The Diving Headbutt

[JustAnotherJames]

Yes, my brother-in-law had concussions, he hit his head for a living and I understand that. But way beyond that, he had a very serious drug and steroid problem. Unfortunately, a lot of athletes still do to this day. It’s spiraling out of control. The medical examiner told us after the autopsy that Chris was on his way to death within 10 months. His heart was huge, about 3 times normal size, and it was ready to blow up at any moment.

- Wrestlezone

After reading the latest report that was posted on the Wrestlezone news section do you think that along with the pile driver the Diving Headbutt a move used by Daniel Bryan and probably many others should be added to the banned move list?

Obviously with Beniot there was more to the story like Steroid abuse and maybe a few other things but its hard to pass that the constant head battering Beniot took could have been a major factor in his ill health.

I for one am glad that the WWE is taking concussions more seriously, why should all these guys and girls put there health at risk for the sake of our entertainment. The answer to that question is, they shouldn't.

Please discuss.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Benoit's issues with the diving headbutt didn't have so much to do with the move itself, rather than the fact that he didn't try to protect himself when he did it. Most of the time, Benoit would dive off the top and would, literally, let his forehead slam into the shoulder, chest or whatever part of the wrestler taking the move. Unlike Bryan, Benoit hardly ever used his arms or hands to cushion the blow. His head took part of the impact rather than him simply making it appear like his head took part of the impact.

It was more than the diving headbutt that contributed to Benoit's mental issues. Like a lot of guys during his time, Benoit is someone who took a lot of unprotected head shots with steel chairs, trash can lids, cookie sheets, kendo sticks and just about any & everything else used as a weapon in pro wrestling matches.

If any good came out of the Benoit tragedy, it's that it finally caused WWE to open its eyes and take the medical health of their wrestlers far more seriously. Or, I should say, it was a major contributing factor. I think what had even more impact was the fact that the US Congress was considering opening a full investigation into the WWE and possibly even regulating it. Basically, Congress threatened to bend Vince McMahon over and make him its bitch. WWE instituted the Wellness Policy as a means of not only protecting its wrestlers but protecting its collective ass as well. Also, what happened with Benoit is really what started all this new research that's been done into head trauma in general. The story gained national attention and people begin talking about concussions and head injuries related to sports on a level that I'd never seen before.

Unfortunately, as is usually the case when it pertains to something that alters the public perception of something, tragedy had to take place before people started to pay attention or ask questions that needed to be asked.

 

[Dirk]

I'd like to add Mysterio's diving headbutt to this. To me it looks like he's using his arms less than Bryan (because they stay at his side), but he doesn't jump as high in the air either.

From a kayfabe perspective, why would you headbutt somebody else's shoulder? It makes no sense! Why not hit a nice softer part like the stomache? So even in kayfabe, it's better to hit a headbutt to the gut than on solid bone.

 

[Starkist]

Never understood the headbutt in wrestling in general. As MTB pointed out, the move hits a hard part of the body. The shoulder area is a very hard area and Benoit hit it every time. Literally. It's a major cause to why I don't understand the move. Sure, it's a different move rather than the plain old elbow and legs drops. It's just a move that looks cool but it also looks like it hurts the guy doing it more than the person taking the impact. It's just weird.

I don't think it should be banned if Bryan can keep the move safe. After all, Bryan is like a modern day Benoit. Just a healthier, non steroid eating, head shot taken version of Benoit.

 

[Cena's #1 In My Heart]

- Wrestlezone

After reading the latest report that was posted on the Wrestlezone news section do you think that along with the pile driver the Diving Headbutt a move used by Daniel Bryan and probably many others should be added to the banned move list?

Obviously with Beniot there was more to the story like Steroid abuse and maybe a few other things but its hard to pass that the constant head battering Beniot took could have been a major factor in his ill health.

I for one am glad that the WWE is taking concussions more seriously, why should all these guys and girls put there health at risk for the sake of our entertainment. The answer to that question is, they shouldn't.

