The Seventh Dimension 02.01.08: The Doyle Grumble

Здравей. If you have not clicked this link in error, welcome to the Seventh Dimension. Nice, isn’t it? Roomy, yet cosy. I like it. I like you. Do you like me? Yes, yes I thought so. Yes.

Yes.

The Doyle Grumble

I like evolution in a product. I’m all for artists taking their work in new directions in the hopes of achieving something they haven’t yet attempted. My Chemical Romance will never be as successful as Oasis (and nor should they), but I have a ton of respect for them having a long-term story to tell, and an ever-mutating way of telling it. That’s more than can be said for Liam and Noel’s recycled act of rubbishing everyone else in the industry before releasing yet another very safe album with a crap name. Similarly, Green Day’s American Idiot convinced me that the band is infinitely more daring than, say, U2.

That said, there’s a difference between moving through an organic sequence, and changing something for the sake of change. Look at Heartbeat, if you don’t believe me. It’s still stuck in the 1960s despite having been on the air for fifteen years, yet the producers decided this series to change the camera filters – NOT enhance the plot any further than “Policeman A gets killed by Antagonist 1”, but to use a superficial technique to give the impression that something was different. I hate The Bill with a passion, but at least with its ridiculous new soap-opera semantic it’s actually developed the show in some way. A new, albeit worse, philosophy on the concept of a programme? Noble. A slightly enhanced frame-rate after a decade and a half of unwavering familiarity? Change for the sake of change. Fuck ITV.

What does this have to do with anything in the wrestling world? Well, I’m sure it hasn’t escaped your attention that a certain Jonathan Cena won the Royal Rumble this week. We all know I’m a bit of a mark for him, I think his psychology is usually top-notch even if some of his moves look a bit sloppy at times, and I don’t credit anyone who calls him “talentless” or says he “can’t wrestle” with a wit adequate to have any knowledge of what they’re talking about. Likewise, anybody who says “only kids, girls and gays like him” (in which case, since you apparently believe being one of these three things is somehow a bad thing, you must be incredibly lonely), or that he should suffer another injury that forces him to retire, needs to quit watching the fucking show immediately. You’re not a fan, you’re a prick. They’re not the same thing.

But I’m not covering any of that today. Oh, no. Instead, I’m going to look at five arguments (it seems right – Five Knuckle Shuffle, ‘Five Moves of Doom’, etc.) that have been made against his win, that in some cases actually criticise other members of the company as well. No ‘Cena won because he rocks, chain gang 4 life yo’ diatribes, no patronising or vitriol. Just a simple examination of what is being said about the situation, and whether or not any of the arguments hold water.

Trust me, a bit of perspective is going to help here.

ARGUMENT ONE: John Cena won the Royal Rumble without having to earn his spot.

This is the one I’ve been seeing the most around the place, and it lacks any logic at all, either in kayfabe or in reality.

First, consider the storyline. John Cena was the champion, until he was injured by Kennedy-cum-Orton, and was forced to surrender the title. If nothing else, he was always going to be permitted a rematch for the strap. Ok, Batista wasn’t immediately given one, but nor was Cena. He was placed in the Royal Rumble, instead. If anything, Cena should have been taken straight back into the title scene, instead of being given a 30/1 chance of ever getting that opportunity and just happening to be lucky with the number drawn. And no, I’m not saying that I’d expect the same to happen in other sports. But this is wrestling we’re talking about here. Remember the outcry when Kennedy wasn’t immediately pushed back to the moon after his injury? Precisely. It’s a double-standard. Besides, Roddy Piper, Jimmy Snuka, and Mick Foley didn’t do a damn thing to deserve their places in the Rumble from a kayfabe perspective, either. And they’re not full-time competitors, unlike Cena.

Second, in the actual here-and-now, Cena more than deserved to be included. He carried Raw, and some would argue the entire WWE, on his back for more than two years. Just because he was unfortunate doesn’t mean that he should be shoved down the card. I agree that placing him in the main-event when he’s probably a bit sluggish after the surgery is a risky thing to do, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t WORTHY of the chance. He worked his arse off to become the franchise, took to it like a duck to water, put up with years of crap and then had to effectively start from scratch when he tore his pectoral. At the very least, he’s earned your respect even if you refuse to give it to him.

