The Tale of Two Crucifixions: Why was ECW's more "outlandish"?

[James]

So I was watching "The Rise & Fall of ECW" and the storyline between Raven & Sandman went over the edge when they decided to do the crucifixion to Sandman on PPV. So I am sitting here thinking to myself saying, "When The Undertaker did it, it was on live TV whereas this was on PPV wtf?"

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xay735_ecw-the-crucifixion-of-the-sandman_sport

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny75ciSI-44

Why was WWE's approved, but ECW's was disapproved? And to top it off, Taker had this over the top "Lord of Darkness" character as well. Hell, he was even speaking tongue with his which was even crazier. At the time when it happened I was 7 or 8.

I don't understand.

 

[ShinobiMusashi]

Sandman's wasn't on PPV it was a super card show in the ECW Arena in 96. They didn't go to PPV til 97. They would put on PPV style supercard shows that were cut up and edited for their syndicated Hardcore TV weekly show.

I don't really know why it was a big deal in ECW because they had done crucifixion stuff before. Dreamer was crucified with handcuffs bleeding like a stuck pig in one show. Raven was crucified with handcuffs at Heatwave 95 when "The Chair Shot Heard Round The World" happened.

I think it was just the fact that they actually used a real wooden cross(with a barbed wire "Crown of Thorns"). It freaked out the crowd(and Kurt Angle). Taker didn't use a wooden cross, it was his "T" logo.

 

[closet_fan]

Sandman's wasn't on PPV it was a super card show in the ECW Arena in 96. They didn't go to PPV til 97. They would put on PPV style supercard shows that were cut up and edited for their syndicated Hardcore TV weekly show.

I don't really know why it was a big deal in ECW because they had done crucifixion stuff before. Dreamer was crucified with handcuffs bleeding like a stuck pig in one show. Raven was crucified with handcuffs at Heatwave 95 when "The Chair Shot Heard Round The World" happened.

I think it was just the fact that they actually used a real wooden cross(with a barbed wire "Crown of Thorns"). It freaked out the crowd(and Kurt Angle). Taker didn't use a wooden cross, it was his "T" logo.

This is my take. The cross is a very strong symbol to a lot of people. If they had changed it a bit, I am sure that ECW wouldn't have gotten such a bad reaction. But since the WWF didn't use a true cross-shaped prop to hold Austin up, it was an afterthought.

Even Stevie Richards, who is a devout Catholic was offended, but didn't want to be punished by not going along with the plans.

 

[HBsam31]

This is my take. The cross is a very strong symbol to a lot of people. If they had changed it a bit, I am sure that ECW wouldn't have gotten such a bad reaction. But since the WWF didn't use a true cross-shaped prop to hold Austin up, it was an afterthought.

Even Stevie Richards, who is a devout Catholic was offended, but didn't want to be punished by not going along with the plans.

This is probably pretty close to right on. People take that cross seriously. Just the little tweek of Taker using his symbol probably made a huge difference. I remember being about 17 when the Taker thing happened and I couldn't believe they went there, but anyway I am sure their lack of using and actual cross made a big difference.

 

[asiatic7]

If I remember correctly, the ECW incident did offend some people, but not a whole lot. I don't remember if they were forced to apologize or not. It wasn't a big deal at the time to the average fan but keep in mind, this happened around 96'. 1999 is when the WWE's mock crucifixion happened and by then WWE had already made the "Attitude" transition and was getting away with a whole lot already (anyone remember 1998's Fully Loaded PPV when Sable went bare chested to win a bikini contest or one of Godfather's hoes shaking her ass in a thong and another literally deep throating a 10" sausage on live TV?). In 96, outside of ECW, a lot of that was still taboo, but by 1999 when WWE was making USA Network the highest rated cable station in that time slot, money spoke louder than anything. I'm sure some people were offended by Austin getting crucified. It was hard for anyone with strict morals not to get offended by WWE's vugarity back then. But from what I can remember, neither was that big of deal at the time. I know Kurt Angle was upset by it, but remember, he was fresh off winning gold in Atlanta that year. He was a hero and didn't want his good name tarnished by his appearance that night.

You were seven when this happened? Awww you were just a baby...

 

[Poop Master Flex]

A lot of reasons actually.

First when it happened to Austin it was on a Taker symbol and he was being sacrificed as per the storyline and all the stuff Taker was doing at the time. Sandman however was on a frickin' cross with a CROWN OF THORNS. The Taker crucifixion wasn't a slap in the face to Christianity but the Sandman crucifixion most certainly was. It probably didn't help that Sandman's kid was out there too doing the Raven taunt that looked very similar to Jesus on the cross.

Secondly it was a different time. Even though it was 2 years apart the landscape of wrestling changed. Think of it this way, if the curtain call incident happened today it wouldn't be a big deal at all and most people would say "Hey, that was a nice way to see Hall and Nash leaving". Back in '96 it was considered the worst thing in the world because it broke a lot of walls and barriers. They didn't mean any harm by it but at the same time because it broke the mold and broke kayfabe most people thought it was the ultimate disrespect to the WWF and to pro wrestling in general. The crucifixion happened in '96 and you just didn't do stuff like that in wrestling back then, it stirs the pot and stirring the pot often pisses people off. South Park has been on since 1997 but if it debuted in lets say 1970 it would have lasted 1 episode and would have been cancelled. The Austin crucifixion was in the right time, Sandman crucifixion was in the wrong time, not to mention it really spit in the face of Christianity, once again a BIG deal.

Lastly the Austin sacrifice made sense from a booking perspective, it helped show how dark and Undertaker was and it was done in such a way that it enhanced their upcoming buried alive match, their storyline, and Undertaker's character. The crucifixion had no rhyme or reason, it was done for one reason and that was for shock value. Raven decided to do the crucifixion for the sake of doing a crucifixion, Undertaker did it to move business.

So lets see symbolism was different, one insulted an entire religion, a different time and absolutely no reason to do it. Yep, that pretty much covers the difference.

 

[xxxdaniel_ariesxxx]

Some people are way to touchy about their cultures Fairy Tales (i.e. Religion). Now, if Raven had put Sandman in a gas chamber and gassed him, while proclaiming that he was "purifying" ECW, then I could see where that would be offensive. And I seriously doubt that Kurt Angle was all that offended, I mean wasn't he the one who said that he would make Jesus Tap Out?

The main difference was that Sandman was "Crucified" on a wooden cross, his body was limp (as if he were dead or dying) and the whole "Crown of Thorns" thing, while Austin was tied to a giant T and was very much awake and struggling, not limp and dead-like.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

Some people are way to touchy about their cultures Fairy Tales (i.e. Religion). Now, if Raven had put Sandman in a gas chamber and gassed him, while proclaiming that he was "purifying" ECW, then I could see where that would be offensive. And I seriously doubt that Kurt Angle was all that offended, I mean wasn't he the one who said that he would make Jesus Tap Out?

The main difference was that Sandman was "Crucified" on a wooden cross, his body was limp (as if he were dead or dying) and the whole "Crown of Thorns" thing, while Austin was tied to a giant T and was very much awake and struggling, not limp and dead-like.

Kurt Angle has come out since and said he was very much offended with the ECW crucifixion. He went up to Heyman and demanded that he not be featured on the show, and he would sue Paul E if he was shown on camera.

I think the Undertaker putting Austin on his symbol was still the wrong thing to do, but at least it was part of a storyline and Austin was wide awake and the didn't actually use a cross, which is an important Christian symbol.

Sandman was lying limp on the cross like Jesus, with a fucking crown of thorns on his head, and was then carried out of the arena. I'm not religious, but fucking hell, it was way over the line and a smart man like Raven should have known it was the wrong way to go. No wonder Heyman made him go back out and apologise.

I am not offended by much in wrestling, and the crucifixion itself doesn't offend me, but when I saw it I was just like "whoaah, some people are gonna be pissed at this!", it was in incredibly bad taste and should never have happened. It didnt even have any point to it, just seemed like an attempt to shock for the sake of it. I am one of Raven's biggest fans, but he fucked up on this one.