pratty

I watched it, thought it was really good. Very cheeky of the US gov to take the "the law is the law" moral highground despite having their dubious spying tactics exposed. Shouldn't 'national security' also include keeping the government itself in check?

Poor Lovren, just when he probably thought his season couldn't get any worse. Ah well. Feels like the football gods deciding it would be poetic and fitting to put us out on pens after the all the fuss over the pen last week. I was thinking during the game all these cup runs this season have been really unconvincing, bungling our way through against weaker opposition a lot, we were poor again tonight so it's hard to feel aggrieved.

I think they'll always have a Taker match as long as he's able to it, he's a special attraction, someone you don't see every week, and the fans are always excited to see him, so from WWe's point of view I think that's reason enough to have him on the show. Know the streak is done I thinlk there's more chance Bray will win. Generally I prefer singles matches to triple threats and 4 ways. If singles matches limit the number of people that can get on the card then so bit it, I think Mania should be reserved for the most over and biggest names. My issue with the amount of singles matches basically does down to time and possibly crowd fatigue, adding Bryan in a singles match doesn't help either. So maybe fueds like Miz and Sandow and Paige vs Nikki won't be settled at Mania. Or maybe there will be a bumber pre-show. I could see the Ic match turned into a multi-man match. Hopefully there won't be a musical act this year eating up precious wrestling time.

I would think he plays it by feel each year, sees how he feels when mania rolls around, he may well have thought last year was his last, maybe even before that. I'm sure he's banged up but it's a hell of a pay check for one night.

Nice, once they're here we shouldn't let them leave, well Torres can leave.

Really? Sorry but I think this is poor reasoning. Either it's a pen or it isn't, that's what refs decide. There's no such thing as a half pen. So 3 non-pens (in the opinion of the ref) should not equal a pen. If it did then people would be diving for anything, knowing it would all add up in the end. The problem is people's opinon of a foul varies so much, and that's still going to be a problem with video technology, when the pundits on TV can't agree how can we expect the officials too? Some managers and fans complaining about lost points, might want to be careful what they wish for, it goes both ways, the correct decisions could cost them points too, I hope if technology does come in they can all take it on the chin, probably won't though, just look at the players that still have the cheek to appeal to refs that a ball did or didn't cross the goal line, even when they know the ref knows it has or hasn't for a fact. If people really genuinely cared about the truth and fairness it would be refreshing if they actually protested bad decisions that went for them. I'm sick of the hypocrissy of managers saying it's BS when a bad decision goes against them, but justify a bad decision for them saying "it's about time some luck went our way", all too happy to benefit from the injustice they previously complained about, at the expense of another team/manager being robbed of points.

Thought Fastlane was a good show. The opener was solid, the tag titles match was good, Cena vs Rusev was also good, and Bryan vs Reigns was superb i thought.

Coutinho, take a bow son.

Enjoyed the end to Raw, I think the post-Rumble Bryan/Reigns stuff has been as good as it could have been.

The second half of the merseyside derby was some of the most boring football I've seen all season, not blaming him for it entirely there's something about Joe Allen that just sucks the life out of Liverpool, as soon as Lucas went off and he came on I knew we'd struggle to win the game. Also, Nigel Pearson, slap yourself.

I agree it's better that way, people like you and me want to be worked, but I don't think the WWE fans today booing Roman Reigns do, so I think WWE are in a 'damned if they do, damned if they don't' situation. WWE trying to kayfabe and work these fans is like swimming against the tide, the fans will turn on a good guy purely because WWE would like us to like them. They just will not be worked, just look at the way they insult each other online, "don't a be mark".

Partially, but I think it's a chicken and egg thing. Would WWE have done that if fans weren't already reading the dirt sheets online? You hear the complaint all the time about fans having their intelligence insulted by kayfabe, and in the response the WWE supposedly aims not to insult their inteligence by admitting it's entertainment. As a result the fans watch the show only half believing what they see, if that, the other half of them is conscious that they're just watching a show. So as soon as something happens that they don't like the fans go fully into the "it's a scripted show mindset", taking themselves out of the show. It upsets everything, the heat goes on the bookers instead of the intended heels, faces like Reigns essentially become heels, even though their character is pure babyface, it makes no sense to watch WWE while trying to suspend disbelief, if the fans are booing babyfaces for backstage reasons where not supposed to know about. I enjoy the inner workings of the business as much as anyone, after the fact, I don't like spoilers, because it spoils my enjoyment of the product. I try to forget I know how the backstage stuff works when I watch, the problem is a lot of vocal fans don't. it insults my intelligence when WWE and other promoters think I'm incable of suspending my disbelief, the very thing that makes pro wrestling so enjoyable, and arguably possible. The result of fans watching wrestling this way has chaged wrestling dramatically, as promotions are being forced to cater to it (again it's chicken and egg). Because everybody knows it's fake and is conscious of that while they watch, being realistic and trying to convince the fans it's real, is less of a priority, and wrestling has become "what can we do to wow people?" instead of "what can we do to work people and manipulate their emotions?". So now a 'great match' is who can do the most over the top moves, and selling and the eb and flow of the match is just an after thought. Instead of looking like a wrestling match, it actually looks like two people pretending to have an exaggerated, choreographed pretend wrestling match. I remember there even being talk of TNA considering having fan voting and/or judges to determine the winner of X-division matches, instead of actually got the pin. WTF? I know people who look down on 'rest holds' and wrestlers that work a hold with disdain, as "not good wrestlers" and lazy, even though what they do ironically resembles real wrestling a lot more than what their favourite 'spot-monkeys' do. A friend of mine won't even watch Flair vs Steamboat, but loves indy high flyers trading 'high spots' and calls that proper pro wrestling. Each to their own, but you can see many fans now see it as pure performance now where the most difficult and impressive moves are all that matters. A wrestler is bad now if his moves aren't all slick and silky smooth, even though real fights and sports in general are anything but. I remember Russo recently saying he thinks a lot of young wrestler wrestle the way they do because of wrestling video games, where it's all move and after move, I think a lot of fans may be influenced in their taste by that too. He absolutely hates The Rock (and nearly all big guy) and calls him slow and a terrible wrestler, even though he had audience in the palm of his hand and out their seats during his matches, and could pop the crowd with just an elbow. So The Rock could hypothetically face an Isis terrotist character and my friend would still boo him. If you're a booker, how do you tell that story or any story, when the story is irrelevant and the backstage perception is all that matters? You'd have to make your wrestling stories about backstage politics and such, but that would be a mess of logic, because on the one had you're admitting the business is fake, but there are 'real' backstage issues, and we're going to resolve these 'real' backstage issues with... fake matches. So I do think the fans are as much to blame, if not more. WWE still try to kayfabe things, like calling Matt Bloom Tensai, but the fans chant "Albert", because they like the sound of their own 'smart' voice.

I think Austin read my question for HHH. My question: How do you feel about fans watching and judging wrestling form a non-kayfabe point of view, especially during the show itself? It feels like the heat heels are supposed to get is going on the bookers and writers instead, undermining the guys in the ring. I think this may be why you (HHH) will always be the biggest heel in WWE because the fans, rightly or wrongly, perceive you as in charge of the show. For example Bray Wyatt eliminated Daniel Bryan from the Royal Rumble, but instead of booing Bray, they boo the booking of the Rumble match itself. Do you think that the genie can ever be put back in the bottle and fans will watch the show from the kayfabe standpoint again? Do you think the fans even want to suspend disbelief anymore, with them being so critical of the creative/booking process? If not what does that mean for WWE? The Podcast: Austin: “It’s almost like kayfabe has died. Back in the day you would watch the product in the ring, and whatever happened in the ring that’s where you got your heat or your satisfaction from. Now if the story doesn’t go the way people want, they’re mad behind the scenes at the writers.” Triple H: “Times changed. Just telling a story and people accepting that storyline for what it is, as a storyline, is gone. A large portion of your audience just buys into that. Another large portion of your audience – they know everything that goes on every five minutes of every day. They know more about what’s happening sometimes than we do. And I think you get to a point where they just want to go the opposite direction. They want to see a certain thing, or they think a certain type of thing is what works.”

Really enjoyed Raw this week, Bray vs Ziggler and the main event were great.

I watched the first 2 or 3 episodes and decided it wasn't for me. The in ring wrestling is quite good if you like that sort of style, but I didn't like that style of presentation. It's funny that for all the criticism of WWE for being too much entertainemnt, and not enough sports/wrestling, as an alternative Lucha Underground is presented even more as entertainment rather than a sport. Matt Striker's not so subtle digs at WWE were tiresome aswell.

Fair play to chelsea, a close tie but they probably edged it. Obviously we're in need of a finisher. Nice to see a solid display from mignolet for once, good for him. Good to see us at least look competetive against a team like them considering how dire we've been at times this season.

Probably the more reason not to have a 'moveset'.

Well played Liverpool, didn't get the win but we made Chelsea look ordinary.

Lucas is the first name on the team sheet for me, has probably been or most consistant player not named Suarez in the last few years, no idea why Rodgers doesn't seem to want to keep him, it's no coincidence we've been playing better since he's back in the team.

Only to loan him back out to Atletico, weird move.

Thank god for the equaliser, no way did we deserve to lose today after bossing most of the game. The point is the least we deserved. Gutted for Borini getting sent off. Was a correct decision, but there's got to be more consistency over this dissent rule. There's clear evidence of dissent, both verbally and through their body language, by players for virtually every decision, so why only punish players showing dissent with the ball? Swear in the ref's face and it's all good in the hood, but don't you dare slam the ball into the ground.

I must be out of touch or something. I'm seeing a lot of negativity towards TLC online, but I thought it was generally pretty good. Sure there was a few short filler matches that were a bit meh, but the big matches all delivered, Ziggler vs Harper could have main evented, as could Cena vs Rollins. Ambrose vs Bray was very good too. Those 3 matches were as good as anything on the NXT show that people are raving about, which was basically a 2 match show. I really don't get it.