WWE Year in Review 2009 (Overview)

jaykhunter

Hey guys, as a thank you for all the positive feedback I've received lately, and because you guys are so awesome, I've written up an overview of 2009 in WWE. It's a different viewpoint than looking at PPVs or wrestlers in isolation, more just shifts in the focus of the company. I hope you enjoy it. So, let's do it to 'em!

WWE Year in Review 2009 (Overview)
written by Jay Hunter

ODD.



"Odd" might be the best word to describe WWE in 2009. People were elevated and stopped, main event scenes changed, but also stayed the same. This year there has been more emphysis on elevating mid-carders since the WWF became WWE. The downside is that WWE never really went full-out with mid-card pushes (until December 2009, that is!) and that despite successfully cultivating two new bonafide Main Eventers (CM Punk and Jeff Hardy), the RAW main event has been the most stagnant in years, and SmackDown's post-SummerSlam has gone way downhill. Despite the stop-start pushes, 2010 looks to be another year of youth movement, elevation and new main eventer-cultivation. Triple H, HBK and Undertaker only have so many years left!

Another point that's worth mentioning is that the general quality of the PPVs has been at least good. Despite the stale booking, the overall in-ring wrestling is very good by WWE's standards. If you could stand the staleness of the main event scene, it was a very good year for in-ring wrestling.

And now, the bad part.

EXCESS.



"Excess" might also be the best word to describe WWE. Excess with adding a new TV show - Superstars (making that an average of 6 hours of WWE programming per week, not counting the numerous 3-hour RAWs and weeks with Pay Per Views) and 14 PPVs per year (2 in June - Extreme Rules and The Bash, and 2 in October - Hell in a Cell and Bragging Rights). There's never been so much WWE on TV.

EXCESS TITLE CHANGES.



Excess in that WWE have had a nasty habit of changing titles more than once per month. Oh, it's not that bad, is it? Oh, hell yeah! There have been SEVENTEEN (17) FU-KING WORLD/WWE TITLE CHANGES THIS YEAR! WTF IS THAT?! That's more than ANY other year before it! Not even 2002 with it's 9 title changes hasn't got sh*t on this one! WWE haven't copped the law of diminishing returns (the more you do something, the less effective it is; i.e. the less interest/value a title change has).

List of World/WWE Title Changes in 2009 : wrote:

WWE TITLE CHANGES IN BOLD

WWE : Edge beat Jeff Hardy at the Royal Rumble (Jan-25-09)
WWE : Triple H won the RAW Elimination Chamber (Feb-15-09)
WORLD : Edge won the SD! Elimination Chamber at No Way Out (Feb-15-09)
WORLD : John Cena beat Edge & Big Show at WM25 (Apr-05-09)
WWE : Randy Orton beat Triple H at Backlash (Apr-26-09)
WORLD : Edge beat John Cena at Backlash (Apr-26-09)
WORLD : Jeff Hardy beat Edge at Extreme Rules (June-07-09)
WWE : Batista beat Randy Orton at Extreme Rules (June-07-09)
WORLD : CM Punk beat Jeff Hardy at Extreme Rules (June-07-09) (Cashed in MITB)
WWE : Randy Orton won a Fatal 4 Way on RAW (June-15-09) (beating HHH/Cena/Show)
WORLD : Jeff Hardy beat CM Punk at The Bash (July-26-09)
WORLD : CM Punk beat Jeff Hardy at SummerSlam (Aug-23-09)
WWE : John Cena beat Randy Orton at Breaking Point (Sept-13-09)
WWE : Randy Orton beat John Cena at Hell in a Cell (Oct-04-09)
WORLD : Undertaker beat CM Punk at Hell in a Cell (Oct-04-09)
WWE : John Cena beat Randy Orton at Bragging Rights (Oct-25-09)
WWE : Sheamus beat John Cena at TLC (Dec-13-09)

EXCESS GIMMICK MATCHES.



Excess in that WWE have started just going "Russo" on us and making every damn month a gimmick PPV.
This means that despite a feud being at the start, middle or end, here's a damn gimmick match. The feud between Undertaker and CM Punk has been hit worst because of this (1st Submission match, then Hell in a Cell, then 4-way = no normal singles PPV match). It's a very dangerous game WWE are playing - recycling gimmicks so frequently means that initially, curiosity about a "fresh" PPV will mean good buy-rates, but will seriously wain every year after that.

So in 2009, the gimmick PPVs are : wrote:

Jan's Royal Rumble.
Feb's Double Elimination Chamber.
June's Extreme Rules (every match is a gimmick match).
July's Night of Champions (every match a title match).
September's Breaking Point (main events are submission).
October's Hell in a Cell (main eventers have a Hell in a Cell match).
October's Bragging Rights (featuring 3 RAW vs SmackDown talent matches).
November's Survivor Series (featuring 3 Survivor Series matches).
December's TLC (featuring a table match, ladder match, chair match, and TLC match).

WWE SHUFFLES THE DECK...THREE TIMES!



WWE haven't skimped on the shuffling either. In an unprecedented lack of planning, WWE had not 1, not 2, but THREE Drafts this year! That's right. It took WWE three tries to get the current roster. It gives you an idea of how far WWE actually think ahead.

WWE 2009 Drafts : wrote:

WWE Draft 2009 : April 13, 2009.
Of importance :
Went to RAW : MVP, Triple H, Miz, Matt Hardy (who turned heel, then came back to SD as a gormless face). Kennedy.
Went to SD! : CM Punk, Jericho, Mysterio, Morrison.
Christian stayed on ECW.
Full roster changes : http://www.bebo.com/BlogView.jsp?MemberId=7866769176&BlogId=9092773372

WWE Draft 2009...2! : June 29, 2009.
Of importance :
Went to RAW : Evan Bourne, Jack Swagger and Mark Henry (who turned face, with some success)
Went to SD! : Hart Dynasty. Matt Hardy (who's heel-run disintegrated when Jeff left). Finlay.
Went to ECW : Benjamin. Regal. Christian stayed on ECW.
Full roster changes : http://www.bebo.com/BlogView.jsp?MemberId=7866769176&BlogId=9544678362

Women's Draft : October 12, 2009.
Of importance : Who cares!
Full roster changes : http://www.bebo.com/BlogView.jsp?MemberId=7866769176&BlogId=10059127470

Celebrity involvement in 2009.



Did you know that Donald Trump "bought" RAW? That's right! Trump bought RAW on June 15th, but when Trump/Vince realised Trump would NOT (and never would) show up every week, Vince "bought" back RAW THE NEXT WEEK from Trump for....double what he paid for it...in an excrutiating segment.

In an effort to disguse their ever-changing booking plans and drafts, and to name-drop Donald Trump at every opportunity, WWE announced that Trump had finalized some WWE business (the Drafts, Guest GMs) before he sold RAW back to Vince. Not that the selling of a single-show on a Brand isn't a ludicrous a notion as Kane ringing Taker's mobile phone to get him on RAW next week.

With that in mind, starting on June 29th, Vince announced that RAW would have a Guest Host GM, who has "complete control" over the show. Of course this is just a ratings-ploy, to garner attention from main-stream entertainment. GMs have varied in success, with in general, the best shows coming from former WWE talent. In my opinion, the best GMs have been Ted DiBiase, Seth Green, Shaq, Bob Barker and Jesse Ventura (my favourite). RAW's ratings have varied throughout the Guest Host deal, but in general, they get the same ratings as before.

WWE fans get the last laugh, as since Trump buying RAW was shot as "a shoot i.e. legitimate", WWE stock prices fell the next day. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy!

There's one more huge change to WWE that I haven't mentioned. Do you know what it is?



Any ideas? Yes! That's right!!


NO BLOOD.

Linda McMahon is running for Senate, and the PG-Era is really in full-swing. In addition to no swearing (JBL is Poopy) and no Divas lingerie/pillowfight/etc matches, we have the "NO BLOOD" rule, even on PPV. WWE want to be seen as a strictly PG show. This means that previous guaranteed blood-matches like Hell in a Cell, or even TLC, have no blood. With this in mind, I'd like to see WWE do a First Blood match! We've seen the match STOPPED when Cena was cut open hardway (i.e. by accident) so that officials can clean it and stop the bleeding. This match stoppage happened AGAIN at TLC, with Christian, showing us that "cut doctors" are here to stay in WWE.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

SIGH! But with that out of the way, let's get down to the actual wrestling!

So what was WWE like going into 2009?



Coming off 2008, Jeff Hardy had just gotten his first WWE title from a three-way squabble (Triple H refused to get pinned by Hardy, unfortunately), John Cena was just back from yet another injury, steam-rolling Chris Jericho. Kozlov and Mark Henry were getting mild pushes, and CM Punk was pushed back down to circa-midcard (having won the world title eariler in the year, Orton punting him before the match, so Punk didn't even participate in the match he lost the title in - a feud that never materialized).

Looking back over 2009, broad strokes show the following :

January to WrestleMania :



JBL was feuding with HBK. For a time it looked like Michaels would give Morrison the best match of his life until HBK decided to face the Undertaker at WM25 instead. Triple H went duck-hunting for Orton (Tripper invaded his home, searching the house for Randy), Swagger's amazing series of under-appreciated matches with the returning Christian, Finlay and even Tommy Dreamer on ECW showed huge potential, capped off by Swagger embarassing Cena in a great match on the April 13th RAW. Edge, Big Show and Cena fought over SD's highest prize, which was quite lame, since Cena and Edge battled many, many times over the past few years. Mysterio put in a fantastic performance at No Way Out, and was paired with Jericho after WM.

Post-WrestleMania to the fall :



Jericho and Mysterio stole the undercard show with three fantastic PPV matches. Mysterio turned into a two-month fued with Ziggler, making him look great, then dropping the title to Morrison (not Ziggler), who hasn't really done much with it. Edge started a tag program with Jericho, but immediately got injured. Big Show has taken his place in the team, to actually a lot of success. Jericho's constant name-dropping of Edge ensures a feud next year.

In the main event scene, Orton and Triple H continued to fued until Cena took over, and Triple H diverged to took on Legacy. That culminated with Shawn coming back and DX reforming, but did a surprisingly great job of making Legacy look good. Miz/Morrison split, as Morrison turned face and enjoyed some fractured success on SmackDown, The Miz flourished as a new mid-card heel, who's scathing criticism of Cena and refreshed look gained him even more popularity in the smark camps. Unfortunately Miz's promos went unheard, as Cena buried Miz at The Bash in just a few minutes. The damage already done, Cena made Miz look great the next night on RAW, in a great 15-minute match. The Miz has since whethered the storm, gained and retained the US championship. Meanwhile, Christian languishes by himself on ECW, as Swagger, Bourne and co are lost on RAW.

Fall/Winter, leading into 2010 :



Kofi Kingston received a big push, losing his comedy-Jamaican accent and engaged with a feud with Orton. At the time of writing, he's still looking for that big win; having lost decisively at TLC to Orton. Drew McIntyre has been playing the monster heel in the mid-card area of SmackDown, usurping Zigger's mid-card push. "Hand-picked by Vince McMahon", the Scot relieved the IC title from Morrison at TLC, and looks to have a bright future on SmackDown. Similarly, RAW newcomer (since October 26) Sheamus started decimating non-legitimate talent (Noble, the timekeeper, Lawler) before setting his sights on WWE Champion Cena. Sheamus won the WWE title at TLC, in the biggest shock of the year. News that Bret Hart has signed a contract with WWE, and an emphysis on aforementioned talent (as well as Ziggler and Morrison, and hopefully Swagger and Bourne will get renewed pushes next year), the future looks very fresh and interesting for WWE.

It may not have been the smoothest ride, but we're finally over the hump of Triple H/and Shawn/or Cena vs Orton and/or Legacy and look to see some new main event matches next year. And with Sheamus leading the way, as an Irish wrestling fan, I haven't been this full of hope for a new year in a very, very long time.

So that's it! By the length I hope you can appreciate why I decided to make it it's own blog! Hope you enjoyed the overview of the year!

waltersobchak

another tremendous read!;)

DM_7

Great Post

The word excess really does describe what wwe engaged in this year.

All in the name of finding ways to raise revenue from things like PPV and DVD sales.

The biggest disapointment for me was the way WWE made Smackdown brilliant and let it go to waste. They took what was good about smackdown (New fresh feuds and talent) and tried to bring it to raw but only in a half heated way.

The biggest plus was the way some new talent came on the scene and proved if used right wwe have some young superstars they can rely on for years to some.

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

good thread. !

Machismo Fan

Once you mentioned the law of diminishing returns you brought back horrible flashbacks of my only average economics test this morning.:) 17 title changes is about 14 too many if you ask me plus people give out about TNA and gimmick matches, WWE is nearly just as bad.

Redzer7

Great thread haven't watched wrestling in years but seen the TLC match with Cena V Sheamus, was going to start getting back into it again but I don't like the sound of them making it PG .

callaway92

Very Good read TS!

Mr.Nice Guy

Very interesting read for those of us who have been away from wrestling in recent times.

I didn't know they stopped using blood. Feck's sake. :rolleyes:

Rjd2

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I didn't know they stopped using blood. Feck's sake. :rolleyes:

Honestly am I the only one that has no problem with no blood policy? You should not need it to get a match over and blading is disgusting when you think about it, the wrestlers sports entertainers do enough damage to their bodies for our enjoyment.

jaykhunter

Rjd2 wrote: »

Honestly am I the only one that has no problem with no blood policy? You should not need it to get a match over and blading is disgusting when you think about it, the wrestlers sports entertainers do enough damage to their bodies for our enjoyment.

In general, no. Agreed, though - matches don't need blood and wrestlers (in general) should be able to put on a great match without it.

My main contentions with the "no blood" policy are :

- Some matches DO need blood - e.g. Hell in a Cell. What's the point of having such a badass gimmick if no risks are taken and both men aren't visibly worn after the match? We've been brought up to see HiaC as a feud-ending ulta-violent matchup (i.e. both guys do colour) and it's very obvious now that it's gone. A lot of gimmick matches (like Elimination Chamber, TLC) we'd associate with big spots and someone being busted open. If a feud has gotten so heated that they have (eg) a non-sanctioned match, the 'emotions' in the match run so high that blood would enhance the match - like the Orton/HHH feud earlier this year. Orton took out Vince, Shane and Steph, and Tripper should've gotten finally revenge by injuring/bloodying him up, not just pinning him. It was a little weak.

- Stopping the match because of a small, hardway cut --even on PPV-- is just embarrassing. Is it so taboo now! I disagree with this new WWE rule whole-heartedly.

Mr.Nice Guy

Rjd2 wrote: »

Honestly am I the only one that has no problem with no blood policy? You should not need it to get a match over and blading is disgusting when you think about it, the wrestlers sports entertainers do enough damage to their bodies for our enjoyment.

I agree with you on the blading. My main gripe is the reason for why they have decided to stop doing it. They might wind up doing away with heel turns next, for fear of scaring the little ones.

Bubs101

Rjd2 wrote: »

Honestly am I the only one that has no problem with no blood policy? You should not need it to get a match over and blading is disgusting when you think about it, the wrestlers sports entertainers do enough damage to their bodies for our enjoyment.

Ah that's crap. Look at UFC for proof, any time a fighter is gushing blood the crowd just comes alive. It's the carnal instinct, people just like seeing it and look how important it was to Flair and Hulk. the images of their blonde hair slowly being painted red are iconic. And blading does virtually no damage

How Soon Is Now

Great thread man really gave me a quick idea of how the year went seeing as i have missed the whole thing.

To be honest it really sounds like i didnt miss much seems be good few new faces and same old ones still hanging around.

The whole blood thing pisses me off though i mean it used to really show that they were laying into each other would get real tempo and anger into the fight and it added to the whole atmopshere of a big main event match up.

michael.etc...

At the end of the day, blood is a shortcut, and there's something wrong in the grander scale of things, if the action is incapable of drawing the viewer in, to the correct degree without it.

It's something that's very, very effective when used correctly, but more often than not, it isn't.
What does bug me, is the match-stopping due to hardway cuts... different matter altogether.

One thing I do approve of, is the more limited use of chairshots, and in particular the removal of unprotected headshots altogether.

davrho

Great read.

Again Michael is on the button with the chairshot comment.

The "blood" issue has nothing to do with kid friendly or Linda's run. It is to do safety concerns. WWE like all other companies has to legally take risk assessments. The risks of a heavily bloodied employee going into a crowd is not acceptable. Unfortunately its the way things have become. For WWE to ignore legislation leaves itself open for scrutiny.

I expect to be slated for this post but i bet if you look into this you will find its not far off the truth.

Safety has become a joke. I worked for Intel, Leixlip, about 10 years ago. We had classes on how to go up and down stairs, make a cup of tea, how to safely use hand tools etc...........I questioned the safety aspect of this bull****. It had feck all to do with safety but had to do with law. If you fell down the stairs and hurt yourself then Intel were not liable as you had been shown how to do this safely:eek::pac:. If ye burned your hand making tea they were covered and so on.

Sorry for going off topic on a great post but this is what we are dealing with....

Machismo Fan

michael.etc... wrote: »

One thing I do approve of, is the more limited use of chairshots, and in particular the removal of unprotected headshots altogether.

Never mind how stupid unprotected chair shots are in general but they don't make sense either, if I swung something at your head you'd look awfully stupid if you didn't put your hands up to try and block it.

jaykhunter

davrho wrote: »

The "blood" issue has nothing to do with kid friendly or Linda's run. It is to do safety concerns.

You've got to be kidding me!! WWE are stopping matches because of small hardway cuts and stopping blading because of safety concerns?! C'mon mate, that's bullsh*t! Bloodied wrestlers don't go into crowds or brawl around the arena (in general), if they did there'd be no point in being bloody, as the camera would be doing wideshots. The point of blood is to show it up close to heighten emotions. To say there's no correlation between the new no-blood mandate and Linda's Run/PG-Era is fool's talk.

In a somewhat related topic, WWE depressingly apparent don't give a sh*t about wrestlers (insert rant about independent contractors, no health insurance etc etc here) ....although they're getting better (offering rehab) but they've got to look after their current roster better. WWE haven't gotten rid of blood because of "safety concerns"...Jeez!

On a separate note, I wholly disagree with unprotected head chair-shots. I think the Dudley Boyz are to thank for that! (Apparently they cussed out other wrestlers backstage for protecting themselves) ...I'd use it sparingly because it looks amazing, but should be done to different wrestlers to minimize damage.

flahavaj

Immense thread again jaykhunter. Really really enjoyed the read. Its only when you read the year summarised in thie way that you see how over the top they've gone with the title changes and the overuse of gimmicks.

With regard to unprotected chairshots, thats a total no-brainer to ban them post-Benoit. Anyone who argues otherwise is a moron.

The blood issue is an interesting one. Generally speaking, blood shouldn't be necessary to tell a story in the ring. Aside from the PG stuff, blading in matches had become vastly overused. There was a time when people were blading left right and centre, even on a weekly basis for TV main events. You couldn't watch a HHH or HBK PPV match without the old "crimson mask" being busted out there for a while. Overuse of the gimmick in this way is IMO a shortcut to getting heat on amatch, is somewhat lazy and damaging in the long term in terms of the audience's perception of blood in matches. If you're going to criticise WWE for overusing gimmick matches and title changes so that their signifigance is totally diluted, then its only right to praise them for cutting (no pun intended!) out the blading. It does mean that when they do allow someone to blade in the ring (and I guarantee they would do so if the occasion called for it) it'll seem truly important and totally add to the drama of the match. Blood is used sparingly in matches in Japan and is usually reserved for epic Main Events once in blue moon. Its noticeable that when someone does blade the audience really reacts, such as the famous Muta-Hase bloodbath back in the day. In short, less is more and in the greater spectrum of mad decisions WWE have taken, I'd look on this as one of their better ones.

davrho

jaykhunter wrote: »

You've got to be kidding me!! WWE are stopping matches because of small hardway cuts and stopping blading because of safety concerns?! C'mon mate, that's bullsh*t!

In a somewhat related topic, WWE depressingly apparent don't give a sh*t about wrestlers (insert rant about independent contractors, no health insurance etc etc here) ....although they're getting better (offering rehab) but they've got to look after their current roster better. WWE haven't gotten rid of blood because of "safety concerns"...Jeez!

.

So your telling me WWE is exempt from the law. I guarantee you at some meeting a risk assessment was done and it was decided by some eejit that blood and crowds is a no-no. When have we ever seen medics coming out for cuts untill recently? A decision on safety grounds has been made. I know it sounds ridiculous but thats what we are dealing with. The same folk give you lessons on how to walk up the stairs in places like intel...

flahavaj

davrho wrote: »

So your telling me WWE is exempt from the law. I guarantee you at some meeting a risk assessment was done and it was decided by some eejit that blood and crowds is a no-no. When have we ever seen medics coming out for cuts untill recently? A decision on safety grounds has been made. I know it sounds ridiculous but thats what we are dealing with. The same folk give you lessons on how to walk up the stairs in places like intel...

Not necessarily disagreeing with your point but wouldn't they also have an issue with top rope moves or high rish manoeuvers like the bump Jericho took face first through a table at TLC in that case?

jaykhunter

You should read the back of your ticket stub and the terms & conditions for WWE live events! That kind of "hazard" should be expected and WWE aren't responsible (as part of entering the arena you agree to these rules) Blood gets on your shirt, hey, blood gets on your shirt.

I agree that blood in crowds is a no-no but the new "no blood" policy is anything other than due to Linda or PG is preposterous.

WWE have been blading for over 20 years. For someone to suddenly do a "security assessment" in the last 2 months is ludicrous, just coincidentally around the same time as the former CEO of the company runs for US Senate, in a time when WWE have gone fully-fledged about being PG.

Otherwise you'd have more successful "I got hit with a drumstick" cases at concert. I can't find any. Who knows.

Anyway, I'm sick of arguing this point. If you don't believe me, that's fine. No-one else takes your point of view.

(PS I done some of those stupid safety lectures too, I firmly believe it's not the case with WWE) You and Intel =/= Fans or Wrestlers at WWE live events. There's a huge difference.

If you want to continue can you please make a new thread about it It annoys me looking back on the thread I started.

Lone Kimono

davrho wrote: »

So your telling me WWE is exempt from the law. I guarantee you at some meeting a risk assessment was done and it was decided by some eejit that blood and crowds is a no-no. When have we ever seen medics coming out for cuts untill recently? A decision on safety grounds has been made. I know it sounds ridiculous but thats what we are dealing with. The same folk give you lessons on how to walk up the stairs in places like intel...

I would believe it has more got to do with WWE going PG than some law. I have never seen any WWE wrestler going into the crowd when covered in blood and I understand why. But I find it hard to believe there is some law against wrestlers bleeding when fighting in the ring. If that was true then boxing and MMA would have massive problems.

D2D

jaykhunter wrote: »

If you want to continue can you please make a new thread about it It annoys me looking back on the thread I started.

Completly agreed, I think we should leave the blood issue for another thread. This was another great read, jaykhunter. You really can write a hell of a review.

I thought the overkill on gimmick matches and the 17 title changes really affected WWE this year. To me, A title should be treated with respect, it's not something that should be passed around at nearly every PPV. TNA's world heavyweight title switched hands 3 times this year. WWE's world heavyweight title changed hands 8 times this year.

On gimmick matches overkill, a gimmick matc is usually a match that ends a great feud, e.g Jeff/Punk TLC at Summerslam and the steel cage match on the following SD. WWE created 9 PPV's that go around gimmick matches. That means only 5 PPV's out of the 14 WWE produced this year didn't go around gimmick matches. Also, the reputation of the match itself is ruined by overkill. Take Hell in a Cell for example. Before the PPV, HiaC had 16 matches that usually ended classic feuds (HHH/Cactus Jack in 00; 'Tista/Taker in 07; Taker/Edge in 08). After the PPV, 3 more matches joined the 16. DX vs. Legacy; Cena vs. Orton and Punk vs. Taker were the matches selected to be in HiaC. The Orton/Cena feud continued to Bragging Rights, Punk/Taker opened the PPV and pretty much finished the feud in a dire match where Punk was basically squashed (dress-code issue) and DX/Legacy main-evented the PPV?!?! The feud continued on Raw after this but then just fizzled out with Cody going on Team Raw for Bragging Rights.

davrho

jaykhunter wrote: »

I agree that blood in crowds is a no-no but the new "no blood" policy is anything other than due to Linda or PG is preposterous.



Anyway, I'm sick of arguing this point. If you don't believe me, that's fine. No-one else takes your point of view.

(PS I done some of those stupid safety lectures too, I firmly believe it's not the case with WWE) You and Intel =/= Fans or Wrestlers at WWE live events. There's a huge difference.

So what is the projected votes going to gained by banning blood? Vote McMahon for blood free wrastlin. I can see the electorate being swung by this decision.

A few here think i have a point.

It the same health and safety laws that cover every employee in every work place. I dont think any corporation world wide would have blood covered employees in with their customers.

For years ladders were commonplace on building sites. They are now barred. Mobile scaffolding is used and ladders can only be used if you are issued a permit(bam,m&p etc work to these new regulations). Some eejit ran a risk assessment and this was the result. Same as wrestling..........

I wont post agin on this but there is more to decisions than just blaming pg. When wrestling was pg before blood was common place.

jaykhunter

Intelligent discussions and Disagreeing respectfully - this is what I love about the site! :):)

D2D

jaykhunter wrote: »

Intelligent discussions and Disagreeing respectfully - this is what I love about the site! :):)

We'd get banned if we don't disagree respectfully.

jaykhunter

Dare_2_defy wrote: »

We'd get banned if we don't disagree respectfully.

HOORAY! :pac::pac::pac::pac: