on Umaga, i'd agree, but it's DQ finish! You're not happy when he wins clean, you're not happy when he wins on a DQ. Nice jibe about Umaga stiffing the quads btw, very objective
VR!0 -
Advertisement
-
validreasoning! wrote:If it was a clean pin on Umaga, i'd agree, but it's DQ finish!
That's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. A win's a win. He's racking 'em up.validreasoning! wrote:You're not happy when he wins clean, you're not happy when he wins on a DQ.
I'm not happy with him CONSTANTLY WINNING. The one match he lost since his return was to a guy who he had earlier won a match against.validreasoning! wrote:Nice jibe about Umaga stiffing the quads btw, very objective
I was thinking of making it my new sig. STIFF THE QUADS!0 -
Mr.Nice Guy wrote:That's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. A win's a win. He's racking 'em up.
... as a strong babyface should. See Cena, John. (especially during a title reign )I'm not happy with him CONSTANTLY WINNING. The one match he lost since his return was to a guy who he had earlier won a match against.
If it was Cena, you'd be cheering! But because it's not one of your boys...
VR!0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
validreasoning! wrote:... as a strong babyface should. See Cena, John. (especially during a title reign )
A strong babyface should not get the better of the WWE champion and Umaga. Even Cena had to sell. Even Hogan sold. Generally speaking a babyface shows vulnerability.
Triple H has defeated the World Tag Team champions in a handicap match and now the WWE champion and Umaga in a handicap match and the fanboys try and pass this off as completley normal! Pass the sick bag...validreasoning! wrote:If it was Cena, you'd be cheering! But because it's not one of your boys...
Wrong. If Cena made Umaga and/or Orton look weak I'd criticise it. In actual fact however, Cena sold huge for Umaga - on his own - and for Orton - on his own - unlike SuperHunter who managed to beat the both of them at the same time! You are so biased towards HHH that whenever something retarded occurs which involves him you refuse to denounce it and instead try to justify it by bringing up others, "what about so and so" etc. Call a spade a spade. (To your credit you did this for the Umaga burial on Raw unlike others who justify EVERYTHING involving SuperHunter) Be consistent though.Minto wrote:I don't f*cking believe this! You call Cena superman because he has the title a too long and because he has been very predictable over the last few months. And now Hunter is superman? Dude, seriously, I'll be looking for you to call Val Venis Superman, the next time he wins a match.
Hold on, when did I ever refer to Cena as Superman? What the f*ck? He sells. Hunter does not except under extreme circumstances. Therefore yes he IS Superman. And it's not like I've coined that phrase for him.Dre as in Dray wrote:Mr Nice Guy , you have an unhealthy obsession with John Cena.
Um, how's that exactly? Because I don't follow the crowd and slate the guy?Minto wrote:I'd agree if wrestling was a real sport, but news flash, its not (unless you are "It's still real to me, dammit" guy)!
What? Why would you agree if wrestling was a sport? If it was real then you could have no complaints about him racking up wins as he'd be meriting them! The fact it's not makes him racking up all these wins just pathetic!
Seriously, are you unable to criticise the guy in any capacity?HBK wrote:But he didnt neccessarily 'best' them now did he?...they got disqualified for being caught as heels.....makes perfect sense to me!
No they got disqualified because Triple H was about to pedigree Orton and win but Umaga ran in and hit him in the back with a steel chair causing the DQ (yes Umaga resorted to using a chair). So yes he did 'best' them as they couldn't get the job done on SuperHunter!0 -
-
-
Mr.Nice Guy wrote:Wrong. If Cena made Umaga and/or Orton look weak I'd criticise it. In actual fact however, Cena sold huge for Umaga - on his own - and for Orton - on his own - unlike SuperHunter who managed to beat the both of them at the same time! You are so biased towards HHH that whenever something retarded occurs which involves him you refuse to denounce it and instead try to justify it by bringing up others, "what about so and so" etc. Call a spade a spade. (To your credit you did this for the Umaga burial on Raw unlike others who justify EVERYTHING involving SuperHunter) Be consistent though.
You of all people calling me biased when you sh*t on everything HHH is pure Pot and Kettle syndrome, and you know it. I don't denounce it, i acknowledge it, i just bring up other examples. As you seem to believe that HHH is the only one guilty. I admit that he completely took a lot away from Umaga on RAW. However he didn't do anything MegaCena did a few months earlier.
In no way am i justifying HHH's actions, but you should practice what you preach when it comes to being consistant. Especially regards MegaCena. Also try to bear in mind that just because you're taking 5 users in one thread doesn't mean you're right. It's merely opinion.
