The title says it all. I wanted to start this discussion after a show I did last saturday, which was your basic equivalent to a C-level house show.
At one point, they wanted me to take a ref bump (which I normally have no problem with), except it's smack dab in the middle of the card (3rd match) and it was the extremely overused "irish whip reversal, ref gets in the way" spot that led to my "downfall". My problem with it is that the spot always makes the ref end up looking like a clumsy moron who doesn't see where he's going (he should be the all-seeing eye of the match). In the undercard, no less. I think this is the kind of thing you leave for main events and bigger matches.
Yeah, I concur. No offense or anything, but I never thought of the ref as "the all-seeing eye." I've been hearing jokes about the incompetence of wrestling refs since long before I actually started watching wrestling.
I do slightly agree about the importance of the ref bump being reserved for bigger matches. Maybe that's just because I was so conditioned by the late 90s WCW/WWF. You KNEW every main event match was gonna have a ref bump/interference. Usually a ref bump is reserved for matches where both guys have to save their heat, which is usually the case when you are trying to push both guys in a match. Without the pushes, there's no reason to have a ref get bumped. So in that sense, I can see how a ref bump is unnecessary in a (meaningless?) undercard match.
It seems like there have been more ref bumps in matches in the last few years. Most of them is not necessary, but some is necessary to bring a match to its climactic point. You just don't need it every week. How do I know that a ref bump is coming. Look at where the referee is positioned. For (a random) example, A is ready to clothesline B. Ref is behind B. B misses A's clothesline, ref eats clothesline. Some of the time it is so obvious that you know it is going to happen. Most of the time, I yell out "REF!!!", because he is in the area that he is about to be hit, and the ref takes a bump. About a decade ago, you are surprised that the ref gets knocked down. Now, they take as many bumps as the wrestlers themselves.
I really think you need to reserve this for a major spot and definitely only once in a show (and if it is television, only once in so many weeks of shows). And there better be a good reason for it. Done wrong and you sell the whole match short. Done right and it can help to extend a feud.
Speaking of this topic, may I just mentioned that Goose Mahoney in OVW does probably one of the best ref-bumps around? He manages to not only look like he shouldn't be where he is when he gets hit, but he's taken some nasty elbows and kicks to the head in order to get the bumps over.
Obviously this assumes you have some say into how things go..
If it makes the match the best one on the card I would take the bump no matter where it is on the card, assuming that it helps the match (evil deeds take place while I am down) and that not every following ref does the same thing (crowd will notice and turn on it)
As far as the way it happens goes, just make it look good. Make sure the guy hitting you makes it look real and that you bump good, without stealing the spotlight *grin*
So, your show was saturday. Did you do it? How did it go down?
I agree it seems like overkill having the ref bump on the undercard. Something I think is tremendously under used, is the ref bump where nothing actually happens (i.e.: ref goes down followed by no interference whatsoever). I think this adds a little realism, and stops people staring at the ramp everytime the ref gets hit.
I went with it, despite my objection. Mainly to shut everybody up. Like I said, I have no problems taking one. If I survived a guy like Pierre-Carl Ouellette charging at me full speed into a corner, I can take this.
Good points brought here, but I don't agree refs should be portrayed as moronic oafs with zero authority. They should at least put their foot down at the right moments.
But yeah, last saturday. I went with it. Didn't really slow the match down, didn't really add anything either. A simple distraction could've done just fine.
The film keeps being called "The Rock's next movie," which is highly inaccurate. He's a villain in the film and has a small role. It's a little more screentime than he got in The Mummy Returns, but not much...