Hell no, I won't f---kin' do it!

[Mustang Sally]

It was interesting to consider how Punk handled A.J.'s assigning him to fight Sheamus on Raw.

What did he do? He said no. He didn't feel like wrestling the guy she was ordering him to fight, so he announced he was utilizing one of his personal days and walked out of the building.

Naturally, when you cross the boss this way, there's usually hell to pay, right? The boss can punish you; that's one of the things about being in charge. We figured on seeing A.J. take control of matters, but she didn't. In fact, Punk's move was intended to accomplish two things: (1) Further his status as a good guy turning bad. (2) Send A.J. back to the "mentally unbalanced" state that was working so well for her before her promotion to GM. She certainly appeared "confused" after Punk walked.

But, did you ever notice that pro wrestlers don't refuse assignments? If the GM tells them they're fighting an opponent later in the show, they do it. If the fans vote for certain conditions under which they want to see assigned opponents perform, the wrestlers do it.

Ironically, during the same episode of Raw, we saw an example of how performers usually comply with orders, even when the assignment is ridiculous. Of course, I'm talking about Kane-Daniel Bryan. The fans twittered their preference to see these two guys "hug it out."

Why would Daniel comply? Why would Kane submit to this? Just because the fans voted for it? Why would they care about that? Given that Michael Cole announced the result of the fan's voting, my preferred solution would have been for Kane to say on live TV:

"Why in the fuck would I want to hug that son of a bitch? Who gives a flying fuck if the fans want to see me hug that little fucker? I ain't fuckin' doin' it. Fuck you, Cole."

But no one ever refuses a match-up or condition, do they? Except now, for Punk. Did you ever see anyone else ever do that in WWE? Did you ever see someone flat-out refuse a direct order from the boss?

 

[asiatic7]

your're right in the sense that Punk pulled that move to get heat and solidify himself as a full blown heel. I mean, he did it in his hometown of all places! Punk totally blew off The Windy City (blew, wind, get it?).

I can recall wrestlers in the past defying authority, but also complying to their superiors orders. That's a typical heel move. Del Rio tried this a few weeks ago and ended up doing what he was told to do. Most fear the repercussions so they follow suit. How many times have we heard Teddy Long come out and say,"Hold on Playa, just a minute!", and got his way. I belive the move was also done to show the fans that AJ Lee is losing control of her show because the whole night things were going wrong...

There are instances to the question you asked, but I can't really think of any off the top of the head but good question nonetheless.

 

[King_of_Swing1520]

good point about the hug it out thing.

but other than that sillyness, it really comes back to what the miz said on commentary. these guys want to wrestle. they want tv time. they want to be seen by the audiance. sure they dont always get it on their terms but thats part of being an employee. the boss says do something you do it. people have refused to wrestle before, and they usually get some kind of punishment for it. like a match that is even less in their favor than the original one they refused to wrestle in. of course punk being the wwe champ theres not much aj can do to discipline him.

 

[LegendKiller716]

I understand what your trying to get at here, and I don't think anyone has flat out refused an order without facing consequences, but I think they were trying to do two things here.

1.) Punk said he had personal days in his contract. I think in the coming weeks we're gonna see Punk (with help from Heyman) start putting over clauses he had put in his contract last year. Punk's contract was a big story line last summer, and I think they're gonna start to capitalize on that this year.

2.) I think by allowing superstars to disobey her orders AJ will eventually be let go as GM. I think that backstage segment was done to further AJ's story with Vicky and give Vicky some leverage with the board of directors.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

There are times when guys either walk out on their tag-team partner or get intentionally counted out. But at least in those cases the match had started.

The most similar instance that I can think of is HBK laying down for HHH to win the Euro Championship. I think the fans really thought they were going to get a legit match between the DX members. It turned out to be great way to generate heat.

There seems to be a code for the professional wrestler of doing what they are told. Whether it is as obscene and embarassing as William Regal wearing lingerie or SCSA having to get through a gauntlet match to hold his title the workers usually comply with the orders from the boss.

I just hope this doesn't become a go to move for the WWE. I know the card is subject to change and I had no idea that Punk/Sheamus was ever supposed to be booked when I turned on the TV, but not having the match was kind of a letdown after it was announced. I was certainly looking forward to it more than Cena/Del Rio.

Otherwise the rest of the show made up for it. Heyman's reveal, Cena/Del Rio, #Hugitout, Anger Management, Vickie/AJ, AJ's slow burn and implosion, and Ziggler/Orton made this week's Raw my favorite since 1,000. It was kind of better in a way.

 

[SRSB]

Why would Daniel comply? Why would Kane submit to this? Just because the fans voted for it? Why would they care about that? Given that Michael Cole announced the result of the fan's voting, my preferred solution would have been for Kane to say on live TV:

"Why in the fuck would I want to hug that son of a bitch? Who gives a flying fuck if the fans want to see me hug that little fucker? I ain't fuckin' doin' it. Fuck you, Cole."