VR!0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
i think a fair point has been brought up in this discussion. Cena has jobbed continuously on Raw throughout late 2006/2007. He even jobbed to kevin freakin federline; so much for SuperCena
great to see Michaels back, please please please Vince, put the gold on this guy as soon as possible. a month title reign in nearly 10 years is disgraceful (and that wasn't even the WWE title)0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
validreasoning! wrote:You of all people calling me biased when you sh*t on everything HHH is pure Pot and Kettle syndrome, and you know it. I don't denounce it, i acknowledge it, i just bring up other examples. As you seem to believe that HHH is the only one guilty. I admit that he completely took a lot away from Umaga on RAW. However he didn't do anything MegaCena did a few months earlier.
First off I don't sh*t on everything HHH as I have, for example, given him praise for his main event match. You have referred to Cena as a "talentless hack" in the past so if you're hellbent on venting fury at biased individuals, start with yourself like a good lad. Every time I bring up a valid point you focus on me personally ("MNG's biased blah, blah, blah") because YOU haven't got a decent defense for SuperHunter and in reality are "biased as f*ck" to quote your good self! You know it and I know it. There's no Pot, Kettle Black at all as I have knocked incidents involving Cena plenty of times, most recently the Unforgiven match and the bullsh*t DQ ending. This is what I wrote at the time actually...The ending to the Cena-Orton match was ridiculous. They used a PPV match to set up another PPV match? That is disgraceful.
Now if I say something like that about HHH apparently I'm "biased". Not so. I'm not biased, I just want to see entertaining television.validreasoning! wrote:In no way am i justifying HHH's actions, but you should practice what you preach when it comes to being consistant. Especially regards MegaCena. Also try to bear in mind that just because you're taking 5 users in one thread doesn't mean you're right. It's merely opinion.
First off you ARE justifying HHH's actions as a simple read of this thread will show. Secondly I do practice what I preach regarding Cena. Thirdly, John Cena followed orders and sold when asked whereas Triple H is actively involved in the direction of his character and rarely if ever sells.Dre as in Dray wrote:No because you follow the Croud and love the guy.
If I wanted to follow the crowd I'd boo the guy like the people booed him on the last Raw and become one of the countless internet hordes who leave comments on my videos like "Cena sux rofl. He's got 5 moves lmao". Unlike them I can actually appreciate and see the effort he puts in and the strides forward he has made in the past year and thus I will give him credit for that and won't simply go along with the crowd. The "Cena sucks" stuff is very last year as far as I'm concerned.Minto wrote:Are you saying you've never used the term SuperCena or superman when refering to Cena? I'm not going to go looking through threads, but almost everybody has called him that. If you haven't, then I apologise.
I've not referred to Cena in those terms, no.Minto wrote:Why should Hunter sell to guys who will never make it big? If he did and then he won the WWE title, I'd bet you would be one of the first to say that he lost to too many guys to make a credible champ. It's a vicious circle that will never end!
How do you know these guys will "never make it big"? If that's the mentality why are they even employed to begin with? You have to try and put over talent. And I don't think Triple H could ever be accused of lacking credibility due to what he has accomplished. Look at Undertaker. He put over Heydenreich and it's fair to say he never made it big but it didn't damage Taker did it? At least he had the class to go do it.Minto wrote:I can criticise him, I just don't feel the need to, sure he buried some guys, but really who the f*ck cares any more? Your watching RAW, which is the Triple H show, so if you don't like it don't watch it! It's not like he comes to your house every week and forces yu to watch RAW.
You know what, this is the most honest post I've seen given by those who disagree with my views on HHH so I actually have a lot of respect for you saying that.
You acknowledged he has buried guys and you've acknowledged Raw has become the Triple H show. Guess what, we're in agreement! I just wanted that clarified is all. Kudos to you for doing so. You obviously enjoy that Raw is the way it is but I hope you understand that I don't watch Raw for "the Triple H show" and that I'm entitled to be upset at the things that have gone on lately.
I credit you however for not simply trying to defend the indefensible and for basically saying, 'yes it goes on but I like it'. Shame others can't be so honest and will go to great lengths to prolong an argument! 0 -
-
Mr.Nice Guy wrote:First off I don't sh*t on everything HHH as I have, for example, given him praise for his main event match. You have referred to Cena as a "talentless hack" in the past so if you're hellbent on venting fury at biased individuals, start with yourself like a good lad. Every time I bring up a valid point you focus on me personally ("MNG's biased blah, blah, blah") because YOU haven't got a decent defense for SuperHunter and in reality are "biased as f*ck" to quote your good self! You know it and I know it. There's no Pot, Kettle Black at all as I have knocked incidents involving Cena plenty of times, most recently the Unforgiven match and the bullsh*t DQ ending. This is what I wrote at the time actually...
I referred to him as that Once! And boy have you done all you can to make sure i don't forget it! I don't have a defense for HHH because i don't condone burial after burial, but half of these so called burials don't even count as half of them weren't even in a match! This one has been done to death though. As for your Cena quite, thats fair enough, unlike you, i won't trawl through past posts. Now that you have proven that you have blasted your boy Cena, will credit you for being consistant (now that wasn't so hard now, was it?)