Please discuss.

Whoa wait a minute... Why should they put their health at risk for our entertainment? Why should we value their entertainment in the first place?

If they don't want to risk their health, step aside, I'll risk mine. Risk is entertainment. It's like the underlying issue with America... why are people saying what people can and can't do?

Why BAN a move? Why not let two people perform it, if those two grown adults in a country of the free decide they want to do it? Why not let me, a grown man, smoke my weed in peace?

Your conservative views are stomping out our liberties. If the wrestlers are afraid of head injuries, maybe they could be OPTIONAL!!!!!!!! You know, sure I'll do that move, or No I don't want to. I don't see the point in BANNING something though.. that's just oppression of free will.

And if they don't get AS over because THEY DECIDED not to risk their head, then that is the choice they made. But you certainly shouldn't take away someone's right to risk themselves if they want. By that logic, I don't want you going on a roller coaster cause I might have to watch you fly off of it if something doesn't go right.

I can tell you it most likely was painkillers that caused Chris Benoit to perhaps lose awareness. Medicated his brain just a tad too far... trust me.. I have seen my Dad in an unresponsive zombie like state from pill abuse before where he was still moving around.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Unfortunately, as is usually the case when it pertains to something that alters the public perception of something, tragedy had to take place before people started to pay attention or ask questions that needed to be asked.

That's true, and the way society reacts to tragedy is to point fingers. Our legal system and insurance companies are much better at assigning blame and damning the offender for whatever happened than encouraging preventative measures beforehand.

In the case of Chris Benoit, if his flying headbutt was dangerous, surely management and the other wrestlers knew it. If the danger had been pointed out to Chris over the years and he answered by telling them it was his own health and he should be the one to worry about it, then WCW and WWE shouldn't be blamed for what resulted.

At the same time, while many people figure Benoit was an evil person for what happened in the end, I find myself only feeling bad about the agony of mind he must have felt after what he did. Those final moments must have been horrible and while political correctness demands we hate him, all I can think of is what a good man he was said to have been all the years before the tragedy.

But in matters concerning which wrestling moves to allow and which to ban, the wrestlers themselves should weigh in. For that matter, Paul Levesque himself should establish a review board; who would know better what his fellow performers are doing? He should encourage input from others, too.

After all, Randy Orton's "punt" was deemed too dangerous to allow, right? That's a move that can hurt people whom Randy is wrestling......but moves that can hurt the guy performing it have to be considered, too.

My own choice? That thing Sheamus does where he somersaults while holding his opponent on his shoulders. I'm telling you; one day he's going to land wrong and jam the vertebrae in his own neck. His opponent will have done nothing to Sheamus; he will have done it all himself.

But, in the usual manner, no one will do anything about this until it happens.

 

[Con T.]

But in matters concerning which wrestling moves to allow and which to ban, the wrestlers themselves should weigh in. For that matter, Paul Levesque himself should establish a review board; who would know better what his fellow performers are doing? He should encourage input from others, too.

I would like this, under one condition. Absolutely no, and I mean no, wrestlers are included on this review board. You've seen the resistance that the NFL has received from players, past and present, in their attempts to make the sport safer?

I can assure you, the mindset is going to be worse for wrestlers. There's still that old school mentality to work "hurt", and I wouldn't doubt that panel would be more trouble than it was worth, if you fill it with veterans.

Go another route, add doctors like the NFL did, start using independent trainers, instead of your own, but for the love of God, do not bring in former wrestlers to help decide.

 

[The Butcher]

I would like this, under one condition. Absolutely no, and I mean no, wrestlers are included on this review board. You've seen the resistance that the NFL has received from players, past and present, in their attempts to make the sport safer?

I can assure you, the mindset is going to be worse for wrestlers. There's still that old school mentality to work "hurt", and I wouldn't doubt that panel would be more trouble than it was worth, if you fill it with veterans.

