The Use Of Blood In 2011

[Twanfusco]

My question stems from a frequently discussed topic and so perhaps may sound a little repetitive to some. It may also spark up the whole PG debate but lets try to keep it specific to the question, which is: Is there any place what-so-ever for the use of blood in the current wwe product?

The question came to me because I've just watched Wrestlemania 13 ala Austin vs Hart. As many have said this match was a key turning point for the career of both guys and the image of Austins bleeding face played a huge part in the future direction the company would go in. The use of blood at the time of this match, to tell the story of this incredibly heated rivalry which saw austin pass out in his own blood is for me the best use of blood ever. The imagery, the story, the resulting face/heel turns lead me to believe that this match would have be nowhere near as effective without blood.

What followed this match was an excessive use of blood at nearly every ppv and eventually diluted it's effectiveness.
It was outlawed and for good cause as it was rather dangerous an unhealthy. The last time we seen blood on wwe purposely was at mania this year in the hhh/taker match. It shocked us because of the ban in force we know about and it hasn't been used since, another good use of it IMO. Will we see it at NOC in the punk/hhh match? It's possible, the fued is personal and it seems like it'll just be a fight.

So I ask, is it right to use blood in this era in the right conditions with permission?
Or should it continue to be outlawed?

 

[Defekt]

I think blood should be used, but sparingly.

As you said, when wrestlers blade too often, it loses it's importance.

But showing blood once or twice a year in heated, important matches can be really effective.

Austin vs Hart
Batista vs Kennedy
Cena vs JBL

Those are 3 matches I think were improved by blood.

But then you have tons of other matches where wrestlers bladed and it meant nothing

Everything in moderation I guess.

 

[The Future Rises]

The last time we saw blood on WWE Television was at the Extreme Rules 2011 pay per view when Brodus Clay, who wasn't even in the match, was clearly bleeding heavily after what I remember him getting hit with a ladder during the Christian/Del Rio show stealer. And it obviously wasn't supposed to happen. But after that I don't think the WWE ever got in any trouble with parents for it and it didn't hurt their PG rating at all. I think even the commentators mentioned the bleeding.

But can the WWE get away with using blood more often despite still having a PG rating? I'm not sure. I would however like to see it happen like everyone else. But blood still doesn't make a good wrestling match. It would add intensity to the match especially if it's a no disqualification match but I'm still good with not having any blood as long as the matches are still great.

 

[InsomGTS]

I think it should be used tastefully at certain PPVs and RAW when needed. HHH vs Punk is the perfect time for some blood since HHH can do whatever he wants. Someone getting laid out and bloodied adds something to certain situations and shows they got their ass kicked worse than average. Mick Foley built his career on getting busted open and showing he's a tough bastard.

 

[Bla Bla0155]

The Attitude Era made blood less significant, and less meaningfull and i think that if the WWE were to bring blood back, it should be used in matches such as No Holds Barred, Elimination Chamber, and TLC etc...

If used right, blood could bring the shock value back to matches as very rarely superstars would bleed and when they did, people would know that it was a significant match.

I'm all for blood being re-introduced back into the WWE as long as they use it right this time

 

[Gman35]

The outlaw of blood sucks. I don't want to see it all the time, but we are in a time where HIV and other diseases are more prevelant in our society today. There was rumor going around that WWE went to the USA network to see if they would allow them to have HHH bloody up CM punk before survivor series. Now, would that be good for television?? Yup, I think so, but will the USA network allow it?? We will have to see. Cena was busted open the hard way during a ppv match, and it was stopped to be cleaned up before the match continued, also some states do not allow blodd during matches, hence Kentucky fined WWE and I don't think they go back. It would work, but like someone else said, used sparingly, on a ppv, or on T.V.

 

[GameOver]

Get over it, why is blood so desired and needed? it does nothing but add something that alot of people would be sickened to see. You don't need blood to portray violence and injury

The way stars bleed is totally unrealistic anyway, the forehead would sooner bruise before it ever got to a point of bleeding, yet you rarely ever see bruising. Now if it was cut then yes there would be blood and little bruising.

and since stars don't carry around knives to cut there opponents, how in the hell does a fist or some form of dropping someone on there head cause a nice clean cut? that blood oozes out of yet no lasting bruise

Ignoring the use of weapons or ringside equipment obviously and since that happens alot less often then the past generation blood is not logical.