I think because the history between AJ Lee and Daniel Bryan, her sole purpose is to torture him. She's the reason he was in the Anger Management classes. I'm almost positive there would have been consequences to Bryan, if they didn't go through with whatever the fans voted. CM Punk has a leverage and an out due to him being the WWE Champion and certain "clauses" in his contract. I'm sure there will be some (not all) logical explanation given that should make these two scenarios different.

Yes, there's Jack Swagger, but he was selected by AJ Lee to replace CM Punk in a match against Sheamus. He did what was asked. He went out there, put in some offense, but ended up getting his ass kicked. He did his job, but yeah, he's taking some "extended time off". In this scenario, I see it purely as continuing the AJ Lee/Vickie/Board storyline; AJ struggling with power. As I mentioned, she has a thing for torturing Daniel Bryan, so him having to show up and do what was voted makes sense. Punk has an out, and Swagger did what he was told to do.

It sucks trying to throw in logic when it comes to wrestling because sometimes we just have to ignore it and just go with it. Like movies, there's going to be tons of plot holes.

 

[TheGame2029]

"Why in the fuck would I want to hug that son of a bitch? Who gives a flying fuck if the fans want to see me hug that little fucker? I ain't fuckin' doin' it. Fuck you, Cole."

Best. Line. Ever!

As has been stated, heels usually end up towing the line because either their egos get in the way, or they're afraid of the repercussions. Punk's probably pretty confident that he's above repercussions, or he just doesn't care.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I love that WWE just didn't have Punk cater to the Chicago crowd. I figured that they'd almost kind of drop the heel turn bit for one night as Chicago is a hot town, especially for Punk. Since Punk refused to wrestle in front of his hometown crowd, and expected them to be ok with it, it just built heat for Punk.

Some fans are always going to cheer for Punk, that's just how wrestling fans are these days. Dolph Ziggler is still a heel but he's getting pretty decent face pops sometimes. However, Punk is getting substantially more boos than he once did.

As for how he was able to get away with disobeying AJ's orders, I'm thinking that Paul Heyman will be revealed as having something to do with that. Remember when Punk cited that his contract included "personal days", it reminded me of Heyman's role with Brock Lesnar. Heyman is Lesnar's legal adviser and maybe part of the upcoming storyline is that Heyman has been "advising" Punk or that Heyman himself helped to "negotiate" CM Punk's new deal with the WWE when he "walked out" after MITB last year. As for why Punk has decided to invoke such clauses in his contract now, it can all be chalked up to the current search for respect angle. Punk says he's taken a "back seat" to Cena & Rock out of respect right? Well, since Punk feels that he's being disrespected, maybe he's deciding to show a little "disrespect" himself in that sense by citing such contract stipulations at inopportune times, like maybe not wrestling in front of his home crowd.

I think that Heyman will be revealed as being an adviser to Punk in a legal sense, and as someone who respects him, and that Heyman's involvement will have something to do with Punk being able to brush off the orders of the Raw GM, something that the other WWE wrestlers aren't able to do.

 

[Tired0FthePeople]

We've seen Bobby Rude, Stone Cold, DX and the Rock straight THE HELL out of their bosses. Seeing Punk use a clause in his contract to get out of wrestling Shaemus seems resonsonable since there is often physical violence between wrestlers and the boss anyway. This has probably been the first time we've seen a wrestler be able to legit refuse a match though. If there are any other examples I cant think of any.

 

[mikde_]

I think this is one of those things that you just kind of have to ignore as a Wrestling fan because it is kind of a plot hole so to speak.

Like how come Cena's AA can put someone away but a superplex from him wont? Is'nt the superplex basically a slam also but from a higher height?

How come Triple H's broken arm recovered in a couple of weeks?

Are we supposed to believe The Undertaker is really dead?

How come if Superstars get attacked backstage by way of a few punches and kicks then they instantly need medical attention and will miss the rest of the show like Jerry Lawler last week on RAW? Are punches and kicks more dangerous outside the ring?

Granted, it would be nice if a lot of these little things were sorted out and we had a more realistic product but this is WWE and continuity and realism is not the main aim. WWE is about fireworks, videos about troops with eagles and shit, USA, Z-list Celebrities, Soap Opera drama! and the odd bit of 'Rasslin!

 

[Ethelion]

Did you ever notice that pro wrestlers don't refuse assignments?

Hell, I was just as surprised as asiatic7 when Punk blew off his hometown of Chicago. You'd think that that night would've been the one night where the WWE would let him be cheered. Go figure. Maybe this is where they're going with him:

Punk said he had personal days in his contract. I think in the coming weeks, we're gonna see Punk (with help from Heyman) start putting over clauses he had put in his contract last year. Punk's contract was a big storyline last summer and I think they're gonna start to capitalize on that this year.

Still, the "personal days" excuse seemed pretty BS to me.

Did you ever see anyone else ever do that in WWE? Did you ever see someone flat-out refuse a direct order from the boss?

How many times have we heard Teddy Long come out and say,"Hold on Playa, just a minute!", and got his way?

Exactly. I remember the last time he did that was on Daniel Bryan. Bryan, being the heel that he was, was planning to "leave" the arena to "escort" her then-kayfabe girlfriend AJ out as well. Teddy, who wouldn't have any of it, goes after them, utter the words, "Hold on Playa, just a minute!", and drops a bombshell on Bryan that if he "leaves", he's "fired" or something.

But yeah, there WERE instances that someone flat-out refuse a direct order from the boss, but I also really can't think of anyone. I even carefully thought it out and... nada.

By the way, Mustang Sally, I... I...

On a side note, here's a follow-up emoticon to my first post on your last thread, Sally:

 

[HBsam31]

I also like that he basically blew off his hometown. I thought he would go out and play the face for this one night, but they kept the heel thing going, and with the addition of Heyman at the end was perfect. I liked the example used of HBK laying down for HHH after Commissioner Slaughter made the match. I can't really think of any other examples, but I do think they should use this more. It would really go along with Punk defying authority.

 

[Some Guy]

To me, Punk refusing the take part in the match happened to further two separate storylines:

1. To further perpetuate Punk's new heel character being so arrogant that he believes he can get away with anything, as he is the WWE Champion and therefore the biggest/most important asset to the company.

2. To further undermine AJ's role as the Raw GM, and to make it look that she is not in control of the people she is meant to be the boss of (this is further exacerbated by Jack Swagger walking out), which will most likely culminate in her job becoming under threat in the coming weeks and perhaps going back to being the mentally unstable AJ we all know and love.

Whether or not Punk would have had the nerve to do that to another authority figure remains to be seen, but it seems to me that now Punk has Heyman on his side, he/they will continue to do as he/they feel until someone higher up intervenes.

I think the fact that the OP brings this up as a rare example of this ever happening goes to show that it is a good tool to enhance the plot. Any other wrestler in the past or present, perhaps like Daniel Bryan or Kane (particularly the former in this case), would not dare to challenge the authority figure as this would undoubtledly lead to some form of punishment further down the line.

 

[GrandSword]

I think because the history between AJ Lee and Daniel Bryan, her sole purpose is to torture him. She's the reason he was in the Anger Management classes. I'm almost positive there would have been consequences to Bryan, if they didn't go through with whatever the fans voted. CM Punk has a leverage and an out due to him being the WWE Champion and certain "clauses" in his contract. I'm sure there will be some(not all) logical explanation given that should make these two scenarios different.

Yes, there's Jack Swagger, but he was selected by AJ Lee to replace CM Punk in a match against Sheamus. He did what was asked. He went out there, put in some offense, but ended up getting his ass kicked. He did his job, but yeah, he's taking some "extended time off". In this scenario, I see it purely as continuing the AJ Lee/Vickie/Board storyline; AJ struggling with power. As I mentioned, she has a thing for torturing Daniel Bryan, so him having to show up and do what was voted makes sense. Punk has an out, and Swagger did what he was told to do.

It sucks trying to throw in logic when it comes to wrestling because sometimes we just have to ignore it and just go with it. Like movies, there's going to be tons of plot holes.

I've highklighted three things in your post... Consequences for Bryan if he didn't do it... yet Vickie slapped AJ, and she didn't fire her or put her in a match against Big Show or anything...

Plot holes deluxe!!!!

At the moment there is no consistency on WWE tv. If creative come up with something, it wont matter if the week before the opposite happened. Don't try and make sense of it. I'm still trying to get over the count out thing the WWE introduced a while back where both guys are being counted out. One guy gets back in it doesn't break the count, the other guy just loses...

 

[SRSB]

I've highklighted three things in your post... Consequences for Bryan if he didn't do it... yet Vickie slapped AJ, and she didn't fire her or put her in a match against Big Show or anything...

Plot holes deluxe!!!!

At the moment there is no consistency on WWE tv. If creative come up with something, it wont matter if the week before the opposite happened. Don't try and make sense of it. I'm still trying to get over the count out thing the WWE introduced a while back where both guys are being counted out. One guy gets back in it doesn't break the count, the other guy just loses...

Wait, didn't AJ attack Vickie the week prior? It makes sense that AJ would be careful, especially when it comes to Vickie, who's trying to get her fired. Vickie was attacked first by AJ on RAW (Aug 27th episode), and that's where all AJ's power struggle with the Board is happening. How do you think it would look from the Board's view, if AJ "fired" Vickie when she attacked Vickie first? Not so good.

As I said, Bryan and AJ do have history so it makes sense for her to torture him. Not necessarily torturing him in a way that would cause her the job. She put him through all these obstacles. He's always had some kind of consequence. Bryan following orders because he doesn't want to be tortured by AJ.

Why doesn't he do what CM Punk and Jack Swagger did? Different scenarios.