The W
Views: 101509040
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
21.12.07 1204
The 7 - Site Bashing - Why I Hate Net Critics Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(173 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (25 total)
BigVitoMark
Lap cheong
Level: 76

Posts: 553/1509
EXP: 3939389
For next: 66690

Since: 10.8.02
From: Queen's University, Canada

Since last post: 3437 days
Last activity: 3346 days
ICQ:  
#1 Posted on 29.10.03 1743.09
Reposted on: 29.10.10 1744.03
I gotta say, I usually find Jason Powell's writing at the Torch entertaining - but his Hitlist for Raw this week was a perfect example of what pisses me off about internet wrestling critics.

From his column...

"Austin announces Goldberg vs. Triple H: Let me get this straight. Triple H placed a bounty on Goldberg's head. Hunter never actually explained the intent of this bounty, but it was widely assumed that he wanted someone to soften up Goldberg so that he would have an easier time regaining the title. Then Austin comes out and rewards Triple H by giving him a title match against Goldberg at Survivor Series. Is Austin stupid? Well, apparently not because Ric Flair threw a fit when Austin announced that Hunter would be getting the title match. My head hurts."

The reason Powell's head hurts is not because the logic doesn't flow. His brain hurts from lack of use. First, Austin said in his promo prior to making the match that he spoke to Goldberg over the weekend, and Goldberg insisted he'd be back. Wouldn't Goldberg want revenge on the man who paid to have him taken out, since he's the face and all? Wouldn't it therefore be logical for Austin, as the good-guy GM, to give him that opportunity? As far as Flair being pissed at the idea of a title match, well, he should be. Two minutes earlier Bischoff was ready to strip Goldberg and simply award HHH the title. Presumably that's a more favourable scenario for Evolution; the fact that Austin changed it should anger Flair.

My point here isn't that I don't like Jason Powell - frankly, that in itself sucks as a topic. What I don't like is the fact that many writers on the net spend more time looking for holes in the storylines and not enough time making the logical connections that intelligent viewers should make. There are enough people who complain about how the WWE treats it's audience like a bunch of retards...maybe there's a reason for that. What should they have done? Had Terri interview Flair and ask him why he was angry that Austin wouldn't let Bischoff hand over the title? Thanks, but I can figure that out for myself.

I guess this is where I should draw some kind of conclusion. Unfortunately, I don't think I have one. I guess that was more just a rant than anything else. Sorry 'bout that, but thanks for indulging me.


Promote this thread!
Big Bad
Scrapple
Level: 146

Posts: 2375/6760
EXP: 38243367
For next: 270019

Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 12 hours
#2 Posted on 29.10.03 2241.50
Reposted on: 29.10.10 2242.29
If Austin wanted to punish HHH, he would've booked the match for Survivor Series but made it non-title. That would've settled his hash.

(edited by Big Bad on 29.10.03 2342)
Excalibur05
Knackwurst
Level: 102

Posts: 1842/2929
EXP: 10889143
For next: 200862

Since: 19.1.02
From: Minnesota

Since last post: 28 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
#3 Posted on 29.10.03 2309.06
Reposted on: 29.10.10 2310.35
Powell apparently wasn't paying attention either.

Flair flipped out about Austin making the Goldberg/HHH match, and Austin said that if Batista did as good a job as he says he did, then Hunter should have no problem winning back the title. It should be a "short night". That's what settled Flair down. Certainly HHH not having to wrestle at all is preferable to having him wrestle even a wounded Goldberg, but Evolution has confidence that they've hurt him enough that HHH will win no problem.

Now on the face side, here's the deal. Goldberg is after Hunter for trying to pay off guys to take him out. Now that he's hurt, he wants revenge even worse. But Goldberg isn't the kind of guy who would want this to be non-title. Hurt or not, he's going to want to defend his title. Austin isn't stupid, and if it WERE non-title, he knows HHH would find some way to weasle his way out. Besides, Bischoff's threat to strip was because Goldberg would be unable to defend his title in the mandatory 30 day period, this eliminates Bischoff's reasoning.

(edited by Excalibur05 on 29.10.03 2309)
King Of Crap
Goetta
Level: 38

Posts: 62/309
EXP: 348355
For next: 22095

Since: 17.9.03
From: Holley, New York

Since last post: 3536 days
Last activity: 3467 days
AIM:  
#4 Posted on 30.10.03 1007.50
Reposted on: 30.10.10 1008.25
I've noticed that this happens a lot, where re-cappers are more concernced with bashing WWE and "putting themselves over" than actually re-capping the show, so they miss stuff like this.
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Level: 104

Posts: 1273/3059
EXP: 11643508
For next: 218657

Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 2046 days
Last activity: 1980 days
#5 Posted on 30.10.03 1249.55
Reposted on: 30.10.10 1250.03
True. There was something in Keith's rant this week along the lines of "Shows how important Goldberg is-he's not even part of the decision making process" with regards to the SS title match. It just left me thinking "what the HELL are you talking about?".
King Of Crap
Goetta
Level: 38

Posts: 63/309
EXP: 348355
For next: 22095

Since: 17.9.03
From: Holley, New York

Since last post: 3536 days
Last activity: 3467 days
AIM:  
#6 Posted on 30.10.03 1520.13
Reposted on: 30.10.10 1520.17
This also happens with quite possibly the most arrogant group of critics: film reviewers. I can't count how many times I've seen someone so quick to try tio shoot holes into a movie that they didn't like that they miss the obvious answers.

The fact that most movie critics seem to be more self-obsorbed than they have any right to be makes it that more satisfying to me when they screw up.

For example, the dumbest and simultaneously self-important thing I've ever seen in criticism of a movie was this line from my local newspaper:

"Any movie with the title Final Destination 2 (can there be a second part to finality?) would not seem to suggest many brains behind the scenes."

Think about the irony of that sentence.
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Level: 104

Posts: 1275/3059
EXP: 11643508
For next: 218657

Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 2046 days
Last activity: 1980 days
#7 Posted on 30.10.03 1529.39
Reposted on: 30.10.10 1532.20
Ah....now there we disagree. Actually, we don't-I'm a reviewer/columnist for 411movies and I'd like to think I'm not as pretentious and self-aggrandising as many.
rspwfaq
Cotechino
Level: 23

Posts: 73/92
EXP: 59699
For next: 8025

Since: 10.6.02
From: Saskatoon

Since last post: 477 days
Last activity: 58 min.
#8 Posted on 30.10.03 1835.53
Reposted on: 30.10.10 1838.43
    Originally posted by oldschoolhero
    True. There was something in Keith's rant this week along the lines of "Shows how important Goldberg is-he's not even part of the decision making process" with regards to the SS title match. It just left me thinking "what the HELL are you talking about?".


It means that Goldberg, the character, is left playing a passive participant in the storyline, doing what he's told by the authority figures, rather than being the one to DEMAND a title match against Goldberg so he can kick his ass in retribution for being put out of action by him.

But then it's no secret that he's just riding out the contract until they jettison him after WM, so it's all academic at this point anyway.

Tribal Prophet
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 648/2065
EXP: 6452812
For next: 197878

Since: 9.1.02
From: Winnipeg, MB, Canada

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 1 day
#9 Posted on 31.10.03 0259.45
Reposted on: 31.10.10 0259.53
    Originally posted by rspwfaq
      Originally posted by oldschoolhero
      True. There was something in Keith's rant this week along the lines of "Shows how important Goldberg is-he's not even part of the decision making process" with regards to the SS title match. It just left me thinking "what the HELL are you talking about?".


    It means that Goldberg, the character, is left playing a passive participant in the storyline, doing what he's told by the authority figures, rather than being the one to DEMAND a title match against Goldberg so he can kick his ass in retribution for being put out of action by him.


I think a better way to get across what you're trying to say is the fact that while Goldberg did "talk to Austin" over the weekend and demand the match with Triple H, not having him in the ring to do it in person weakens him. It almost seems like he had Austin go in to fight his battles for him, like a kid getting his dad to go to school to fight bullies.

Storyline-wise, Goldberg did the demaning, and Austin is following what Goldberg wanted, but your point still stands from the way they played it out.


Tribal Prophet
SomeRandomFag IV
Cotechino
Level: 22

Posts: 88/93
EXP: 57771
For next: 580

Since: 12.8.03

Since last post: 3693 days
Last activity: 3693 days
#10 Posted on 31.10.03 0621.26
Reposted on: 31.10.10 0621.51
Scott, I see that you've "adopted" Dean's 'CLUBBING FOREARMS' into your rants. Maybe it's just me, but why don't you stick with your own material/ideas?

(edited by SomeRandomFag IV on 31.10.03 0723)
rspwfaq
Cotechino
Level: 23

Posts: 74/92
EXP: 59699
For next: 8025

Since: 10.6.02
From: Saskatoon

Since last post: 477 days
Last activity: 58 min.
#11 Posted on 31.10.03 0700.59
Reposted on: 31.10.10 0701.17
    Originally posted by SomeRandomFag IV
    Scott, I see that you've "adopted" Dean's 'CLUBBING FOREARMS' into your rants. Maybe it's just me, but why don't you stick with your own material/ideas?

    (edited by SomeRandomFag IV on 31.10.03 0723)


It's just you.

dMr
Andouille
Level: 90

Posts: 922/2215
EXP: 6940038
For next: 248598

Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 7 hours
#12 Posted on 31.10.03 0849.51
Reposted on: 31.10.10 0850.19
    Originally posted by Tribal Prophet
    I think a better way to get across what you're trying to say is the fact that while Goldberg did "talk to Austin" over the weekend and demand the match with Triple H, not having him in the ring to do it in person weakens him. It almost seems like he had Austin go in to fight his battles for him, like a kid getting his dad to go to school to fight bullies.

    Storyline-wise, Goldberg did the demaning, and Austin is following what Goldberg wanted, but your point still stands from the way they played it out.


    Tribal Prophet


Of course the counter argument to that is that, storyline wise, Goldberg was injured by Batista so wasn't physically able to be in the ring that night. In spite of his injury though, Goldberg being the big man that he is spoke to Austin and said that injury or no, he wanted HHH at Survivor Series.

Outwith storylines, Goldie did have a legit back injury and as far as I understand was also due a night off after upping his number of house show appearances in Trips' absence.

I honestly think there's times when we all think way too much about who's being made to look strong/weak, particularly where it involves a HHH or an Undertaker or a McMahon.

Most people watch wrestling in a pretty passive way and all they would have taken from that is that the evil heel challengers plan to get back his belt without a fight was screwed up by the determination of the champion allied to the good nature of the face GM.

As far as I'm concerned thats simple effective story telling. The insertion of a non-title clause would have only served to make Goldberg look scared, as well as making for a ppv match that would be worth absolutely squat.
SomeRandomFag IV
Cotechino
Level: 22

Posts: 90/93
EXP: 57771
For next: 580

Since: 12.8.03

Since last post: 3693 days
Last activity: 3693 days
#13 Posted on 31.10.03 1657.13
Reposted on: 31.10.10 1659.01

    Originally posted by SomeRandomFag IV
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Scott, I see that you've "adopted" Dean's 'CLUBBING FOREARMS' into your rants. Maybe it's just me, but why don't you stick with your own material/ideas?

    (edited by SomeRandomFag IV on 31.10.03 0723)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------



    It's just you.


Yeah, your right. It'd be awful hard to stretch *your own ideas* out for a whole column, huh?
rspwfaq
Cotechino
Level: 23

Posts: 75/92
EXP: 59699
For next: 8025

Since: 10.6.02
From: Saskatoon

Since last post: 477 days
Last activity: 58 min.
#14 Posted on 31.10.03 1716.44
Reposted on: 31.10.10 1717.21
    Originally posted by SomeRandomFag IV
    Yeah, your right. It'd be awful hard to stretch *your own ideas* out for a whole column, huh?



I'm sure Dean is thrilled to have you fighting on his behalf, but I don't really see what I'm "adopting" from him, since Michael Cole has called them "clubbing forearms" for years now, and making generally sarcastic comments about a move is hardly something you can trademark. Maybe you should tattle to Dean, since he DOES have an e-mail address and is obviously sitting up late at night worried about other people adopting from his style of writing, judging by how much you're worried about it.



OMEGA
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 696/1747
EXP: 4935632
For next: 57238

Since: 18.6.02
From: North Cacalacky

Since last post: 2000 days
Last activity: 1968 days
#15 Posted on 31.10.03 1746.07
Reposted on: 31.10.10 1748.18
    Originally posted by SomeRandomFag IV
    Scott, I see that you've "adopted" Dean's 'CLUBBING FOREARMS' into your rants. Maybe it's just me, but why don't you stick with your own material/ideas?


Seems like you're searching a little TOO hard to find things to put Scott Keith down for. I'm sure Dean isn't the first person to ever use the term "clubbering forearms". And even if he is, I doubt anyone cares.
SomeRandomFag IV
Cotechino
Level: 22

Posts: 91/93
EXP: 57771
For next: 580

Since: 12.8.03

Since last post: 3693 days
Last activity: 3693 days
#16 Posted on 31.10.03 1754.16
Reposted on: 31.10.10 1759.01
I still *heart* Scott Keith and read him everyday!
Jackson
Sujuk
Level: 64

Posts: 592/976
EXP: 2098007
For next: 116102

Since: 4.1.02

Since last post: 2049 days
Last activity: 1574 days
#17 Posted on 3.11.03 0031.59
Reposted on: 3.11.10 0032.23
    Originally posted by rspwfaq
    making generally sarcastic comments about a move is hardly something you can trademark.



But keep trying Scooter. Maybe someday.
grutman
Pinkelwurst
Level: 13

Posts: 19/28
EXP: 9712
For next: 555

Since: 17.3.03
From: NYC

Since last post: 3908 days
Last activity: 3905 days
AIM:  
#18 Posted on 3.11.03 0050.12
Reposted on: 3.11.10 0051.17
Hey Scott. I didn't really read what anyone wrote and I'm pretty drunk, but I want you to know that any of these sons of mothers got a problem with you, they have a problem with Grutman. That's a 411 brother you're attacking! Sure, he's Canadian and no one ever accused him of being Miss Universe, but the man knows what he likes and has brainwashed a good portion of the IWC to agree with him. I use brainwashed in the nicest way possible.

I'm sorry, wasn't this thread about Jason Powell? What? TheCubsFan isn't gay! Shut up! What pictures? Let me see those... oh that couldn''t have been very comfortable for either of those men. Hey everyone! TheCubsFan is that idiot Cubs Fan who screwed up the Cubs 8th inning in game six! And you have the nerve to call Scott Keith a redneck!

Moving on to my point, well, someone wrote why they hate net critics. Man, it's not just net critics. Political writers like Michael Moore and Anne Coultier (sp?)purposely manipulate facts so they can write their version of the truth. CEO's twist facts around so they can appear as though the company turned a profit. Religious leaders take everyday occurances and claim they were miracles so they can sell God. Believe me, and you gotta believe me here, there are so many lies being told to you on a daily basis that the last thing in the world you need to worry about is Jason Powell from the Torch not reporting all of the facts from Raw in his report. It's nothing. It's bullshit. All of this IWC stuff is.

That's why I can say that Zed needs a haircut and a bath, because he knows how stupid all of this stuff is. So the next time you want to complain about a wrestling internet writer printing lies about wrestling, think about how important it is to your life to comment on it. Think about if mine or Keith's or Powell's or Hyatte's or anyone's opinion matters for crap about wrestling. Because it's professional wrestling. They're not playing with nuclear bombs. They're doing a really homoerotic fake fight with lots of talking and we comment on that. Just think about that.

Bathe, Zed. Bathe.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 214

Posts: 3174/16400
EXP: 144896881
For next: 828539

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#19 Posted on 3.11.03 1044.21
Reposted on: 3.11.10 1045.36
But... I take LOTS of baths! I even put Ivory soap in there for bubbles! Do you know it's getting harder and harder to find Ivory soap? It's all part of a Proctor & Gamble CONSPIRACY.
thecubsfan
Scrapple
Moderator
Level: 132

Posts: 652/5295
EXP: 26579771
For next: 552233

Since: 10.12.01
From: Aurora, IL

Since last post: 16 min.
Last activity: 16 min.
#20 Posted on 3.11.03 1229.34
Reposted on: 3.11.10 1238.54
Don't believe those pictures.

I just take naked Twister very seriously.
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: Amusing post at P-Boi
Next thread: More Scherer McMahon Bashing
Previous thread: Flea
(173 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Site Bashing - Why I Hate Net CriticsRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.237 seconds.