The gaping plot hole that is the MITB briefcase

[LionheartY2J]

So the holder of the all mighty briefcase is entitled to a single shot- any time, any place. But nowhere does it state that they have endless chances.

Every year, there are several teases when the holder will rush to the ring, ref in tow, ring the bell, and go for a pin. Then for one reason or another, he'll take back the briefcase, or the match will be nullified. Wouldn't that be it? The moment that bell rings, isn't the match official, even if he takes the briefcase back and scampers?

When Sheamus went for it against Rollins a few weeks ago and Orton RKOd him, wouldn't that be it? It was a DQ.

All I'm saying is that they should rethink the anytime/anyplace part.

 

[Teddy Irving]

The bell never rings, so the opportunity hasn't been used.

Orton RKO'd Sheamus before the bell rang so therefore the match never started and Sheamus didn't cash in.

It's genuinely that simple. Next question

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I don't see any plot hole. As has been mentioned already, if a bell doesn't ring, then a match doesn't officially begin. If the match doesn't officially begin, then the cash in attempt doesn't count. It'd be a gaping plot hole if the MITB briefcase holder cashed in, was prevented from OFFICIALLY cashing in and had the briefcase taken away.

 

[Woodstuff]

This isn't a plot hole, it's another classic case of "smarks reading into things WAY more than they should". How is the ref going to DQ somebody from a match that hasn't started yet? Just sit back and enjoy the show. As much as half of you hate to admit it, WWE knows what they're doing.

 

[johnbragg]

I don't see any plot hole. As has been mentioned already, if a bell doesn't ring, then a match doesn't officially begin. If the match doesn't officially begin, then the cash in attempt doesn't count. It'd be a gaping plot hole if the MITB briefcase holder cashed in, was prevented from OFFICIALLY cashing in and had the briefcase taken away.

No, that would be a heel GM twisting the rules to screw over someone he had a problem with.

(It would also be bad booking because it does long-term damage to the MITB concept.)

 

[Navi]

So the holder of the all mighty briefcase is entitled to a single shot- any time, any place. But nowhere does it state that they have endless chances.

Every year, there are several teases when the holder will rush to the ring, ref in tow, ring the bell, and go for a pin. Then for one reason or another, he'll take back the briefcase, or the match will be nullified. Wouldn't that be it? The moment that bell rings, isn't the match official, even if he takes the briefcase back and scampers?

When Sheamus went for it against Rollins a few weeks ago and Orton RKOd him, wouldn't that be it? It was a DQ.

All I'm saying is that they should rethink the anytime/anyplace part.

But the whole point of the MITB cash in, is to give the holder the best chance possible to win the title. Edge would do it when the champ was beat down and out of it, thereby avoiding a fight all.

Rollins tried many times, but was always stopped usually by Ambrose. Unless the ref rings the bell, then the cash in isn't officially on. In Sheamus's case the bell wasn't rung before he was RKO'd so the cash in was nullified.

I would be very boring if they took the anytime/anyplace part of it away. That means that everytime the MITB holder came out, you'd know he was going to cash in and probably win.

 

[pipebomber]

The moment that bell rings, isn't the match official, even if he takes the briefcase back and scampers?

That's just it. The bell never rings so the match isn't official. This is the gapping plot hole in your post.

as for the anytime anywhere, I think to keep us guessing they should do a cash in at a live event. Similar to how Diesel won the WWF championship from bob backlund.

 

[enviousdominous]

Who does the WWE hire to ring that stupid bell!? Nothing can start or stop until that bell is rung and the WWE hires the slowest freaks in the world to just ring a damn bell!

We fans get almost a minute of a guy acting out like he's TOTALLY meaning to cash in his stupid briefcase and win the WHC, when something unexpected happens to him and meanwhile the bell ringer has either been chasing a pink dragon in dreamland or watching kittens play musical instruments on his iPhone.

That briefcase does one of two possible things; it instigates an impromptu title match or it gets thrown at Roman Reigns' head. If you're a bell ringer and you see that briefcase get handed off, RING THE FUCKING BELL!!

There is no gaping plot hole, the only thing gaping is the long moment of time between something happening and that stupid bell ringer actually observing it.

 

[BestSportsEntertainer]

The moment that bell rings, isn't the match official

The bell didn't ring, so the cash-in wasn't official. And taking away the any-time any-place rule completely destroys the purpose of the briefcase.

 

[World Class Mark]

The bell is the "plot device" that starts a match. Therefore, if the bell never rings, there is no match, so it's not any kind of inconsistency in the plot. The tease that you discuss is done in order to keep pushing the angle, the gimmick, the storyline, the wrestler.

And considering that crowds generally don't care about Sheamus, he needs all the help he can get, haha. Other than his "you look stupid" haircut, he has little to no connection with the crowd.

As a sidenote, I hope that Sheamus gets the "Sandow Cash-In," which is to say he won't win the title. I don't think I can stomach another worthless Sheamus title run.







.

 

[Navi]

If you're a bell ringer and you see that briefcase get handed off, RING THE FUCKING BELL!!

I thought the referee had to tell the bell ringer to ring the bell. Isn't that how it works? The MITB holder tells the ref he's cashing in and the ref then lets everyone know by having the bell rung. So there is lot's of time for shenanigans to happen.

Actually Lillian Garcia making the announcement at Mania about Rollins cashing in was the first time I've ever heard of that happening as well. Usually the commentators are the ones who tell us.

 

[enviousdominous]

I thought the referee had to tell the bell ringer to ring the bell. Isn't that how it works? The MITB holder tells the ref he's cashing in and the ref then lets everyone know by having the bell rung. So there is lot's of time for shenanigans to happen.

Actually Lillian Garcia making the announcement at Mania about Rollins cashing in was the first time I've ever heard of that happening as well. Usually the commentators are the ones who tell us.

I don't think the WWE ever got around to hacking out the particulars of how we fans can possibly know for sure that we're not getting jerked around by another dumbass briefcase tease.

So now the bell ringer can't act unless told by the referee? The WWE could save thousands of dollars in health care benefits if they just hired a monkey fluent in sign language for that stupid job. Just give the ref a remote, he pushes a button and the bell rings.

Why so many steps for this thing? They make that stupid briefcase into a concept where you can have your title match at ANY time, but apparently it's not that simple. It's like trying to teach the alphabet to a brain damaged parrot; you hand the briefcase to the ref that you may have brought yourself, the ref does his usual "Are you sure? WHAT!? I can't go through with this right now as I'm only 98% certain that you're 100% certain!". This is a bigger farce than Scientology; they make it sound like when you could just pin a sleeping hardcore champion and take their belt, when it's really as if you have to go through five minutes of prep just to get your damn match underway.

 

[Headman]

As it's been stated, the bell never rings during aborted cash ins. With that said... Why the hell does the ref always argue with the guy cashing in? Every single time someone cashes it in the ref looks like he's trying to talk the guy out of it. What is the ref asking him? "Are you sure?", "Is this morally the right thing to do?", "Can I go pee first?". Call for the damn bell ref!

 

[whoopin' ass]

I do get his point as we have seen times where the bell has rung but something has happened and the holder never got into the ring - they treat it as the match never happened when it really should be a countout loss. Honestly, the moment the holder says he is cashing it in, that should be the end of it - either wrestle or you forfeit it. You are picking the time to cash it in, you take the risk of something happening that means you lose out. Moment you say "i'm cashing in", you are accepting any and all risks that might occur so if someone comes out from the back and takes you out, sorry for your damn luck but you lose the briefcase - call it a no contest. I get the idea of teasing that I could cash it in whenever I want but when I actually say those words, that should be the end of it.

 

[gmanversion1]

Former 20+ year WWE ref Jimmy Korderias has said he feels that regardless if the bell rings or not, an attempted cash in (hand over of case) should constitute a cash in

 

[BestSportsEntertainer]

Former 20+ year WWE ref Jimmy Korderias has said he feels that regardless if the bell rings or not, an attempted cash in (hand over of case) should constitute a cash in

Probably, but multiple failed cash-ins can result in an even louder crowd reaction and anticipation for when the briefcase holder finally cashes in.

 

[Sexcellence of Sexecution]

Really, we have a thread questioning the efficiency of profession wrestling referees. These guys get gently bumped into and KOed for 5 miutes. Their hand is unable to make contact with the mat when somebody pulls their leg. They see a chair in the ring and a guy bleeding from the head all of a sudden and wonder what might have happened. Why are you surpised that these jokers can't call for the bell in time?

 

[chicagokmc]

As it's been stated, the bell never rings during aborted cash ins. With that said... Why the hell does the ref always argue with the guy cashing in? Every single time someone cashes it in the ref looks like he's trying to talk the guy out of it. What is the ref asking him? "Are you sure?", "Is this morally the right thing to do?", "Can I go pee first?". Call for the damn bell ref!

This here is the plot hole. Telling the ref I'm cashing and the ref signalling for the bell should take seconds. Yet it usually appears as though the ref can't understand English (plot hole) and by the time it's clear that the bell should be rang, something happens and they abort it.

 

[Teddy Irving]

I do get his point as we have seen times where the bell has rung but something has happened and the holder never got into the ring - they treat it as the match never happened when it really should be a countout loss. Honestly, the moment the holder says he is cashing it in, that should be the end of it - either wrestle or you forfeit it. You are picking the time to cash it in, you take the risk of something happening that means you lose out. Moment you say "i'm cashing in", you are accepting any and all risks that might occur so if someone comes out from the back and takes you out, sorry for your damn luck but you lose the briefcase - call it a no contest. I get the idea of teasing that I could cash it in whenever I want but when I actually say those words, that should be the end of it.

Can you find me one of those times the bell was rung and the match didn't go ahead and the cash in wasn't counted please?

The fact it takes 90 years for the ref to manage to get the time keeper to ring the bell is not in question here, everyone understands that is done to build suspense. The question is about why the cash in doesn't count when the bell is rung.
THE ANSWER: It does count once the bell is rung, not before though.

End of

 

[Slash-LN]

I don't think the WWE ever got around to hacking out the particulars of how we fans can possibly know for sure that we're not getting jerked around by another dumbass briefcase tease.

So now the bell ringer can't act unless told by the referee? The WWE could save thousands of dollars in health care benefits if they just hired a monkey fluent in sign language for that stupid job. Just give the ref a remote, he pushes a button and the bell rings.

Why so many steps for this thing? They make that stupid briefcase into a concept where you can have your title match at ANY time, but apparently it's not that simple. It's like trying to teach the alphabet to a brain damaged parrot; you hand the briefcase to the ref that you may have brought yourself, the ref does his usual "Are you sure? WHAT!? I can't go through with this right now as I'm only 98% certain that you're 100% certain!". This is a bigger farce than Scientology; they make it sound like when you could just pin a sleeping hardcore champion and take their belt, when it's really as if you have to go through five minutes of prep just to get your damn match underway.

The referee always signals to the timekeeper to ring the bell to start the match.

That goes back to the start of professional wrestling I'm pretty sure.

Adding the announcement from Lillian Garcia at WM was weird though.

Sheamus on Raw with Orton and Rollins was stupid though. It looked like he was playing tug of war with the referee over the briefcase.

I understand it was to give Randy time to recover but it just came off as really dumb looking.

 

[BestSportsEntertainer]

This has went on far too long. Why is this so hard to understand? If the cash-in counts, the bell must ring. Teasing this builds suspension and anticipation.