 

[lawrencebry]

Some PPV's should use blood, like for instance hell in a cell, how can you throw someone into the cage repeatedly and not have that person bleed. some PPV's would seem more realistic if they bring it back, but not over use it.

 

[Sheamus' Suntan]

I think they've been using it a bit more often lately. If I'm right, christian had blood trailing from his mouth at one point in the last PPV match with Orton?

It IS Being used a little and that's how it SHOULD BE. Blood was way overdone by flair/michaels/HHH/most of the attitude guys and now that it's gone away, it's making it MORE exciting to see as you know someone is either legit hurt, or they're going all out for the match.

 

[poppycock]

I just re-watched Summerslam 1992 only last night and when it ended I thought about how it was a fantastic PPV and had no bleeding in it whatsoever or any need for blood. Saying that though I am not against the use of blood and I do think certain matches could and do benifit from having a wrestler bleed. Matches like Triple H vs Cactus Jack would not have been quite as effective if no bleeding was used in my opinion. I just hope if they ever allow it to come back they use it once in a while and not overuse it like they did a few years back.

 

[Penguin]

In all honestly this is one part of the PG era that I'm thankful for as I've always hated bleeding in matches, I can not stand the sight of blood to the point that I've missed a fair few "classic" matches and moments owing to the fact that I've had to switch off and it's a shame because it means that people like Rick Flair mean nothing to me.
Maybe it's just me not liking it but I would assume that a high proportion of other female fans also hate it too and I have to wonder over the years how many woman have said "oh I don't like wrestling because of the blood" and how that would effect ratings.

 

[Bender]

It's all surrounding the "pg era",

How it would be bad for the little kiddies to see their models get all bloody.

Who cares? But I agree with some of the first comments, there has been an improved amount of blood in recent year.

Of course they shouldn't of do it, that would just lose the beauty of it being... WWE.

 

[Cookie14]

I must see a thread like this at least once a month on here, and they really piss me off, so instead of writing a full on reply, I'm just going to copy and paste what I said in a different thread (http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?p=3302837#post3302837)

"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......"

Now, can we please stop with the 'I want blood back in wrestling' threads please??

 

[FlairFan2003]

It's hard to do cage matches, TLC matches, Street Fights, etc without blood, it's entirely too phony and those matches are not the least bit entertaining with all those high spots and weapons if there is no blood, it's like a cartoon, completely unrealistic

 

[The Hardcore Kid]

We've all been so desensitized to blood, but your example is an absolutely perfect one in defense of effective use of blood. Austin/Bret at WM13 would not have been anywhere NEAR as memorable if Austin didn't pass out in a pool of his own blood. It was so essential to what that match was trying to do, and it was perfect.

Blood should be used VERY sparingly, imo, just to enhance stories much like Austin/bret.

 

[XXJJ]

Honestly I dont really miss it. I thought Orton and Christian had a great cage match. I really didn't even think about wanting to see blood during that match.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I don't understand this near obsession some internet fans have with blood. WWE has proven time after time after time that blood isn't necessary to have a great hardcore/no DQ/no holds barred match. They've been proving it over and over for the better part of 3 years.

Blood was always intended to be something of a prop used to help sell the violence of a particular match. It's not supposed to be the centerpiece of the match, however, and I don't see why some see it that way. It's not particularly needed or necessary.

Besides, think of all the various diseases that are out there. Desmond Wolfe, AKA Nigel McGuinness, is rumored to have Hepatitis C. As a result, his in-ring career is pretty much over. If he bled, even accidentally, onto another wrestler during a match then he could wind up infecting that person. Back around 2005 when Randy Orton & The Undertaker were feuding, Bob Orton, Jr. was involved in some of the matches. He bladed during a few of the matches and bled all over Taker. Orton hadn't revealed, however, that he'd had one type of Hepatitis in the past and Taker understandably flipped out and Bob Orton, Jr.'s deal with WWE was cancelled. What if a wrestler goes out and winds up catching the clap or HIV from some ring rat then, bleeds in a match a few weeks down the road and winds up infecting the guy he's in the ring with?

As I said, it's not needed. It's an outdated wrestling tradition that should be left in the past just like chairshots to the head.

 

[Twanfusco]

Those who are saying people are obsessed with bringing back blood clearly didn't read the original post and subsequent replies. Not one comment above this indicates that anyone is "obsessed" with seeing blood brought back. Forums are designed for discussion and my original post posed a question as to whether the use of blood, sparingly, would be effective and fit in with the current product, especially as programming has become a little edgier. Get off your high horse and give an actual educated opinion on the matter instead of bashing other people's without properly reading their comments.

 

[Attitude Era Junkie]

They should definately only use blood in more heated feuds. Having blood in almost every other match like they used to got a little on the stupid side. I can see them using blood in the match between HHH and CM Punk since it's personal.

 

[Snoe]

Blood is never NEEDED, but I think that if used rarely that it would be great for shock value, for example taker vs. hhh with the chairshot (not blood but shocking) . Anyway, some of my friends said that wrestlers used fake blood packets. I think that that fake blood would work great. It would take away the risk of hepatitis or hiv but would still look real. Also if used sparingly, in my opinion would be great.

 

[boozinjedi]

In these days of hepatitis and HIV awareness,blood from blading should never be used.Too much blood has in the past has lessened it shock value.

It's the accidental blood now that make it look so much more real.

We've seen guys midway through a match get bloody lip/mouth or a busted up nose.

It's that little bit of blood that better sells the rivalry of a match.

 

[DethMetal]

I think blood should be used only during huge matches filled with emotion/ sparingly. Example, a steel cage match does not need blood. Christian and Orton proved that a couple of weeks ago. However, I feel if there is a last man standing match, implying that you will go to whatever lengths to defeat your opponent, there should be a tad bit of blood. Not to the point where they look like they've been in war, but enough to add the image of, "Wow. He's really trying to put him away here." So in conclusion, not all the time. Also, I think the Attitude marks need to get over their blood fetish.

 

[FunKay the Inevitable]

Thing about blood is, it was overused for years and years. We saw it almost every PPV. These days it's a rarity to see blood, mostly due to the fact that blading's been outlawed by WWE. It allows for a safer working environment and to be honest, makes it a wee bit more pleasant to watch. Don't get me wrong, blood can be great, when used correctly. WrestleMania 13: Bret vs. Austin, wouldn't be the same without Austin bleeding. It simply wouldn't. However, using it on a regular basis takes the shock and awe out of blood being spilled. There’s still room for it in wrestling g, just not in the same way it was throughout the Attitude Era and beyond.

 

[byrnside]

This is actually a really interesting top, especially if you're trying to stray away from the whole "PG-Era" argument.

Personally, I don't see any problem with the lack of blood or, for that matter, the entire PG Era.

I recently saw an interview that Triple H did on [I believe] MSNBC. Basically the Attitude Era was brought up and how it was so risque and different than what the product we've got now. Triple H was saying that the main reason why they've toned down the hardcore aspect specifically was because there was too much of it. It was watered down. When you have something that you consistently are seeing too much of at some point you're going to get bored, so you need to pull it back and continue to pull it back that way we're weaning ourselves off of something we see all the time.

That being said, I think that there's absolutely no reason or need to have blood in every single match or even during every single event for that matter. If the product is too watered down with blood then it's not special. One of the most special things about the Hart/Austin Wrestlemania match is that Austin was busted up. That didn't happen very often in the mid-90s which added so much more to an already awesome match. Remember a year or so ago when John Cena was actually busted open on accident and the paramedics came down and patched him. That had all of us talking for a few days about how crazy it was because we had grown so accustomed to the whole PG aspect.

 

[Yesiamaduck]

I think the reason the isn't blood isn't so much to do with the PG rating but more to do with the safety of their stars and to appease certain sponsors. They are worried about unnecessarily large amount of blood loss and various infections being transmitted amongst wrestlers, staff and audience members.

That being said if they regulated the amount of blood then I can see it making a come back down the line maybe, if they saved it only for the big blow off matches... but still I'm more sure it will never come back in the WWE. That being said I'm glad that they no longer stop matches due to bleeding anymore and the announcer acknowledge it again.