Are we forgetting that Chris Jericho returned barely a couple of months ago, and was thrust into the title picture right away? And HE didn’t even do anything to get the match, other than say Randy Orton had a boring personality. Where was the backlash when THAT happened? Why didn’t I see any columns about how Jericho hadn’t “paid his dues” upon his comeback, and was being pushed above “people more deserving than him”? Because, I assure you, the argument was a LOT more viable back then. But we didn’t get it because this isn’t about having to merit the chance. It’s simple favouritism, which is fine of course until you start pretending it’s something more profound.

Jericho was placed in the WWE Championship match at Armageddon because it was considered the right thing for business. It’s called “striking when the iron is hot”. The same thing is happening here. Cena’s return could, and likely will, have a monumental impact on the WWE, and the company cannot be criticised for wanting to get to the end result as quickly and as effortlessly as possible.

VERDICT: Cena had every right to be in the match.

ARGUMENT TWO: The final three of John Cena, Triple H and Batista proved that WWE is not interested in providing anything new.

As you can see, this particular strand is not exclusive to John Cena. It is cast over the entire final three left in the match as, to a lesser extent, Kane who finished fourth. The frustration comes from the apparent lack of inventiveness as to who could win. And, looking straight at it, the point has some weight to it. Two of the final four were former Rumble winners, the other two were former runners-up, and all of them had won World Heavyweight Championships before. For a match that claims to be the only chance for the majority of the roster to get a title shot, I can understand the disappointment.

However, history teaches us three things about the Rumble match:

• There is always either one or two clear favourite/s before the match.
• Whoever is considered or reported the pre-match favourite will eventually win.
• The Rumble is never won by someone who enters unannounced beforehand.

At the start of the night, there were three men considered likely victors, which is one more than we are normally used to. These were Batista, Triple H and The Undertaker. The Undertaker was eliminated by Shawn Michaels during Big Daddy V’s entrance, and around seven minutes later Triple H came in as the #29 entrant. Batista, who had entered at #8, was still in the match, so at this point it was a foregone conclusion that these two frontrunners would slug it out to determine the winner.

But then, Cena was the #30. So now, we had a situation where the two safe-bets before the match started were suddenly considered underdogs to a man who’d never won and who was not expected to take part. I’ve never known this to occur in the Royal Rumble’s history. Add to the fact that the Rumble was one of the few still-relevant accolades that Cena had yet to claim, and I don’t see how this can ever be written off as ‘just another year’ for the event.

And there’s just one more thing to say on this. Last year, Undertaker and Shawn Michaels, two men who have been in the profession for nearly two decades each and have spent most of that time near the top of the card, were the final two. Everyone lapped it up, and rightly so. This year, the final three was contested between Batista and Cena, who have only been in the main-event scene for THREE YEARS, and Triple H, who’s done well to stay away from the title lately for the most part. The response was “same old shit”. Again, it’s a case of worrying when it suits you.

VERDICT: It was a situation we never saw coming and had no precedent, that resulted in something that has never happened before. How much more ‘new’ do you want?

ARGUMENT THREE: The entire injury must have been a work, or Cena must be a steroid monkey to have recovered so quickly.

Ah, yes. That old chestnut. The chestnut that spits directly in the face of every competent journalist within the IWC. The one that, much less than pose any serious question, does little more than mock the very fibre of this society. Oh yes, THIS bloody chestnut.

At first, I thought this was just the ramblings of a few incoherent ‘walking mistakes’ sired by the ever-expanding team at Split Condom Productions. However, it soon became clear that there is actually a respectable (loose use of the word) number of people who actually think Cena was never hurt in the first place. On top of that, there are many who take this as evidence that Cena is using HGH and other performance-enhancing substances.

First, the obvious thing. Anyone who believes Cena’s entire injury was faked should probably back away from the internet and never darken its doors again. John underwent surgery. It was filmed. On top of that, in order to believe that he was out shooting a movie this whole time, you’d have to ignore the fact that ‘12 Rounds’ (that’s the name of his film by the way, in case you cared) doesn’t actually even START filming until the end of February. Most importantly, however, is the common sense of knowing that Cena’s grievance actually endangered a pay-per-view with less than a week to go. No matter how much you want to create smoke here, there is absolutely NO reasoning as to why WWE would pull its biggest star out of No Mercy and his Last Man Standing match with Randy Orton, especially when you consider that the stipulation itself can easily set up injury angles to explain hiatuses.

As for the steroids thing, I can’t prove or disprove it either way and neither can you. All I know is that 1) Cena is young, 2) Cena has never suffered a serious injury prior to this in his WWE career, and 3) Cena has mastered the art of conditioning from his body-building days. I would go as far as to say that his quick recovery could be attributed to a lack of steroids, because we all know that in the long run those things actually do a lot more to weaken the muscles and, henceforth, lengthen the recovery time. Obviously people do take steroids to heal wounds, in which case Cena can’t really be blamed if he only used them to heal up. In any case, I think the fact he’s only thirty years of age and has been lucky enough not to suffer such damage in the past has a lot more to do with his rapid recuperation rate than a needle.

In the end, though, this all boils down to wanting to find reasons to lament the guy and, in all likelihood, the IWC in general. We all got fooled, and now the more embarrassed of you are looking to pin the blame for this on those whose columns they religiously read each week while concurrently criticising. The easiest way to do this, it would appear, is to believe that we got it wrong from the start. Well, I’m sorry, but that’s not the case. I can’t, with any degree of confidence, explain how he came back so soon or how WWE managed to keep tight-lipped on the whole thing, but to challenge the original information in an effort to further ridicule those who have done nothing but their utmost to keep you updated and entertained for years is puerile and ungrateful. Similarly to the way Cena is treated, in fact.

VERDICT: The original statement is beyond contempt. Stop biting the hand that feeds, and grow up.

ARGUMENT FOUR: The number 30 spot winning two years in a row is disrespectful to the efforts of guys who worked a lot longer in the match.

For years, the #30 position has been a joke. What was once supposed to be the biggest benefit in the match became a glorified cameo for whoever received it. Chyna and Booker T were made to look like imbeciles for getting eliminated almost immediately by people who were already exhausted, and Randy Orton couldn’t even get the better of Rey Mysterio after Triple H had helped him to an insane degree.

This meant that, for a very long time, those with the opening spots were actually seen as favourites because they were the ones with the storylines behind them. Chris Benoit and the aforementioned Mysterio going ‘coast to coast’ within two years of each other actually did more to harm the importance of drawing a good number than it did to cement either man as a legitimate main-event threat. Neither man’s World title run was anything more than a feel-good moment (and, in Benoit’s case, the greatest triple-threat match in history). Similarly, Shawn Michaels won it from the #1 spot and didn’t even get the WWF Championship later that year, while Vince McMahon was victorious as the #2 and ended up forfeiting the title shot to Stone Cold Steve Austin. Smell the prestige!

Now, however, we have had two consecutive winners who have drawn the ‘cursed’ number thirty position. The first time, it can be put down a bit to Undertaker having two other experiences as the final entrant (1997 and 2003), and therefore knowing what to expect and how to pull through. This year, the #30 became an event all by itself. Number thirty will now not only be synonymous with potential winners, but it will ALSO now be a cause for excitement if the holder of said spot is not readily predictable.

The death of kayfabe is often criticised but, on this occasion, the WWE have taken a huge step in convalescing what was becoming something of a lackluster cliché within its rulebook.

VERDICT: If anything, the constant ‘miracle’ victories before now have disrespected those that were considered to be at an advantage.

ARGUMENT FIVE: Cena using his WWE Championship match at No Way Out, instead of Wrestlemania, shows that the WWE has no faith in Randy Orton as a champion.

I’m sorry, I must have missed the bit where the match has already taken place. Look, who’s to say that Cena’s winning the title? It seems likely at the moment, but I still have the belief that WWE will go with Triple H vs. Orton, or perhaps a triple-threat like I figured we might see with Batista. If we’re looking at a one-on-one match at Wrestlemania, whoever loses at No Way Out will almost undoubtedly either face Batista, or end Ric Flair’s career. If it’s a triple-threat, I say Batista ends Flair’s career.

But anyway, I’m getting a bit lost here. Oh yes – the confidence issue.

Randy Orton was, as little as a year ago, the most hated man in almost all of wrestling. He was considered a jerk, a choker, a hack who was pushed too hard and too soon. The preponderance of those that contribute to this site was absolutely dreading the idea of another title run for the Legend Killer, and were wondering why on Earth he was still employed after he’d caused so much havoc backstage. In August last year, he trashed his hotel room and a lot of people wanted him to be fired on the spot.

And now? Now, we’ve done a complete U-turn. Apparently, WWE have so little support for the man they were going to put over Cena cleanly for the title on three separate occasions, that they can’t BEAR to see him headline their biggest show of the year. A show that, I might add, he main-evented for Smackdown! two years ago, albeit not closing out the card.

So, what’s the difference between now and the early part of 2007? Well, simply put, Orton has improved dramatically. In about the opposite way that Cena has seen his stock increase in the last twelve months – i.e. through the quality of his matches – Orton’s seen his star rise because his head is finally in a place resembling conscience. While Cena has matured on-screen, Orton has ripened behind the scenes to the point where he actually uses his self-assured attitude to help others (see: standing up to DX in Afghanistan in assistance of Umaga, because he believed he was the only one with the power to do so). Meanwhile, he’s recently married and is expecting to father his first child sometime this year.

The upshot of this is that Randy Orton is, apparently, in a much more stable frame of mind both personally and professionally than he was even recently. Orton is exactly the sort of man the WWE want to showcase as their champion, a man in the Shawn Michaels mold but who took nowhere near as long to realise the error of his ways, and don’t think that WWE doesn’t realise this. Why else would he be holding the WWE Championship right now?

But then, why is he potentially not headlining Wrestlemania? Well, because Triple H vs. Cena hasn’t been done for a long time, whereas Orton vs. Cena – the match-up so often referred to as ‘fresh’ and ‘new’ – took place during almost the whole of last autumn, as did the Triple H/Orton Last Man Standing match at No Mercy. It’s a bit like the situation in 2001, when Kurt Angle dropped the belt to The Rock at No Way Out because that match had already taken place at No Mercy as well, and Stone Cold vs. The Rock II would simply draw more buys than Angle/Austin. Basically, what I’m saying is that this has less to do with WWE lacking commitment to Orton, and more to do with them having absolute buoyancy that Cena/Triple H will rake in the dough for them. It’s tough, but it’s understandable. This is a business, after all. Whether or not the plan pays off should they go through with it, that’s another matter.

Besides, haven’t we been yearning for a shake-up in the formula for the longest time? The last several Rumbles, from 2001 up until last year, every Royal Rumble winner has gone on to win a World title at Wrestlemania. The last two years in particular, I read countless articles stating that a shake-up was in order. Well, we’ve got it this year. And now, you don’t want it. Typical.

Oh, and as for Angle in 2001? He had a match with Chris Benoit that’s still seen as a classic to this day. And Edge, who lost the belt back to Cena at the Royal Rumble just three weeks after winning it? He speared Mick Foley into a flaming table and won three more World titles. In other words, WWE has a good plan for Orton one way or another.

VERDICT: If the WWE had no faith in Orton, they would have released him for one of his multiple misdemeanors instead of letting him hold the World title two further times.

I like evolution in a product. I’m all for artists taking their work in new directions in the hopes of achieving something they haven’t yet attempted. That said, there’s a difference between moving through an organic sequence, and changing something for the sake of change. In this situation, I absolutely agree with the WWE’s decision to stick to their guns. If anyone other than Cena, or the three pre-match favourites I listed above, had won the Rumble then there would have been a swathe of others who complained that the WWE was investing its time into a mid-carder. CM Punk would have been nice, being in the North-east and all, but even as a former ECW Champion he would have needed a lot more build before being seen as plausible in a Wrestlemania main-event. Mister Kennedy could have fluked it, as well. Other than that, I can’t think of a single contender other than Shawn Michaels.

The problem stems from the long-term booking of the mid-card. But let’s be serious, here – a win in the Royal Rumble does NOT immediately establish you as championship-creditable. When it came down to it, the only man who could both surprise the audience with his success, AND be instantly regarded as a rational prospect to get the belt, was John Cena.

Whether you like him or not, John Cena was a commendable winner of the 2008 Royal Rumble match.

Rubbish Youtube Quote of the Week~!

From the music video for Rammstein’s ‘Sonne’ (and an infinite cache of other videos)

I4mh1gh
In 1997 a girl called lauren was walking in a forest and then a she just dissapeared no one ever found her untill 2000 when a yoing girl called Mary found her body and markings on her chest saying: I wasnt pretty enough” and now you have read this she will appear in your mirrorrsaying your not pretty enough and kill you. by the way the girl called mary died shortly after. To be saved paste this to 5 videos
THIS IS NO FUCKING JOKE

Well, if there’s no column next week, you’ll know why. It’ll be because I’m not pretty enough to live, yet too stubborn to post the story on five (only five, mind you) Youtube links. In fact, shit…what have I done? I’ve pasted it onto the column, so maybe YOU’LL be affected by it! OH NOES1!~! See you all in Hell, I guess.

