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

[Cookie14]

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......

 

[Captain Morgan Freeman]

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.

Bullshit it was implemented for the same reasons as chairshots to the head were banned, to protect the wrestlers long term health and not end up with another Chris Benoit case.

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.

But were not just talking about WWE here were also talking about the indies where they dont have constant blood tests and in most cases cant afford to. In the case of Bob Orton though he was told by Johnny Ace to do it so untill your have a clear cut ban someone in talent or an agent is going to tell a wrestler to take the risk for the good of the match.

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.

Really?. I think it shows how far WWE has come in creating the safer product we see today. The older dvd's have higher age ratings meaning they arent orientated towards the PG audience WWE caters for today.

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.

So is this what weve become blood thirsty fans who must be appeased??. We recently had the Cena Punk match a MITB which many have called a 5 star match. There wasent a drop of bloodshed at all and yet we have had a highly entertaining feud. The same can be said for the nexus angle last year. Im sure many of the feuds you could mention in the WWE where blood enhanced the story would have been almost if not just as entertaining without blood.
Theese wrestlers constantly work with bumps and brusies from working serious house shows and now their also expected to put their long term health in the hands of Johnny Ace??

 

[Wrath]

No blood policy is certainly good for wrestler's health but bad for storytelling side. Bleeding is one of the storytelling tools just like a chair. For example when you want to end of a very heated rivalry lets assume it's former two friends that try to tear each other apart. In this kind of a match the wrestler do not only want to win the match but make the other one suffer. Last match lets say will be a Hell in a Cell match. When one of the worker bleeds it really adds to a match. It makes match look violent and make us really believe two of them are completely sacrificing their bodies. So we can't deny that it is sometimes a great tool to take storytelling furthermore.

I can't say I blame WWE for their no blood policy after Chris Benoit incident they try to be more careful than ever but still blood is a great tool for storytelling and when it's used right it really adds to matches but at the same time pointless bleeding with no reason at all(Like we more likely see in TNA) is stupid btw.

 

[GameOver]

First off the removal of blood isn't only because of health risks, obviously the networks don't want it, the parents don't want there kids seeing it so the mighty dollar is the first and foremost thing.

Blood use is everywhere else in society so one can't admonish wrestling for using it however it doesn't add to the vast majority of matches and in alot of caes does the complete opposite, only a sadist wants to watch someone work with blood all over there face Ric Flair is a perfect example of bad over the top blood use. He bleeds in every single match regardless and it's always miraculously his forehead bleeding into his white hair never anywhere else

Blood does serve a purpose when it's not obviously faked, in small doses and sends a message that the match or vignette is meant to be extremely intense or the participants weren't really faking something. But lets ignore the possibility of catching a disease as that's a given in the last century, what about the actuall loss of blood while performing such a cardio intensive activity, that can't be good for the health either.

Possibility of all sorts of issues relating to reduced blood flow and lack of blood cells.

 

[conrad405]

as another poster said i take back all the bitching about the PG era and the no blood thing wwe are doing great now punks proof and we dont need to blood to make it a good show everyone knows its fake anyway

 

[I_Am_Electro_Boy]

I think the health and safety of a wrestler is a lot more important than our enjoyment. Most of us on here think blood helps rivalries develop or be entertaining. But like someone else said the current feud between Punk and Cena and many other feuds in recent years have proved that there doesn't need to be blood to help or make a feud exciting.

 

[MizFitAwesome]

I always thought the use of blading and blood created a paradox in the industry. A promotion is going to prove wrestling isn't fake by having a wrestler purposely cut himself open with a razor blade. Isn't that just as fake?

 

[Jack-Hammer]

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

Only a complete moron with absolutely no real world experience or knowledge would say something like that. Hep C isn't the same as contracting the flu. Hep C isn't airborne, it's transmitted through bodily fluids such as blood, semen or vaginal fluids just like any other STD. Hep C also can lead to severe damage to the liver and, if left untreated, can potentially lead to liver cancer. It doesn't usually get that severe in most cases, but if you're someone that has chronic Hep C, that's when it stays with you and you have to take medication for the rest of your life, then your risk for liver cancer go way up.

As for the WWE's screening process, they don't screen you on a daily basis or anything like that. Let's say that Wrestler A goes out and hooks up with some chick in a club and messes around without using protection and contracts Hep C as a result. Wrestler A doesn't know the chick's got Hep C, she might not even be aware of it herself, and Wrestler A isn't scheduled to undergo an exam or drug test for a few months. Now, say that Wrestler A wrestles against some guy and he accidentally gets cut open and bleeds on his opponent, maybe even some of it goes into his mouth or gets onto an open sore or something. That means that there's a very good chance that Wrestler A, who now has Hep C, has infected the guy he wrestled against and they run the risk of infecting anyone else that they wrestle against or sleep with as they won't know they've got Hep C until it's too late.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

I think that beyond health reasons, the best thing about no blood is that it means more now. Remember when HBK and HHH would blade on EVERY ppv and once in a while on Raw too? It lost it's meaning. Nobody gave a shit, it didn't add to the match.

Think about Hart/Austin. Not too many people would bleed back then, so that made the match and the image of Austin fighting in the sharpshooter, blood gushing, even more spectacular. Less is more in wrestling.

 

[CyberPunk]

Blood doesn't enhance anything in a match, leave alone a feud. We have had feuds like Taker/HBK, Cena/Punk (and many more) where the storytelling was good enough to make the feud enjoyable. Plus the risk envolved is not worth it. These performers put their bodies on line anyway and blood adds nothing more to it.

 

[Deexter Jorgan]

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.

What i dont understand is why are companies like the WWE not hiring talent with Hep C, if there is a no blood policy in place then they should allow these talents to perform, I have to agree with Hammer though the no blood policy should stay in effect, they dont need blood to tell a story and anyone who has any infections or illnesses that are transferable they shouldnt be bleeding into other people, if abdulla the butcher bled into the other guy than indies need to look into putting the polciy into effect.

 

[professorrosado]

Wrestling is a close-contact, physical sport where the possibility of injury and transmission of skin disorders or other illnesses exists...! Wrestler life depends on health and safety, once the dis-balance in the very next movement defeat....

 

[Redemption-2012]

I have also been agaisnt blood, Ok sure it was ok and damn overrated when theyb allowed it but if it's putting wrestlers health to risk then do not have it. Just let the real blood show like they seem to have been doing recently.

 

[IrishMcNaughton613]

It's true. Less is more in the world of wrestling sometimes. I think If there is blood it should happen naturaly. Like the Foley, Rock I quit match or the Austin, Hart submission match. It would help make it seem more brutal

 

[Sub-Xero]

Originally, when I heard about the "No Blood" policy, I was upset. I was being robbed of the visceral reaction of seeing a guy crawling towards the ropes, his face covered in the Crimson Mask. Eventually, I realized that this wasn't 1998 anymore and those days in the WWE had passed. I now wholly support the No-Blood policy, as I realize the importance of safety in an essentially unsafe profession. Plus, nobody wants to look like Dusty Rhodes, Abdullah the Butcher or Sabu when they get old, do they?

 

[SteelRevenge]

here`s the thing though. the policy keeps such stuff from being aired, but it doesn`t stop it from happening. Rhodes bleed out worse than anything I`ve seen since the DX vs Rated-RKO feud, and even that was a highly personaly feud that involved blading.

The superstars are still at risk with hot heads like orton and triple h, only difference is they don`t get any recognition for their sacrifice.

Even so, I will to go on record saying I am Pro No Blood as too many greats have been lost as it is. It just the events of this week and how they handled it sickens me to the point of boycotting WWE programing for a while. perhaps forever.

 

[JBShakes]

Thanks for posting this, Hammer. There are way too many people waxing nostalgic for the "good old days" of blood being a regular feature in WWE programming, and it bugs me a lot.

A few points:

-YES, the WWE's "no-blood" policy isn't JUST about protecting the safety and long-term health of their performers. There's certainly plenty of reason to believe that at least part of it is pressure from the networks that carry RAW and Smackdown! to keep the product "family-friendly" so they don't have to deal with hassles from the usual jackasses (Focus on the Family, Parent's Television Council, etc.). So it's not 100% altruistic, but there IS a portion of it that is about safety - not only for the performers, but for the audience watching at home. Watch videos of any of the "backyard feds" that were popular at the height of the Attitude/ECW era, and you get a sense for what routine blood and hardcore wrestling can inspire in the "dumber than a sack of shit" portion of the fanbase.

-YES, the fact that WWE doesn't hire wrestlers who already HAVE blood-borne illnesses makes the policy somewhat redundant. But as a couple of commenters have mentioned, it's possible to contract a blood-borne illness and not know it, and once you're hired, the WWE isn't giving you a frequent blood screening, so it would be very easy for a performer to contract Hep-C (or something worse) after they were hired, and pass it on without knowing.

-Yes, blood HAS made some feuds and storylines seem more "real". But the question always needs to be asked, is that extra little something really worth it? Is it worth risking the long-term health and safety of a top draw just to add a little more "reality"? We all know it's not "real", so what's the point?

-Finally, and most importantly - if you're one of the fans who say they hate the no-blood policy because "blood was cool", or you think that contracting Hep-C is just "part of the risk associated with the business", I have one thing to say: Screw you.

Seriously. I'm not kidding around about this even a tiny little bit. The performers in wrestling already risk serious and permanent injuries, work a schedule that would make athletes in a "real" sport go crying to their mommies, and work through injuries that would shut an NFL player down for a season on a regular basis...ALL FOR YOUR ENTERTAINMENT.

If you can't respect what they do enough to appreciate it unless they're ALSO slicing their heads open with razor blades to amp up your "entertainment", get fucked. Go watch CZW. At least you won't be distracted from all the bleeding by any ACTUAL WRESTLING.