Go another route, add doctors like the NFL did, start using independent trainers, instead of your own, but for the love of God, do not bring in former wrestlers to help decide.

I disagree. Let's say it's a six person board- one of those people should be a former professional wrestler. A person with firsthand experience who knows the extent of the pain a move can cause and its after effects would be a valuable addition to any panel of this nature. I'm not saying it should be Bill Watts or a guy who's always going to just suggest that the wrestlers suck it up, but I'm sure there's a reasonable and knowledgeable guy out there. There should also be one roving spot for a specialist. If the issue is something neurological, then a neurologist weighs in. If it's orthopedic, then an ortho. So on and so forth. The other four spots would include WWE's head doctor and their head trainer and an independent doctor and trainer. That'd be six, with the boss holding a tie-breaking decision should it come to that, which given the wealth of medical expertise on hand, it shouldn't. The wrestler would likely be the only dissenter in most cases. He would still be able to provide insight and also represent the actual talent who have to go and do the maneuvers.

Just a quick mock-up, and just my opinion of course. Frankly I see no reason for it to come to that. WWE seems to be handling the issue fine as it is.

 

[Con T.]

I disagree. Let's say it's a six person board- one of those people should be a former professional wrestler. A person with firsthand experience who knows the extent of the pain a move can cause and its after effects would be a valuable addition to any panel of this nature. I'm not saying it should be Bill Watts or a guy who's always going to just suggest that the wrestlers suck it up, but I'm sure there's a reasonable and knowledgeable guy out there. There should also be one roving spot for a specialist. If the issue is something neurological, then a neurologist weighs in. If it's orthopedic, then an ortho. So on and so forth. The other four spots would include WWE's head doctor and their head trainer and an independent doctor and trainer. That'd be six, with the boss holding a tie-breaking decision should it come to that, which given the wealth of medical expertise on hand, it shouldn't. The wrestler would likely be the only dissenter in most cases. He would still be able to provide insight and also represent the actual talent who have to go and do the maneuvers.

Just a quick mock-up, and just my opinion of course. Frankly I see no reason for it to come to that. WWE seems to be handling the issue fine as it is.

Here's the thing....

Ideally, I'd have Dr. Tom Prichard or Lance Storm on this panel. Both are very smart, very well spoken professionals who take the safety of the sport seriously. I've listened to enough Figure Four Daily interviews to know Lnace is smarter than 99% of the wrestling population when it comes to steroids, concussions, all of the like. But they aren't "in the family", as it were. Vince doesn't consider them family, and frankly, we all know who's making these picks for this theorized boards.

You could argue Triple H will be better, and there's precedence to that. There's also precedence to say that he'd pick his friends, and let's face it, I don't want Kevin Nash on this board.

There may be a middle ground, in someone like Shawn Michaels, though. That I could see.

 

[The Butcher]

Here's the thing....

Ideally, I'd have Dr. Tom Prichard or Lance Storm on this panel. Both are very smart, very well spoken professionals who take the safety of the sport seriously. I've listened to enough Figure Four Daily interviews to know Lnace is smarter than 99% of the wrestling population when it comes to steroids, concussions, all of the like. But they aren't "in the family", as it were. Vince doesn't consider them family, and frankly, we all know who's making these picks for this theorized boards.

You could argue Triple H will be better, and there's precedence to that. There's also precedence to say that he'd pick his friends, and let's face it, I don't want Kevin Nash on this board.

There may be a middle ground, in someone like Shawn Michaels, though. That I could see.

A long way to go to essentially agree with me, but sure. I was just making the case. It'd be solely up to WWE to make the call on who the individual would be, and like I said, no matter who it is, that person would essentially amount to being a wrestler representative. The performers deserve a rep on a panel that will dictate what they can and can't do.

That's why I said that it's fine the way they have it, though. If the dos and don'ts of in-ring performance are going to be dictated to the wrestlers, then it's just as well that the autocrat promoter be the one doing the dictating. Of course Vince is going to take medical professionals input into account, he already does that and the moves/actions that are not permitted in WWE clearly reflects the medical knowledge of the day-- no blading, no piledrivers, no chairshots to the head, etc.

No real need for a review board, but if there were to be one, the wrestlers shouldn't be essentially left out in the cold. Part of the reason we got to where we are and guys I grew up with have dropped/are dropping like flies is because wrestlers never had any voice or representation.

 

[Mustang Sally]

I would like this, under one condition. Absolutely no, and I mean no, wrestlers are included on this review board.

I can see your point, but having the viewpoint of people who have taken the blows would seem to be of great value. But the answer is already in place: Triple H. After all he's seen and been through, he has the wherewithal to handle the whole thing.

Plus, he has the power in the organization to enforce his rulings. Having been on both sides of the fence, he could either fill the advisory position himself or lead the group that takes up the cause.

Could Paul Levesque have been the guy who told Randy Orton to stop the "punt?" He might have had a hand in it, no? If he had the power a few years ago, maybe he could have ordered Chris Benoit to abandon the headbutt.....and stick to his Crippler Crossface.

Food for thought.

 

[Con T.]

I can see your point, but having the viewpoint of people who have taken the blows would seem to be of great value. But the answer is already in place: Triple H. After all he's seen and been through, he has the wherewithal to handle the whole thing.

Plus, he has the power in the organization to enforce his rulings. Having been on both sides of the fence, he could either fill the advisory position himself or lead the group that takes up the cause.

I trust that Paul is perfectly capable of putting the kibosh on certain things. What I'm less likely to trust is that he wouldn't allow certain members of his brain trust to influence his decisions. As a wrestler, HHH was very much influenced by two wrestlers; Harley Race and Ric Flair.

Both men, for different reasons, let the road own them. Hell, Ric Flair is still letting the road own him; as late as 2011, he thought blading an acceptable practice in the ring. And if Paul is a little uncertain about what is acceptable to perform, who do you think he's going to call.

And it doesn't get much better; if it isn't Flair, it'll be Nash. If not Nash, then Waltman. And so forth, and so forth; for as bright as Paul is, he sure did surround himself with some dumb people. The only person who seems barely realistic is Shawn.

When Paul assumed power, it was widely reported he wanted to gear the product towards an older feel. He's still a student of wrestling; all I'm saying is even he isn't infallible.

 

[shalliin]

Whoa wait a minute... Why should they put their health at risk for our entertainment? Why should we value their entertainment in the first place?

If they don't want to risk their health, step aside, I'll risk mine. Risk is entertainment. It's like the underlying issue with America... why are people saying what people can and can't do?

Why BAN a move? Why not let two people perform it, if those two grown adults in a country of the free decide they want to do it? Why not let me, a grown man, smoke my weed in peace?

So you start by saying that they shouldn't be forced to put their helath at risk to entertain us, then the rest of your post is trying to say its wrong of people to not let them perform potentially unsafe and dangerous moves because it lowers our enjoyment of their matches? A little bit hypocritical there.

The reason to ban a move is to save people from themselves and others who aren't skilled enough to properly and safely perform a move. Look at Stone Cold's neck because as good as he was, Owen wasn't as familiar with a piledriver and should never have used it in that manner. Or Bret's concussion thanks to asshat Goldberg's kick. Ended Bret's career and nearly ended his life as it was a contributing factor to his stroke

Your conservative views are stomping out our liberties. If the wrestlers are afraid of head injuries, maybe they could be OPTIONAL!!!!!!!! You know, sure I'll do that move, or No I don't want to. I don't see the point in BANNING something though.. that's just oppression of free will.

And if they don't get AS over because THEY DECIDED not to risk their head, then that is the choice they made. But you certainly shouldn't take away someone's right to risk themselves if they want. By that logic, I don't want you going on a roller coaster cause I might have to watch you fly off of it if something doesn't go right.

I can tell you it most likely was painkillers that caused Chris Benoit to perhaps lose awareness. Medicated his brain just a tad too far... trust me.. I have seen my Dad in an unresponsive zombie like state from pill abuse before where he was still moving around.

So according to you, if someone wants to get drunk off their ass hop in their card and drive home, that's fine because it's their free will to do so? Forget about the fact that they are endangering themselves and others, if you WANT to do something, then no one can tell you not to? OR if some idiot decided to get a gun, run into a store, blow a few people away for $50, then that's fine since it was his free will to do so and we don't have the right to limit or BAN certain actions from taking place?

Sometimes things are banned or forbidden for good reason. Either they endanger an individual or cause that individual to endanger others, then they damn well should be banned or restricted.

That's the guideline I look at when considering these type of situations. Is there a danger to person performing the act? Can this act endanger others? Sometimes for the person's own good, you have to place limits on them.

Case in Point: Scott Hall. Doctors, friends, family, have been telling him for years to stop drinking because he was killing himself. and look at what happened to him. He'll never be the same because of what his free will allowed him to do to his body because no one was able to place limits on him he had to follow. Now it's been made clear to him what will happen if he continues to ignore those rules.

 

[Blade]

But in matters concerning which wrestling moves to allow and which to ban, the wrestlers themselves should weigh in. For that matter, Paul Levesque himself should establish a review board; who would know better what his fellow performers are doing? He should encourage input from others, too.

After all, Randy Orton's "punt" was deemed too dangerous to allow, right? That's a move that can hurt people whom Randy is wrestling......but moves that can hurt the guy performing it have to be considered, too.

My own choice? That thing Sheamus does where he somersaults while holding his opponent on his shoulders. I'm telling you; one day he's going to land wrong and jam the vertebrae in his own neck. His opponent will have done nothing to Sheamus; he will have done it all himself.

But, in the usual manner, no one will do anything about this until it happens.

The idea of a review board for all potentially dangerous moves seems it would be very inconsistent. If it was for all move that could involve damage to the head, I would completely agree with you. But you bring up the example of Sheamus' rolling Senton, or whatever Michael Cole calls it because there's a chance he could botch it someday and hurt his neck.

Well where does it stop? Psycho Sid snapped his leg in half and nearly retired doing a simple kick from the second rope. Should they be banned? Edge, in his debut, did a somersault over the top rope onto a jobbers head, which injured the jobber enough that he had to retire, I believe. Should those high risk moves be banned? And then there's the incidents involving the Powerbomb, between Droz getting paralysed and Cena's neck getting broken by Batista. But the Powerbomb has also been performed thousands of times without incident.

So what is this review board based on? What moves have track records of causing the occasional injury? What moves could potentially cause injury? It sounds to vague to me. A review board for moves that involves potential damage to the head, however, would be useful.

 

[shalliin]

The idea of a review board for all potentially dangerous moves seems it would be very inconsistent. If it was for all move that could involve damage to the head, I would completely agree with you. But you bring up the example of Sheamus' rolling Senton, or whatever Michael Cole calls it because there's a chance he could botch it someday and hurt his neck.

Well where does it stop? Psycho Sid snapped his leg in half and nearly retired doing a simple kick from the second rope. Should they be banned? Edge, in his debut, did a somersault over the top rope onto a jobbers head, which injured the jobber enough that he had to retire, I believe. Should those high risk moves be banned? And then there's the incidents involving the Powerbomb, between Droz getting paralysed and Cena's neck getting broken by Batista. But the Powerbomb has also been performed thousands of times without incident.

So what is this review board based on? What moves have track records of causing the occasional injury? What moves could potentially cause injury? It sounds to vague to me. A review board for moves that involves potential damage to the head, however, would be useful.

Frankly sid was stupid to kick like that. watch any of his previous matches and he had never done that before. sure he leapt off the ropes a few times, but almost always with a double axe handle or a flying punch/clothesline landing cleanly on both feet. this time he tried to kick and the combination of the force of being pushed back as the kick landed on the guy's chest and sid inability to position his single leg correctly saw him land awkward on his leg, planted his lower calf firmly in place while the rest of his weight was pushed back, snapping his leg.

All moves have the potential to cause injury if done incorrectly. Some of the moves done causually today are things that were considered too dangerous in the past or not possible to pull off safely for either the one performing the move or the one receiving. A simple clothesline angled differently could crush someone's throat, any ddt/piledriver could break someone's neck or crack open their skull.

Even something that most fan's ridicule like Crush's Heart Punch, are potentially lethal. A real punch hit with enough force to snap a rib could cause your heart to stop beating or go into potentially deadly stutters.

So where do you draw the line? do you put in a weak trampoline or 6inch gymnastic pads for the ring mat? ban anything outside the ring or over the top rope? Rememver it was only about 20-25 years ago that throwing someone over the top rope was an instant dq.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

Regarding the diving headbutt, yes I think it should be banned.

When the creator of the move, Harley Race is saying that he regrets ever inventing it, that should speak volumes.

The move has been attributed in part to the brain trauma Benoit suffered from. It's been attributed in part to the physical condition of the Dynamite Kid today. Harley himself has a pretty hard time getting around today because of the move.

It's simply not a move, that can be done with reasonable safety, while still looking good. There is a reason that so few guys have used it over the years on any regular basis. It's the type of move that guys will use more to show off how tough they are than anything else, and banning it would essentially protect them from themselves.

Get rid of it.

 

[Nikeo]

It's funny, I was only thinking about the diving headbutt the other day and came to similar conclusions regarding the move.

The move is dangerous, there is no disputing that fact, but I think most of you are focusing too much on the brain trauma it inflicts and are forgetting the trauma it causes to the spine. The way the user lands, especially with prolonged use, has a devastating effect on the spine. I'm fairly sure it's one of the main reasons Dynamite is in such a bad state. With a splash from the top the force is distributed around the body a bit better. With the headbutt the spine takes the brunt of the landing and is, essentially, being forced to bend the wrong way.

While the brain trauma should obviously not be overlooked one should remember that it's not THE reason for Benoit's condition, but rather contributed towards it. The damage it does to the spine will affect a worker much sooner.

However, I would be against a total ban on the move. The problem with the headbutt is prolonged usage and Benoit's problem was that it became a staple of his routine and he used it near enough every week.

Were Daniel Bryan to use the headbutt twice a year is it going to shorten his career? No. Further, using it sparingly will maximise the effectiveness. Benoit's prolonged usage not only shortened his career but took away from the impact the move had on the audience.

If 'Taker was doing his annual over the top dive every week would it evoke such a gasp? No. And you can be damn sure we wouldn't be seeing him wrestle an annual 'Mania match at this stage either.

Totally banning the move is a complete overreaction. Somebody like Bryan using the move as a regular signature simply makes him a fool who doesn't learn from the past.

Using the move once or twice a year is a happy medium and the most logical solution to the problem.

This whole thread brings up a very interesting discussion though. The headbutt is hardly the most dangerous move in wrestling at the moment, not by a long shot. Trent Baretta's TNA finisher, Kaz's belly-to-back piledriver and others are much, much more dangerous and appear quite easy to botch - which would end in a Droz like injury.

Hell, I always thought the Styles Clash was FAR too dangerous to be used and I certainly hope that's why we don't really see it anymore. The Stevie Richards botch should NOT have resulted in Stevie walking away like he did.

The key to these dangerous moves is not to allow a wrestler to add them to their signatures OR use them as a finisher. That maximises the potential for disaster. Use them sparingly and, not only will they elicit a huge response when they are used, but it will minimise the potential for disaster.

Banning the moves outright and doing nothing are both unnecessary extreme responses at opposite ends of the spectrum. There's a happy medium to this argument.