The saddest part? The cunt who posted the message (and, therefore, fell for the trick) is 27 years old. I hate this fucking planet.

Wrestlelife

The Matter: I’ve got nothing, this week.

The Link: Nor has the UWF. It scored a 0.0 for one of its shows. Say hello to Wrestling Society X for me, won’t you?

Feeder Readback

A couple of emails to tackle. I would have one of those sections where I respond to the comments as well, but I think that was something I should have done at the very start of the box’s existence. Too late, now.

Here’s one from Imane Malass:

hey TJ **Writer’s note: DAMN IT, LARRY! You see what you’ve done to me?!?** i’m a big fan of yours . i enjoy reading your column every week. your last column was awesome but what attarct me the most in your last column was the reeder feedback . i agree with sousou, you sooooo should make a spot for the smart benoit related opinions … i’ve seen many stupid one especially in wrestling forums (and of course the great you tube) so many i can write a book about it .

for instance i was part of one of this big (caugh*deff*caugh )conversation about the benoit tragedy . we talked for days and being a reasnoble benoit fan i tried to convince them why i’m still a proud benoit fan and why i still respect and admire chris benoit the wrestler and the human being.
of course it was going nowhere so i sit down and write a master piece where i explain everything about the tragedy (the fact that benoit was a nice respected guy for all his life except the last 2 or 3 days-the CET- the brain damage – the deep depression…) and i made it very clear that i’m defending the person not his acts
what did i got afterward ? well i got replies such as:

— How can you defend him?? he’s a murderer which means he’s beyond defending —

— To me he is a piece of scum, actually he’s a piece of **** stuck to a piece of scum. I hope he never comes close to any kind or reward or accolade. I hope he burns in the firey pits of hell for eternity. That’s just me though. —

but these repliese come nowhere neer this one :

— **** me …from reading this thread it seems to me if saddam hussein and adolf hitler had been able to dop five star indy lo0ving 60 min iron man matches with flippy floppy moves…guys like you and the rest who believe benoit couldn’t have done what he did cos he’s benoit would be making excuses and claiming hitler/hussein werent reallly that bad and should be sympathized with cos they can do a flipping armbar! —

so you can see what we the benoit fans have to deal with everyday. anyway keep on the great work you’re the best mate!

Sadly, this doesn’t surprise me in the slightest. A great deal of those who share their opinions, negative OR positive, have failed to do any research and are completely uneducated. Moreso, they clearly have ideas above their stations in believing their point of view even matters to such a facility.

I think what really pisses me off is when one side attacks the other for being guilty of the same fallacy. For instance, when those who believe Benoit is innocent claim that those who call him a “cold-blooded killer” (that phrase is SO last season, by the way) are “liars”, when in fact they’re lying to themselves as well. Likewise, those who oppose Benoit saying that his supporters are “deluded”, while concurrently making rash judgments about a guy they’ve never known just because he committed an ‘on-paper’ crime that I do, and will forever more until it is PROVEN otherwise, believe he was mentally incapable of being culpable for. I may disagree with the views of Steve Cook, Michael Weyer, and Julian Williams when it comes to Benoit, but at least these men have made their decisions based on the facts of the case itself. Unlike the majority of those who we speak of, who seem to be of the “by golly, he killed someone! BOOO THE MURDERER, DOODZ~! P.S. cena sux, lol” line of thinking. How anyone can take these people and their outdated black-and-white perceptions seriously is, thankfully, not within my own personal realms of comprehension.

I do agree, however, that he should not be inducted into any Hall of Fame any time soon. It sets the wrong message. However, if he is removed from any that he is already residing in, I will make it my personal mission to see to it that said Hall of Fame loses any existing prestige or credibility. How? I have no idea. So it probably won’t work. Ho-hum.

On a lighter note, Steven Straka fancies himself as a bit of a movie mogul:

If anyone can look me straight in the eyes and tell me without lying that they would NOT see a Hurricane & Rosey superhero comedy B-movie, I will be happy to punch them in the face.

If Dwayne Johnson plays the evil villain, I am so there. Heck, Ben Stiller could do it if Rock’s not available. And the girl who played Eminem’s girlfriend in 8 Mile can be the no-nonsense female sidekick who flashes her tits at the security guard. “Hello, Odeon?”

Oooh, yeah!

And that’s the end, for another week. Unless anything major happens, or one of you comes up with something better, I shall probably finally write about politicians in wrestling and what to think of them.

Довиждане.

XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOX