Bringing Back Some Blood - Yes or No?

[Mr_billy]

No, Hep C sucks. For the safety of he workers no. But I've noticed more blood lately, watch last weeks smackdown, Bryan was bleeding in his mouth. Look at the old school bleeders foreheads that look like shredded wheat, all that scar tissue cannot be good for you. If someone bleeds the hard way, I'd have a trainer look at the cut the decide to carry on, but blading should not occur.

 

[vols]

It must have been a few months since I last saw a blood thread on here. However, my opinion will always remain the same, so much so that I can't be bothered to write a whole new rant on the subject, I'll just copy and paste an old reply that I wrote in a previous blood thread.


"I've been making this point ever since I first started posting on WZ, so I'm glad to see that so many other people are realising the dangers of blood in wrestling.

There are just a few other things I would like to mention. Firstly, if you really need to see blood to think of a match as being impactful, then you really need to grow up. Seriously.

Secondly, to those who say blood in matches doen't matter because WWE doesn't sign people who test positive for Hep C etc. Hepatitis C, just like HIV can be contracted in a number of ways, such as unprotected sex (or anything that causes any exchange of bodily fluids), or from using unclean syringes (used for anything from injecting illegal drugs like herion or steroids, or legal, prescribed painkillers, even testing blood sugar levels in people who suffer from diabetes).

Thirdly, how often can you expect wrestlers to be tested? As I have pointed out, you can catch these blood-borne diseases at any time, however, Hep C will not show as positive in a blood test until it has been in your system for a month, HIV doesn't show up in blood test results until it has been in your system for THREE MONTHS! This shows that you can carry the disease, and possibly infect any number of people before you even find out that you've got it.

Fourth, you try going to a hospital and telling a doctor that you've just deliberatly cut yourself with a razorblade to impress your friends. They will immediatly send you to see a psychotherapist to check your mental health. It's a form of SELF HARM, something usually linked to depression, poor self esteem, possible suicidal thoughts etc, not something to boast about or show off.

And finally, we accept that people will occasionally get injured (broken bones/muscle injuries etc). These things happen, often by accident. However, we all know wrestling is fake, so why should the performers have to suffer deliberate and very REAL injuries as a result of blading?

Makes me wonder why TNA still allow blood......"

Now, can we please stop with the 'I want blood back in wrestling' threads please??

yeah, because over the history of blood being in a ton of matches there are so many wrestlers who did get hep c.

and what....are you completely joking about the hospital thing? for one they have their own doctors. and even if they did go to the hospital, i sincerely doubt Randy Orton or someone will tell them they did it to "impress their friends"...how ridiculous of a comment could you have possibly made?

 

[Azane]

Blood should happen in matches like Last Man Standing, HIAC, some cage matches, Hardcore etc... There's entire elements left out of WWE matches right now because of the lack of blood, and I think they'd be well off to use it sparingly.

 

[sajsSAMynwa1892]

so the 2 arguments are blood enhances matches v blood doesnt its dangerous AND/OR childish....
id rather be in the first camp but i dont want to risk sounding like an idiot who thinks everytime there is a chair there has to be blood. because as often as there is effective blood use in matches there are far more times that blood is pointless.

examples:

HIAC no mercy 2002- yes the blood from the undertaker really added to the match, and it got brock over so well as well as making taker look tough and durable.... blood was ESSENTIAL to the ending of bret v austin. in certain situations like hiac and heel turn beatdowns blood, in my opinion really helps to make a point of brutality, like when jbl smashed eddie with a chair at judgement day 04, jesus that was a lot of blood. it was distressing to watch.

BUT... flair should stop juicing, its horrible, and absolutely useless. and heymans blade job at no mercy 2002? no need paul, no need...

 

[Captain Morgan Freeman]

The risk outweighs the reward here. Sure some matches might be made that little bit better if there was blood involved but i think we have gotten to the stage where we don't need blood to get a great match. Both Taker vs Michaells matches and Cena vs Punk are proof of that. Besides back at Wrestlemania 21 Bob Orton cut himself open and bled all over Undertaker despite him having Hep C which means Taker is a very lucky guy to still be wrestling now.
WWE doesn't test it's wrestlers every month therefore it would be easier then you think for wrestlers to contract diseases without knowing about it until it is too late.

These guys are on the road over 300 days a year often working with bumps and bruises and in some cases small injuries just for our entertainment. To expect them to risk contracting serious disease is just asking to much. Im sure none of today's wrestlers want to end up like Ric flair. After all these years of blading a gust of wind is enough to make his forehead start bleeding.
You all need to stop being so selfish and appreciate the work these guys already put in for your amusement.

 

[CM11]

Personally no blood!! I understand people like the effect but if you put on a good hell in the cell match, etc you dont need people pouring with blood. Orton and Barrett recently shed no blood but you could see how much they 'disliked' eachother and wanted to hurt eachother in there matches. Keep blood out!!! Get on track with great matches. Undertaker Michaels didnt need blood to tell a story at wrestlemania in the ring nor should any1 else

 

[Cookie14]

yeah, because over the history of blood being in a ton of matches there are so many wrestlers who did get hep c.

and what....are you completely joking about the hospital thing? for one they have their own doctors. and even if they did go to the hospital, i sincerely doubt Randy Orton or someone will tell them they did it to "impress their friends"...how ridiculous of a comment could you have possibly made?

Sen Waltman had Hep C.
Cowboy Bob Orton also had it when he, Undertaker and a referee were all bust open during a HiAC match. He had failed to inform anyone so could have easily infected the other people, understandably, Taker went apeshit when he found out.
And if you watch 'Don't bleed on me', Abdullah the Butcher apparantly passed Hep C onto in independant wrestler (who's name escapes me at the minute). He then had a try out for WWE and was offered a contract, only for that to be withdrawn when he tested positive for Hep C.

If you read my post again, you will see that the in part you are referring to, I was suggesting that this would be the reaction if a non-wrestler were to go into a hospital with self-inflicted woulds similar to those that you seem to expect a wrestler to inflict upon themselves.
Also, I know they will have their own doctors, but I'm not understanding how that makes it ok? I'm aware wrestlers don't bleed to impress their friends, they do it to entertain a mindless, immature minority like you.

 

[SteelRevenge]

For me I always thought pro wrestling was a 50 50 split between wrestling ability and promo work(though I prefer the former I understand and accept it). Sometimes promo skills surpass a complete lack of inring talent( Miz, barrett, and cena come to mind). I also realize its a dangerous buiz and accidents happen, but I never thught accidents would be praised as the end all be all.

For those who say blood makes it real or that wrestling is missing something I have to remind you someone is being paid to let another guy beat them over the head with a ringbell. that doesn`t really sound like wrestling or anything athletic to me so much as prostitution( in terms of letting him abuse your body) and I personally don`t want to see that.

As for blading, how many self help groups are out there because of this classified mental health disorder. its self harm, pure and simple. I don`t see the need for it, I don`t see how it relates to wrestling, and frankly I think it just makes wrestlers and its fans look bad as some kind of sociopathic sadomasochist group.

 

[oldhamandy1]

How does blood enhance realism? How on earth does a seemingly random amount of blood make a match more real? Screaming for blood is sick and to be honest is not welcome in modern society, now when a guy is busted open we know it is for real. Surley that has more of an effect?

As for those saying what about all the people who don't contract a blood infection, let me ask you this. If life gaurd leaves his post on the beach on someone dies, could he say "look at the whole dies someone didn't die" and keep his job? No he would lose, it only takes one person for it to be wrong, if you can prevent even one person dieing then it is you're duty as a person to do it.

 

[MCMG]

If it is proven to be safe then yes. They should. It helps sell extreme matches and stopping a match half way through is just annoying.

Although i can understand not having blood. If there is health problems associated then it is simple. No blood. Blood is not exactly PG so if it deters viewers then do not have blood.

 

[The Dragon Saga]

Not all that interested in seeing blood. Nigel McGuinness reportedly contracted it and he's lucky his career can continue, however if the blood is legit I don't mind because very rarely will both men in a match legit bleed. To me anyway, when they force bleed it makes things more realistic.

 

[TimeToPlayTheGame09]

The only way I see blood coming back to a WWE match is fake blood. For example a wrestler does a spot like his face being rubbed up against the cage & he spreads fake blood across his face to make it believable. It could be hidden in his tights or secretly given to him by the referee. Other than that I don't see the E allowing blading anymore. One its to dangerous b/c of diseases, two blading a lot damages the face & being that looks are way more important than they were 20 yrs ago Vince doesn't want to mess up some of his pretty boys by making them scar up their forehead just to make a match more realistic, & three I don't think the wrestlers would want to blade. The majority of the roster have gotten by in their career w/o having to cut themselves. If you are not familar w/blading & you cut to deep & lose a lot of blood. I can see some wrestlers protesting to the idea based on the risks associated w/blading. I'm over the idea now. I accept the reason why they stopped & glad that the risks have been brought to light. The E has done fine w/o it. I don't know why these threads continue to pop up.

 

[PlayTheGameHHH]

I wonder how long it will be before everyone is completely re-sensitized by the PG era and they will look back at the old classic cage matches with blood and think how "sick" it was and how disgusting the fans were for watching it? I mean 10 years ago if someone bitched about blood 90% of the people would have stood up and said that it was important to the telling of a match, especially a cage match which was either a turning point in a feud or an ending point. They would have pointed out how stupid it would be to even HAVE a damn "brutal" cage match without blood. But now as you see, plenty of people are popping up to dismiss the concept.

I totally agree. I was talking to a friend about this not too long ago, I remember we used to watch and we thought it was awesome when someone bled, but during the convo he said -

"Y'know, now that I think about it..." and I stopped him and asked why his opinion had changed and he said it was because he realized the product could be great without the blood. I disagreed, I personally think blood can do a lot for matches.

 

[Sportsmen]

I think Blood can do a lot for some matches. Hardcore matches, hell in the cell, and elimination chamber are just a few examples. I think of ECW and the Taipei death match or barbwire ring rope match, and the blood just added to the shock and awe. If done right in WWE it brings a certain level of intensity to the match.
However it has to be done in a safe method, I do not think anyone wants to see any of the guys getting diseases from the blood.

 

[lcbball154]

With triple h and taker going with the last of their error storyline, do you think that the Hell in a cell match at wrestlemania will bring back the use of blood. Now don't get me wrong I'm not sayin the return of blood for good, just for this one match.



Do you think the match would benefit from both being busted open?
Do you think the match shoulf feature some bloodshed?

Personally I believe it would make the match that mire epic if it ended with both men a bloody mess. Think of all the classic Hell in a cell matches that ended bloody, and how mire believable they were when both men looked like they had been through hell.

 

[CapnKabuki]

The short answer to this question; No.

The longer, drawn out response; Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

But in all seriousness, while this match seems like the one in which they would allow the blood to flow, I honestly don't see it happening. If this match were the main event, then my answer would be different, but that's the thing. It isn't the main event. There's going to be one, if not two more matches that come after it, namely Punk vs. Jericho and obviously Rock vs. Cena. If these two end up both as bloody messes, naturally, the blood is gonna start to stain the ring. My point is, Rock vs. Cena is gonna get A LOT of press, no doubt. Pictures in newspapers, magazines, all kinds of stuff. Which do you think the WWE would prefer in the pictures of the inevitable stare-down; a nice, clean canvas, or a mat that looks like someone was slaughtered on it?

The blood would only cause WWE negative feedback in the eyes of the press, as they would no doubt call it even more barbaric, twisting it around to say that these men were "slopping around in blood all night." While I might be exaggerating (been known to do that in the past), you have to see why it wouldn't happen.

I for one, don't think it needs it. Yes, it does add to the brutality that Hell in a Cell represents, but take a look at Taker vs. Edge. No blood, still a damn good Hell in a Cell match.

 

[streicher187]

I think we will/should see some blood in the Hell in a Cell at Mania - HHH bleeding like Flair always does would add a lot to the match. Other then that I don't think blood is all that important. Maybe a busted lip or broken nose every once in a while but like with T&A to much of it gets boring after a while

 

[The Voice]

I am 100% in favor of blood (and head shots). For me it made it seem more real and a hell of a lot more entertaining. When the blood comes back into play i think the product in general is going to be a lot more appealing to the audience.

A few whispers are going around that they will spring a surprise on the audience and bring it back in the Hell In a Cell match at WM28. I really hope this is true but can't see it happening unfortunately.

 

[JVel]

I think we'll see some at WM in the Hell in a Cell match but that's just because of the two people involved. If anyone is going to get the sign off on blood, headshots, and other generally illegal moves, it would be Triple H and the Undertaker.

For the rest of the roster, I hope not. It's generally not needed and a match can be more brutal and interesting in many other ways. Undertaker vs Edge was an awesome Hell in a Cell match and there was no blood at all.

Blood is generally just used as a cheap cop out to add "intensity" to the match. Some scenarios it would fit, but wrestling went a bit overboard with it for awhile. Anyone remember Triple H vs Shawn Michaels in their Last Man Standing at the Royal Rumble? Looked like someone butchered a pig.

 

[zephyrs]

Blood is overrated.I don't need guys blading to make matches seem more dramatic. That being said, I don't think WWE shouldn't freak out whenever someone accidentally gets opened up, unless it's a significant injury.

 

[vikesfan]

Not all the time but in "special" matches then yes. Like the HITC Mania match w/Taker and HHH. Maybe even the Rock-Cena(the crowd would pop HUGE if they see Cena bleed v the hometown guy).

 

[TheGamea]

no dont bring it back ONLY because when I see someone bleed now it has much more of an effect KNOWING its NOT supposed to happen

 

[smokeyjoe414]

As a youngster i used to love it when guys would kayfaby get busted open, but now days it should only be done in the right enviroment i.e cage, hell in cell, hardcore etc, i remember times in the attitude era when a normal match would turn into a blood bath (example, rock v austin WM17) However i would like to see bloodshed in the upcoming hell in a cell match with undertaker and triple h as it would bring back some fond memories and make for great veiwing, just my opinion

 

[jrichardson25]

Blading is stupid. There are a lot of diseases that can be transferred via the blood if you don't get the wounds closed and let them heal properly. However, when someone gets busted open the hard way it is fine (as far as letting it be allowed goes... can't really control that one).

Blood in serious matches such as the Chamber, Hell In a Cell, Cage, TLC and Hardcore are vital to showing brutality but blading is still not something that should be encouraged by any means. It can add drama when needed. It needs to be used sparingly.

 

[jason420]

Blood is awesome. When I was a kid I became obsessed with anything ECW after seeing a pic of tommy dreamer handcuffed to the ropes COVERED in blood on the back of a prowrestling illustrated. I wanted to watch ECW and ECW only precisely BECAUSE it WASNT aimed at kids. The Attitude era soon followed suit and wrestling kicked royal ass, sold-out arenas everywhere and got twice the ratings it does today.

But now we're back to all this watered-down doink the clown/john cena PG kiddyland crap and I've again shunned WWE for awesome wrestling in ROH and the genuine article in the UFC/MMA world.

To me, wrestling is only worth watching if its violent and crazy and fun. "Sports Entertainment" is just watered down Pro Wrestling and everyone from Vinnie down (including myself) is laughing at you sucker WWE fanboys for spending money on BUMP-FREE PPVs.

Do they seriously think I'm going to spend $50 for no chairshots, piledrivers, blood, swearing, titties, or HLA???

Not bloody likely!!