Here's A Reason Why The No Blood Policy Is A Good Idea

[Jack-Hammer]

I was surfing the internet today and came across the story of a former independent wrestler named Devon Nicholson. Nicholson has filed a $6.5 million lawsuit against hardcore wrestling legend and WWE Hall of Famer Abdullah The Butcher.

Nicholson says that Abdullah is responsible for him contracting Hepatitis C in a match they had back in 2007. He's suing for negligence, battery and assault. Also, according to the story, Nicholson recieved an offer from WWE back in 2009 but the offer was withdrawn when the Hep C screening came back positive.

I can't speak to the validity of this guy's lawsuit but it's a reminder of something that I think a lot of people have overlooked. There are lots of complaints that the WWE no longer uses blood, purposely, in it's matches but this is a good reason for that policy to be in effect. Hep C is out there, especially among the independent scene where there are no drug tests, no screenings or any of that. Drugs are out there on the indy scene big time, people sharing needles or just going out there and screwing around without bothering to use protection, etc. Hep C can be contracted sexually and I'd be willing to bet that there are some on the WWE roster that like to get a little strange out on the road and some probably don't use protection all the time.

I'm not entirely sure if this is accurate, but wasn't Bob Orton, Sr. let go several years back because it was discovered that he'd been diagnosed with some for of Hepatitis, hadn't disclosed this to anyone and bled all over The Undertaker while Taker beat him up while Feuding with Randy Orton? There's also a rumor that Nigel McGuinness, AKA Desmond Wolfe, has contracted Hep C and it's why the offer the WWE made for him a few years back was withdrawn.

With all the crap that's floating around out there these days, it's not worth the risk.

 

[Captain Morgan Freeman]

It certainly makes sense. Matches can still be entertaining without the use of blood and the risk is to large(contracting Hep C) to justify the use of it in todays professional wrestling circut. I would certainly worry for indy wrestlers who already have a hard enough time on the indy circut putting their bodies on the line for small money. Without regualr drug tests the risk of crontracting blood related diseases must be very high for them.

I remember hearing Cowboy bob orton being let go for that reason and i found this quote on his wikipedia page

Orton was also diagnosed with Hepatitis C as a teenager. During Randy Orton's Hell in a Cell match with the Undertaker at Armageddon 2005, Orton was cut open at the hands the Undertaker, though the Undertaker did not become infected with the Hepatitis C virus. Orton reportedly told WWE booker Johnny Ace that he had Hepatitis C, but Ace still ordered the beating to take place despite knowing that there was a chance The Undertaker would become infected with the Hepatitis C virus.

Seems like just another reason to dislike Johnny Ace. Im sure Undertaker was impressed after hearing about that. Was probably one of the few times hes been lucky in the ring. Its odd how Johnny Ace diddnt get punished over the incident especially after what happend to Finlay a few months ago.

 

[H33LTurn]

I agree as well, we dont need blood to be entertained (the Punk angle being a good example) and its a huge health risk. I take back all the bitching I did about the no blood thing in the past.

 

[J-Dogg]

The no blood policy is a good thing. As a trainee wrestler iin a wrestling promotion, I'm yet to debut, but I have witnessed matches at my promotion where blood was spilt, and there are risks in getting busted open not just Hep C, blood loss that's excessive, puncture wounds from being cut open. I have come to realize that protecting yourself and others is the first and foremost thing.
But this Devon guy has a right to sue, if you don't disclose that you have Hep C then the carrier is liable.

 

[Midnite Express 2009]

I heard rumors about Abdullah having Hep C and I wouldn't see why they wouldn't be true. I think there's a very thin line that these guys must toe and with all the other risks involved (i.e. freak injuries, etc) I'm sure they don't need to add the possibility of Hep C spreading around. I don't think they should use blood on a purposeful basis because it just isn't that type of era anymore. Since they basically banned chair shots to the head, they pretty much did away with the whole bleeding thing. I for one and glad for it. If someone gets busted open, let him do it from the hard way. No one wants to watch a person blade himself because he can't get busted open any other way.

 

[The Suplexer Perfecter]

Preventing Hepatitis C a good thing? NO WAY! But how can wrestling be good without the insane amounts of blood???

Without the sarcasm, this is a good thing. With all the blood diseases and viruses out there, it's better to be safe than sorry.

 

[The_Grimace]

I've been saying to my friends for a while about stuff like this. My one friends a tattoo artist and all he ever talks about are blood born pathagines and its not just the HIV or Hepatitis but many are out there. The E going blood free saves not just the person in the match but the ring crew and the other preformers who wrestle after what ever match there was blood in.

 

[DeathClutch]

Go back to 1999-2000 blood was pretty prevelent in main event matches, more so Trips, now I've heard of Hep, HIV and other blood disorders/virus' but my own ignorance I never give them a second thought though I've never been around blood to be infected it actually shocked me to go back and what how much blood was a big deal back then.

Now I'm all for a little bit of blood when the time is right but now I've been educated on blood virus' disorders I'm more inclinded to say NO BLOOD, I'm not saying any of the guys have Hep/HIV but at how easy it is to infect someone is it work risking someone's life for a little blood?

 

[jubjub_mh]

most diseases can be transmitted just by a simple cough or sneeze or body contact the wwe should just conduct tests then let the blood rain, blood adds to story lines makes things interesting gets a rise out of the crowd if your worried about catching something then go sit in your room 24/7 and be a germ freak

 

[Notorious718]

I've always been in favor of implementing a no blood policy. I never understood the appeal of having the wrestlers blade and bleed profusely. For me personally, having blood added little to the match (with few exceptions such as Cena/JBL at Judgement Day 2005 for instance). In fact, many times my mother told me to stop watching because of the blood in matches back then. I guess I can understand why people want blood in matches because I guess it adds to the excitement so to speak. But to add more risk to the wrestlers' healths? It's just not worth it, man. I'm still a firm believer that you can have a GREAT match without blood.

 

[H33LTurn]

most diseases can be transmitted just by a simple cough or sneeze or body contact the wwe should just conduct tests then let the blood rain, blood adds to story lines makes things interesting gets a rise out of the crowd if your worried about catching something then go sit in your room 24/7 and be a germ freak

Ok, let see what can be transmitted by coughing or sneezing: a cold, maybe the flu. In other words things that you'd get regardless of whether you're in a wrestling ring or trying to avoid as much physical contact as possible. You can get rid of the cold or the flu, you cant get rid of serious diseases like HIV. Is it really necessary to put someones entire personal life on the line for a couple of blood. Blood doesnt add any more to the story than good storytelling does. Everyone is marking out due to the CM Punk storyline and I havent seen a drop of blood throughout the whole thing. Its one thing to tell a guy he might walk funny because he took a few rough bumps in the ring, its another thing to tell him he can never be intimate with someone again because some guy felt like blading was the way to go.

 

[Shadowmancer]

​

Here is the documentary in question, it is one of the important thing that wrestling fans that should be watching. It changes your opinion of Abdullah completely. I think that it is well worth it for Devon Nicholson to sue Abdullah for this.

As to the removal of Blood from matches, I think it is a good thing for the most part, there are times when I feel that there should be a small amount of blood, but it should only be on a single person and it should only be done to enhance a story, never to the detriment of a performer if they don't want to do it.
An example of a time when blood would be effective is in the lead up to a big blow off match in a feud and the heel tries to beat the face right down so that he can't get up type thing. But even that should be used extremely sparingly.

I do like the idea of no blood, but there are times when no blood exists stops the suspension of disbelief. But it is like the removal of Headshots with chairs, it is something that is good for the wrestlers and the image of wrestling as a whole.

 

[guesswho969]

i think blood adds an lasting element to a match that will stick with the fans. When i think of great matches in the past the first ones that come to my mind have blood in them. that being said it can be very dangerous on the indy level where people are not tested for diseases. but i think there can be a place for them in the WWE and maybe TNA as both have the resources to tested their wrestlers and find who can and cannot participate in those type of matches.

 

[ChiefAlot]

I find some blood matches very entertaining (foley's hell in cell match), and I find some very pointless (Ric Flair in TNA). In mma you expect to see blood so they test the fighters like crazy. I EXPECT the WWE to have an extensive blood work & drug screening test done randomly and offten. So the wrestlers shouldnt have much to worry about. Blood is good sometimes but like I said "Flair in TNA" pretty much ruined it for me. Hopefully new management will bring back a lil harcore.

 

[Defekt]

In some circumstances blood adds to the match.

Catching Hep C or some other disease is part of the risk associated with being a pro wrestler, same as a broken neck or torn muscle.

 

[NegativeFeedback]

All you guys do realize that WWE does not allow anyone with Hep C or any other similar conditions to wrestle in the WWE right? They do physicals. Devon Nicholson actually discovered he had Hep C when WWE tested him and told him he was ineligible to receive a contract.

Bleeding in wrestling is not a bad thing. I am not saying that its NECESSARY in every match like it used to be, but I'm saying it shouldn't be banned just to prevent the exchanging of contagious diseases when no one with contagious diseases is actually wrestling.

 

[gwumusic10]

most diseases can be transmitted just by a simple cough or sneeze or body contact the wwe should just conduct tests then let the blood rain, blood adds to story lines makes things interesting gets a rise out of the crowd if your worried about catching something then go sit in your room 24/7 and be a germ freak

How can anyone say that blood enhances? I mean yes it adds to the dramatization but that's all it does. I mean I don't think you're ever gonna hear a wrestler go to the back and say "It hurt like hell and i'm bleeding like a pig but damn I'm glad I did it".

Back in the AE when WWE was trying to keep up with WCW they had to use some of those tactics but now there's no sense in it. Someone mentioned earlier that wrestling is still entertaining without the use of blood and gave the perfect example of the CM Punk storyline. Absolutely Correct.

I say no blood because let's face it there are too many diseases out there and no matter how careful you are accidents happen. Think about it when if a report had come out stating that the Undertaker had contracted Hep C from Bob Orton.....Trust me no one would be complaining about the no blood policy then.

Need I say more?

 

[NegativeFeedback]

How can anyone say that blood enhances? I mean yes it adds to the dramatization but that's all it does. I mean I don't think you're ever gonna hear a wrestler go to the back and say "It hurt like hell and i'm bleeding like a pig but damn I'm glad I did it".

Back in the AE when WWE was trying to keep up with WCW they had to use some of those tactics but now there's no sense in it. Someone mentioned earlier that wrestling is still entertaining without the use of blood and gave the perfect example of the CM Punk storyline. Absolutely Correct.

I say no blood because let's face it there are too many diseases out there and no matter how careful you are accidents happen. Think about it when if a report had come out stating that the Undertaker had contracted Hep C from Bob Orton.....Trust me no one would be complaining about the no blood policy then.

Need I say more?

Blood gives the illusion that the wrestler has gone through a lot. Look at when Christian won his first World title. It really added more emotion to see the blood dripping from his forehead. It seemed like he went through hell that night and reigned supreme. You could hear the fans go crazy for him too.

 

[triniphenom]

am nope it was orton that had hep c its was cowboy bob orton and he bled over taker at the hell in a cell, orton doesnt have hep c

 

[Dr. Mantis Toboggan, M.D.]

​

Here is the documentary in question, it is one of the important thing that wrestling fans that should be watching. It changes your opinion of Abdullah completely. I think that it is well worth it for Devon Nicholson to sue Abdullah for this.

As to the removal of Blood from matches, I think it is a good thing for the most part, there are times when I feel that there should be a small amount of blood, but it should only be on a single person and it should only be done to enhance a story, never to the detriment of a performer if they don't want to do it.
An example of a time when blood would be effective is in the lead up to a big blow off match in a feud and the heel tries to beat the face right down so that he can't get up type thing. But even that should be used extremely sparingly.

I do like the idea of no blood, but there are times when no blood exists stops the suspension of disbelief. But it is like the removal of Headshots with chairs, it is something that is good for the wrestlers and the image of wrestling as a whole.

Wow. Butcher isn't a wrestler, he's a morbidly obese disease. I can honestly say that I hate him now. He RUINED this young, very talented wrestlers career. It's every wrestlers dream to work in the WWE and now he can't do it thanks to this careless fat ass. Don't say "Oh he can work in the indies or TNA." No one wants to work any promotion other than WWE if they haven't already. All I can say is sue him for more than he's already asking.

Blood in wrestling was cool 10 years ago. It's not anymore. I love the fact that there's now a no blood policy. It doesn't add anything to a match. Put on a great match and no one will care if theres blood or not.

 

[PhD]

I don't see how this story speaks at all to WWE's no blood policy, which was clearly enacted for political reasons, not with talent safety in mind. Furthermore, given that WWE tests all their competitors for bloodborne illness before they set foot in the ring, such an incident should theoretically be impossible in the even if blading were allowed. If anything, this story speaks to the WWE's hypocracy in banning blood while continuing to profit by selling DVDs featuring matches worked in exactly the kind of unsafe style they profess to be beneath them.

For all the people complaining that you don't need blood, yes, it's true you don't need it, but the list of examples where blood enhanced the narrative of a particularly vicious feud or dramatic moment are too numerous to cite. Given the relatively simple preventative measures needed to avoid things like the Mr. Nicholson's plight (e.g. mandatory blood testing, blackballing unsafe workers like Abdullah), it isn't far fetched to suggest that blading has its appropriate place in the world of pro-wrestling. If anything this suggests that pro-wrestling ought to be subject to greater regulatory oversight, so competitors can make informed decisions about what represents an appropriate risk on their own and promoters can be forced to accept responsibility for booking competitors into certain kinds of dangerous matches.

 

[ahoyhoy]

Before you even get to Hep C and other blood diseases and infections, you just have to look at Dusty Rhode's forehead to see that blading and blood is not a good idea.

One thing I have seen in the past though, maybe at a PPV last year I think, was getting medical help for a small amount of legitmate blood and just kind of letting the match linger. I think that there should be a different allowances for the occasional accidental cut and blading. A strict no blading policy should be in effect in all wrestling, in my opinion, for so so many reasons. But if someone has a legitimate bleed, let them carry on or you might miss out on an 'Austin at WM13' priceless shot. They all have the strictest healthcare before going out there anyway to make sure there is no Hep C or whatever to pass on.

 

[Pedigree1]

Now that all the info about blood is out there i totally believe no blood shall be shed!! Thats shit is dangerous and potentially life threating!! Hep C HIV god knows what else can be caught... To think during the 90's and 00's blood was flowing like sands of the hour glass i am suprised no one caught anything!! Drop the PG rating Keep your no blood policy and the WWE will be good again!!

 

[navyveteran]

On top of the risk of infections... all that blood leads to a forehead looking like Dusty Rhodes. His forehead marred with scars from the blades. Why destroy someone's skin tissue like that for a cheap thrill.
If people want blood... leave it in the video games, don't risk the professionals.

 

[Azane]

Someone's life is worth a lot more than our bloodlust for entertainment, To be honest, I'd be fine with fake blood, but obv a large chunk of the audience wouldn't.

There's definitely more reasons against using it than for it.