I focus on you personally because you're the first to cry about HHH since his return. It's fact. As for me being biased, i'm not really. And you already pointed that out when i said i couldn't justify HHH and his actions with Umaga. What i will not do however, is listen to someone bitch about sh*t HHH is doing, and either condone or ignore what someone else (ie Kennedy, Hogan, Cena) has done/is doing. Just for the sake of having a go at HHH.
And that's it.
VR!0 -
Bubs101 wrote:The podcasts have gone to VR's head but Minto is still keeping it real.
What the?... i was an opinionated sh*t before i started the podcasts. So f*ck you!
VR!
(now you can be justified in your statement, whereas before it was blatantly false)0 -
validreasoning! wrote:I referred to him as that Once! And boy have you done all you can to make sure i don't forget it! I don't have a defense for HHH because i don't condone burial after burial, but half of these so called burials don't even count as half of them weren't even in a match! This one has been done to death though. As for your Cena quite, thats fair enough, unlike you, i won't trawl through past posts. Now that you have proven that you have blasted your boy Cena, will credit you for being consistant (now that wasn't so hard now, was it?)
Well I have said all along that I am consistent. You were the one who alleged I wasn't and that I was biased and out to get Triple H. I'm not. I'm just looking for entertaining TV. Thanks for acknowledging that though.
I have simply highlighted HHH's burial of talent and asked for acknowledgement of that from others on the forum. For whatever reason you decided to not acknowledge it and instead spouted off a load of crap about me being biased and so on. To be honest it's out of order. Take the points on their individual merits.validreasoning! wrote:I focus on you personally because you're the first to cry about HHH since his return. It's fact. As for me being biased, i'm not really. And you already pointed that out when i said i couldn't justify HHH and his actions with Umaga.
Could you maybe try NOT focusing on me personally? I think I'm entitled to raise HHH's squashing of Raw talent and not have people complain about me expressing a view contrary to their own. This is an opinion forum after all and I do give valid reasoning for my views.validreasoning! wrote:What i will not do however, is listen to someone bitch about sh*t HHH is doing, and either condone or ignore what someone else (ie Kennedy, Hogan, Cena) has done/is doing. Just for the sake of having a go at HHH.
Who's ignoring other stuff? You were the one who introduced these people into the debate. As I have shown above I have criticised Cena when it's been warranted and I have doen the same for Hogan and Kennedy plenty of times. What relevance have they to this debate though? You should perhaps reflect on why you wanted to introduce these names into the discussion in the first place rather than focus on the guy at hand - TRIPLE H.
The whole thing is a classic example of a red herring...Description of Red Herring
A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:
Topic A is under discussion.
Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
Topic A is abandoned.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html
Triple H has buried talent. Now you're either like Minto and you are fine with that (which seems to be the case) or you're like me and people like Bubs who find the whole thing tiresome.0 -
-
-
-
-
Mr.Nice Guy wrote:I have simply highlighted HHH's burial of talent and asked for acknowledgement of that from others on the forum. For whatever reason you decided to not acknowledge it and instead spouted off a load of crap about me being biased and so on. To be honest it's out of order. Take the points on their individual merits.
Wrong. I put one in the stomach for HHHaters everywhere saying they all weren't happy. I have said you were biased on other occasions, you've since proved you were consistant. I just don't have the time and energy to go through months and months of posts.Could you maybe try NOT focusing on me personally? I think I'm entitled to raise HHH's squashing of Raw talent and not have people complain about me expressing a view contrary to their own. This is an opinion forum after all and I do give valid reasoning for my views.
To an extent yes, but i'll make an effort if you make an effort on quitting trying to be condescending and patronising with some of your remarks. It is an opinion forum. But for some reason you give across the impression, and not just to me, that just because you have an answer for everything, makes you correct. It doesn't. I've no problem agreeing to disagree. And you've proved on occasion that neither do you.Who's ignoring other stuff? You were the one who introduced these people into the debate. As I have shown above I have criticised Cena when it's been warranted and I have doen the same for Hogan and Kennedy plenty of times. What relevance have they to this debate though? You should perhaps reflect on why you wanted to introduce these names into the discussion in the first place rather than focus on the guy at hand - TRIPLE H.
As i already said, a lot of the people who bitch about Triple H, ignore the fact that he's not the only one, and point it out for the sake of HHHating.Triple H has buried talent. Now you're either like Minto and you are fine with that (which seems to be the case) or you're like me and people like Bubs who find the whole thing tiresome.
Agreed, as i felt the same way about Hogan in the early 90s. But i'll find it tiresome if it keeps happening with HHH. It just takes more than two weeks for me, that's all.
VR!0 -
Advertisement
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement