Do you like Professional Wrestling?

Pride Fighter · 18-04-2011 04:16AM

With the Rikishi running down Stone Cold Steve Austin storyline came up I stopped watching soon after that.

I enjoyed it for the lols, its turn your brain off, escapism. But its awful now. The period 90-2002 was the golden era IMO, been awful since.

TeddyTedson · 18-04-2011 04:18AM

When I was very young I remember thinking it was real:D

Yea barca! Loved that! Real were a bit unlucky though not to score. I hope we win all these games against them now, that'll really piss Jose off:P
He tried to pretend he doesn't care but he does. Remember after we won 5-0 he came out and said it's what he expected, like come on, stop trolling Jose.
The media are often going on about how he's missed in the Premiership, people love a troll.

Chuck Stone · 18-04-2011 04:19AM

TeddyTedson wrote: »

It's not too weird if you think about it though, many men are obsessed with all things sport.

That's if you consider it a sport which it clearly isn't.

Sport is about competition that wrestling is not a competition it's a farce.

TeddyTedson · 18-04-2011 04:26AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

That's if you consider it a sport which it clearly isn't.

Sport is about competition that wrestling is not a competition it's a farce.

It captures the essence of a sport though. To be honest, i'd rather watch a wrestling match than a bowls game anyday.

AnalogueKid · 18-04-2011 04:30AM

I think it's hilarious.

The ridiculous plots, table and chair matches, the steroid-fueled rants, preposterous characters, incredible death-defying athleticism, the dopey referees, the wrestlers taunting the crowds (and vice-versa), the fact that adults can laugh at it and kids actually believe it and, number one for me - the commentators and interviewers playing it 'straight' juxtaposed to all of the above absurdity.

For years I thought it was total b&^*@x until I recently sat down and watched a tables match between Jon Cena (the top guy apparently) and Sheamus (from Dublin!). As I learned that night, a tables match is where you can only win by smashing your opponent through a table (How cool is that?!?!?) I was pissing myself laughing at the commentators talking about Sheamus 'basing his training on that of ancient Celtic warriors'. Sheamus won, kids in the audience were crying and the commentators were going on as if Malta had just beaten Brazil in the World Cup Final.

It's just like an ultra-violent cartoon - except with exceptionally skilled actors playing this out live on TV in front of millions of people. Saying you don't like it cos it's fake is pathetic, it's like saying you don't like Road Runner cos it's 'fake'. If you don't like it, then fair enough, but using the 'fake' argument shows you're not nearly as sophisticated as you think you are. Life is too short not to have a few belly laughs along the way.

chicken fingers · 18-04-2011 05:12AM

When people talk about watching pro wrestling* I feel so so SO embarrassed for them.
I grew out of that when I was about 9 years old.

*Otherwise known as greased up men in speedos pretending to fight.

AnalogueKid · 18-04-2011 08:45AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

That's if you consider it a sport which it clearly isn't.

Sport is about competition that wrestling is not a competition it's a farce.

I agree 100% with this post. A farce is exactly what it is - (Here's wiki's definition of a farce)

In theatre, a farce is a comedy which aims to entertain the audience by means of unlikely, extravagant, and improbable situations, disguise and mistaken identity, verbal humour of varying degrees of sophistication, which may include sexual innuendo and word play, and a fast-paced plot whose speed usually increases, culminating in an ending which often involves an elaborate chase scene. Farce is also characterized by physical humor, the use of deliberate absurdity or nonsense, and broadly stylized performances. Farces have been written for the stage and film. Many farces move at a frantic pace toward the climax, in which the initial problem is resolved one way or another, often through a deus ex machina twist of the plot. Generally, there is a happy ending. The convention ofpoetic justice is not always observed: The protagonist may get away with what he or she has been trying to hide at all costs, even if it is a criminal act.

Dismissing it on the grounds that it's not a sport or not real wrestling is even more laughable than 'Professional Wrestling' itself. It's a professionally choreographed and scripted circus freak show.

Sonics2k · 18-04-2011 08:49AM

Nowhere nearly as much as I used to as a kid, in fact I was pretty shocked to find out the Undertaker is still wrestling, and I have memories of him from when I was around 6-7 years old.

Technically, it's all fake, but by god those people (men and women) put themselves through incredible stuff for the sake of entertainment.

Otis Driftwood · 18-04-2011 09:23AM

php-fox wrote: »

A bunch of naked men slapping each others shaved chests. Thank you, but no.

Hate to break it to ya buddy but you've been watching gay S+M porn.

Sonics2k · 18-04-2011 09:29AM

I do laugh at the whole "It's so fake" argument, because it's just the worst possible way to disapprove of Wrestling.

Yes it's all scripted, the winner is pre-determined, but I don't care who you are, jumping or being thrown from the top of a 20ft cage and landing on a table WILL hurt you, being dropped on to the mat will still knock the wind out of you and so on.

Dr. Baltar · 18-04-2011 09:35AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvTNyKIGXiI

Biggins · 18-04-2011 09:43AM

If its the American type - NO, don't like it.
It's the personification of all thats wrong with American media and mindless hype-over what is in the end, pure rubbish and useless fodder for the brain dead.

If it entertains eight year olds, normally I would say 'grand' but if one entertains the idea that dumb violence (false at that) is a good idea to which we should be allowing our young minds to view and become accustomed with, we also need to re-examine our parenting skills too and our values!

Riddle101 · 18-04-2011 09:54AM

Judging from this thread I'm going to be one in a monority if even that, who says I still do watch wrestling. You can make any argument you want about pro wrestling because i've heard it all. "wrestling is fake", "bunch of half naked men fighting" and "just a soap opera" but did it ever occur to anyone that watching pro wrestling is no different to watching any other tv show. It's just a form of entertainment people like to watch, there's nothing wrong with that. No different then watching something like House or CSI or Lost. Course people will be quick to roll their eyes at this comment. But I don't care, cause i'm a proud pro wrestling fan.

Biggins · 18-04-2011 10:03AM

Riddle101 wrote: »

...No different then watching something like House or CSI or Lost.

LOL

There was me thinking that the above programmes were based around science, technology and the use of mans greatest muscle, the brain.

I must have missed all the bits in those programmes where they for hours run silly around a square box, hand slapping their shaved chests like a bunch of dumb Neanderthals - and even worse, cheered on by even more media and profit market induced hyped up Neanderthals outside the ring!

I think I need new glasses! I'm seeing a good difference!

upandcumming · 18-04-2011 10:09AM

No. Was always crap. Still is.

krudler · 18-04-2011 10:15AM

I do, and always have enjoyed watching it. I dont watch it so much anymore because its more aimed at kids , whereas in the years when Stone Cold Steve Austin and The Rock were the top stars it was more edgy and aimed at late teens/early 20's audience, it was a lot more violent than it is now.

Here's the thing about wrestling that people who dont watch/like wrestling dont seem to understand. ready?

fans KNOW its scripted, they know its rehearsed (to a point) they know its all predetermined, they know the wrestlers for the most part get along with each other backstage and its all a show. Its not a sport, its never pretended to be a sport since the 70s when they stopped assuming audiences thought it was real. Its a stage show that rivals most stadium sized concerts. I've been to two Wrestlemanias with attendence crowds of 80,000+ and 75,000+ respectively, thats a lot ot "idiots" dont ya think? Think of it as the combination of a rock concert meets a soap opera with a huge amount of athleticism as well.

Anyone who thinks wrestlers dont get legimtately injured, well you're wrong, plain as. Wrestling has a "show must go on" mentality where guys have been severly injured and the matches have continued, their travel schedule is 200+ days a year on the road with no off season for injury recovery, performing 3-4 nights a week in a different city every night. Its a gruelling schedule and it cuts lives short.

I have a huge amount of respect for the men and women who do it, think of them as athletes/stuntmen who use athletic ability to tell a story in a ring. Is it cheesy? of course, it it all a show? YES. is it entertaining? hell yeah, if you dont like it for legit reasons then fine, but if you're one of those people who scoff at the notion of it while being completely ignorant to how it all works then more fool you.

Pauleta · 18-04-2011 10:15AM

Its a bit of fun. I dont really watch it that much anymore but will always make the effort for Wrestlemania. In the late 90s/early 00s it was aimed at an older audience abd was fantastic. Now its aimed at small children.

Riddle101 · 18-04-2011 10:20AM

Biggins wrote: »

LOL

There was me thinking that the above programmes were based around science, technology and the use of mans greatest muscle, the brain.

I must have missed all the bits in those programmes where they for hours run silly around a square box, hand slapping their shaved chests like a bunch of dumb Neanderthals - and even worse, cheered on by even more media and profit market induced hyped up Neanderthals outside the ring!

I think I need new glasses! I'm seeing a good difference!

You're not seeing my point. While the TVs might be different, they're still part of the same format, they're entertainment. It dosen't matter whether one's about science or one is about technology it's just a tv show at the end of the day.

Also Neanderthals? Couldn't you at least make an effort not to insult the wrestlers who in fairness are just trying to do their job and entertain people. That's just typical of a wrestling hater to make remarks like that.

bonerm · 18-04-2011 10:27AM

krudler wrote: »

I've been to two Wrestlemanias with attendence crowds of 80,000+ and 75,000+ respectively, thats a lot ot "idiots" dont ya think?

Yes it is.

I think I stopped following wrestling when I was about 11 and genuinely can't understand why any adult would continue following it. I've since listened to several shoot interviews (no point reading 'biogs' because they're usually kayfabe) so I've a good insight into the "reality" of the business but regardless you'd seriously have to bring into the question the tastes of any grown person who gets entertainment from watchin of two or more seminaked 250+lb men groping each other in a ring for 10minutes a night.

It's like football (or any economically viable sport with passionate supporters). You have to give credit to anyone who can make it to the top of the tree and become a top professional footballer. Same with wrestling. These guys are doing something very difficult and competitive. Still doesn't change the fact that the fans are the fools pouring their hearts and cash into a product and at the same time making the experience out to be more than it actually is.

Biggins · 18-04-2011 10:32AM

Riddle101 wrote: »

You're not seeing my point. While the TVs might be different, they're still part of the same format, they're entertainment. It dosen't matter whether one's about science or one is about technology it's just a tv show at the end of the day.

...Except that one is based upon a foundation of using brains, plots, and complex situations and often problem solving.
Meanwhile the others is just based solely around the idea of scripted bashing the brains out of each other.

Riddle101 wrote: »

...Also Neanderthals? Couldn't you at least make an effort not to insult the wrestlers who in fairness are just trying to do their job and entertain people. That's just typical of a wrestling hater to make remarks like that.

Just because something exists, doesn't mean it good!
If it struts like a Neanderthal, behaves llike a Neanderthal and is similarly cheered on by hyped-up Neanderthal behaving bodies ...I see Neanderthals!

krudler · 18-04-2011 10:33AM

Biggins wrote: »

If its the American type - NO, don't like it.
It's the personification of all thats wrong with American media and mindless hype-over what is in the end, pure rubbish and useless fodder for the brain dead.

If it entertains eight year olds, normally I would say 'grand' but if one entertains the idea that dumb violence (false at that) is a good idea to which we should be allowing our young minds to view and become accustomed with, we also need to re-examine our parenting skills too and our values!

thats basically the hysteria you'd expect from a Joe Duffy caller, wrestling should be a cause to look at parenting skills? what bout the stuff they put on MTV? you have young girls listening to Rihanna talking about S&M exciting her and Britney spears flashing her bits every time she gets out of a car. Kids watch the X-Factor, which is basically the modern equivalent of a freakshow where rich people get to laugh at the deluded people who come on stage to enterain us by how badly they can sing. Theres far worse stuff on tv to influence young kids these days than wrestling, which is very family orientated these days.Theres no blood, no sex and its gone back to the Hulk Hogan type stuff than the violent stuff in the 90's.

Did you know that the Make A Wish foundation gets more requests for WWE star appearances than any other type of sport or entertainment? or that John Cena is a spokesperson for them due to the amount of charity work they are involved in? the WWE also goes to Afghanistan to perform for the US troops every year, and are involved in a charity helping kids to learn how to read and write, that doesnt seem like the kind of company that caters to "neanderthals" now does it?

Biggins · 18-04-2011 10:42AM

krudler wrote: »

thats basically the hysteria you'd expect from a Joe Duffy caller, wrestling should be a cause to look at parenting skills? what bout the stuff they put on MTV? you have young girls listening to Rihanna talking about S&M exciting her and Britney spears flashing her bits every time she gets out of a car. Kids watch the X-Factor, which is basically the modern equivalent of a freakshow where rich people get to laugh at the deluded people who come on stage to enterain us by how badly they can sing. Theres far worse stuff on tv to influence young kids these days than wrestling, which is very family orientated these days.Theres no blood, no sex and its gone back to the Hulk Hogan type stuff than the violent stuff in the 90's.

Did you know that the Make A Wish foundation gets more requests for WWE star appearances than any other type of sport or entertainment? or that John Cena is a spokesperson for them due to the amount of charity work they are involved in? the WWE also goes to Afghanistan to perform for the US troops every year, and are involved in a charity helping kids to learn how to read and write, that doesnt seem like the kind of company that caters to "neanderthals" now does it?

First of all, I NEVER said any of the other programmes you mentioned weren't as bad sometimes in influencing young minds - but thanks for trying to portray that I was - you failed!

Indeed there is far worse - but because there is far worse, does that mean we should then just allow the lesser of two evils?

You say there is no blood and sex. Your right most of the time. So we have a 'display' of aggression that additionally shows kids falsely that its possible to bash the brain out of someone and they can still in real life get up and walk away without scarring (outside and inner), without blood loss and without repercussion on an aggressor - and whats more they get cheered for it!

So what if the Make A Wish foundation gets requests - be they get one or ten thousand - that still don't make it right!
Justification by using sheer numbers is a stupid argument. Two wrongs (or 70,000) don't make a right.

Wolfe Tone · 18-04-2011 10:49AM

I liked it until Benoit threw a wobbler and killed his family and himself, sort of destroyed the innocent fun it was.

Would only watch the rumble and mania(didnt bother this year) which is good craic when you watch it with a group with a few cans.

Riddle101 · 18-04-2011 10:51AM

Biggins wrote: »

...Except that one is based upon a foundation of using brains, plots, and complex situations and often problem solving.
Meanwhile the others is just based solely around the idea of scripted bashing the brains out of each other.

Ok you've made you're point already about the difference between the TV shows that i've mentioned and wrestling. I just used them as an example to make my point.

Just because something exists, doesn't mean it good!
If it struts like a Neanderthal, behaves llike a Neanderthal and is similarly cheered on by hyped-up Neanderthal behaving bodies ...I see Neanderthals

Most wrestlers don't give off any resemblence of the definition you're giving right now. Which makes me wonder if you're just taking petty shots for the sake of taking petty shots. Neanderthal is a pretty far sighted thing to say. Can I ask, have you actually watched wrestling? and I don't just mean, did you just flick through the channels one day and come across a wrestling program, but have you actually watched it to make such a statement? Or are you echoing the same remarks made by every other wrestling hater.

krudler · 18-04-2011 10:52AM

Biggins wrote: »

First of all, I NEVER said any of the other programmes you mentioned weren't as bad sometimes in influencing young minds - but thanks for trying to portray that I was - you failed!

Indeed there is far worse - but because there is far worse, does that mean we should then just allow the lesser of two evils?

You say there is no blood and sex. Your right most of the time. So we have a 'display' of aggression that additionally shows kids falsely that its possible to bash the brain out of someone and they can still in real life get up and walk away without scarring (outside and inner), without blood loss and without repercussion on an aggressor - and whats more they get cheered for it!

So what if the Make A Wish foundation gets requests - be they get one or ten thousand - that still don't make it right!
Justification by using sheer numbers is a stupid argument. Two wrongs (or 70,000) don't make a right.

but injuries occur all the time on it, just last week a wrestler by the name of Edge had to retire (as in legitimately, not as part of the show) due to a neck injury, they make a big point of telling people its a show but they do get injured, hows that any different than someone watching a movie and thinking they can do what they see some action star doing? my 7 year old nephew watches it and he knows its a show and not to try anything he see on it, the idea that a kid is going to watch it and then go out and hurt themselves is down to poor parenting, not what they see on tv, you can apply that argument to anything with violence on tv, cartoons for one.

chiefbrody1974 · 18-04-2011 10:54AM

LighterGuy wrote: »

and before anyone asks, I cant go into the pro wrestling forum and ask this :P thats like going to a car auction and saying does anyone like cars :pac:

So I am just wondering. Like, it was big in the 80s. Big in the late 90s. Does the average person like it? or does the average person hate it?

its about as fake as an irish person typing "like" out of context!! loike big in the 80s yah!!! bad enough D4 saps talk like that, but you actually typed it!!!! :mad:

Biggins · 18-04-2011 10:56AM

Riddle101 wrote: »

...Can I ask, have you actually watched wrestling? and I don't just mean, did you just flick through the channels one day and come across a wrestling program, but have you actually watched it to make such a statement?

Yes, unaquiviqually I can say yes.
I have watch it and tried to see some advantageous merit to continuing to watch it.
I found none either in entertainment value, educational value or any good reason to stay glued to watch more.

Wolfe Tone · 18-04-2011 10:57AM

Biggins wrote: »

Yes, unaquiviqually I can say yes.
I have watch it and tried to see some advantageous merit to continuing to watch it.
I found none either in entertainment value, educational value or any good reason to stay glued to watch more.

Biggins its like a big dumb action film which never ends, dont take it too seriously.

Biggins · 18-04-2011 10:58AM

krudler wrote: »

but injuries occur all the time on it, just last week a wrestler by the name of Edge had to retire (as in legitimately, not as part of the show) due to a neck injury, they make a big point of telling people its a show but they do get injured, hows that any different than someone watching a movie and thinking they can do what they see some action star doing? my 7 year old nephew watches it and he knows its a show and not to try anything he see on it, the idea that a kid is going to watch it and then go out and hurt themselves is down to poor parenting, not what they see on tv, you can apply that argument to anything with violence on tv, cartoons for one.

The idea that someone allows a year old to be impressed by two adults bashing each other frankly is disturbing.
Would you allow a same youth to watch two adults so similar on your high-street?
...But its on the telly - so thats different of course!

Biggins · 18-04-2011 10:59AM

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Biggins its like a big dumb action film which never ends, dont take it too seriously.

LOL

I don't - I opt not to take it at all. :pac:

Do you like Professional Wrestling?

Comments