But equally so did Maeda, his methods of shoot style wrestling would affect how things would pan out. Injurying Chōshū' was not part of the matches planned, naturally we don't know what was, but because of this audience's lost out because they would pay to see Chōshū', only their time and money was wasted for a month because they couldn't see one of the most influencial Japanese wrestlers because another guy took him out. While Brody wasted money for one match at least, Maeda had wasted a month's worth of money on top of two matches being ruined because of his ego and shoot methods.
Once again, I feel you're completely downplaying Bruiser Brody to make your boy, Maeda, look more unprofessional. Let's face it, Bruiser Brody was
light years ahead of Maeda in pro-wrestling fame, and had a world-reknown reputation for his unprofessional antics on WELL more than one occasion in the ring. However, Bruiser Brody went on to become a sensation in
many territories across the world (and brought his bad reputation with him to every territory he worked for), while Maeda was limited to New Japan.
Sometimes, over an extended period of time, we become comfortable in our place of employment and find ease in rebelling against our superiors. Maeda was with New Japan for his entire career, so his rebellion and unprofessionalism came easy. On the other hand, Bruiser Brody rebelled in
13 different territories. This obviously proved that he disrespected many more wrestlers than Maeda, more promoters, more bookers, and more fans. Brody is the epitomy of unprofessionalism.
Furthermore, Maeda only wrestled for 9 years (1978-1987), and only carried his bad reputation for three of them! His real-life feud with promoter Antonio Inoki only started in 1984 after his stint as a part of the Japanese UWF. However, Bruiser Brody wrestled for 15 years, and his bad reputation was carried with him for the majority of them. Due to his quick success in the states in the many territories that he was a part of (not to mention his alignment with Stan Hansen), his popularity (and ego) grew at an unprecedented rate. And along with his ego, his bad reputation as a liability grew just as quickly.
But even so, Brody was sought out as a wrestler, he would still have arenas booked out to see him, but yet on the other end, Maeda was suspended and fired as a result of his carelessness towards another human being. That is a pure result of unprofessionalism, Brody was sought after still even after his antics with Luger, but Maeda was fired, he had to start his own company to put himself back over again.
First of all, back in the 70's and 80's, if a wrestler was popular and healthy, they were going to get booked if they could put butts in the seats, entertain, and draw money for promoters, regardless of their reputation. That is the entire point of pro-wrestling... it is a form of entertainment in which someone in the shadows is sitting back and collecting their payday as a result of the show they produce with the best talent they could find. That talent was Bruiser Brody, not Akira Maeda.
As for the rest of your reply, I don't see where this makes one person's antics more unprofessional than the other. The backlash and consequences of a person's actions (in terms of punishment) does not make them more unprofessional. If Maeda wrestled stiff in his six-man tag match and DIDN'T injure Chōshū', your argument wouldn't hold water. The fact is that Chōshū'
was indeed injured, but it was a result of stiff wrestling, a style that is extremely common to this day (and possibly more severe, in some instances.) However, Brody's actions were not common and still aren't to this present day.
It's much like Mr. Kennedy was accused of nearly injurying Orton in his one match return and got fired because of it, yet when there's guys who don't sell, they'll get a telling off or maybe a warning. The fact is on the rare occasions when a legitmate injury may come from any unprofessionalism or endangering another carelessly, it costs them their job.
So what you're trying to say is that just because Maeda was fired and Brody wasn't, THAT makes Maeda's actions more unprofessional??
First off, Kennedy is a terrible example here. He was fired for
many more reasons than botching a move on the WWE's top heel. The man was injury prone, a violator of drug policies, a liar to the public about his drug habits, a man who lost his physique after failing drug policies (thereby becoming less appealing to the audience), amonst other issues that I will fail to mention here.
Let's face it... most pro-wrestlers get away with MANY wrong-doings over the course of their career. Even Hulk Hogan admitted that he wasn't the best employee for a wrestling company to employ. To quote Hogan, he said "If you're friends with everyone, then you're not making any money." There is a good chance that Maeda's disagreements and altercations with Inoki came into play when it came to his demise with New Japan. A lot of Maeda's problems with Inoki had to do with Maeda being stupid and stubborn. However,
all of his mistakes during his time with the company don't fall under the category of being "unprofessional." Let's be real here... he isn't the first person in history to ever disagree with his boss about his job duties. And so he was fired for one of his rebellious actions... so what? Just because you get fired from a job doesn't mean you were being "unprofessional." People get fired from jobs for many other reasons besides that.
Now, I highly doubt that if the same thing happened to Triple H, Shawn Michaels, or John Cena, they'd fire them. But none of this matters. The fact of the matter is that Maeda was expendable, so he was much easier to fire than Brody.
Maeda's match with André wasn't one that ended like a normal, nor did it act like a normal show. People were questioning why the match was not worknig like a story being told. It wasn't worked, these two weren't playing off each other, and much like no-selling, it breaks character too because the rhythm of the match goes completely and whatever is planned doesn't go into place. André layed down when he was winning to stop the debate, where he was garanteed a win, he was professional enough to lay down for Maeda to pin him and he still didn't take it.
Regardless, the match actually
occurred. Brody's match never even went past 3 minutes, and it was the main event of the card! After Luger walked off, the crowd had
nothing to watch, after paying their hard earned money to see a main event cage match between Luger and Brody.
This is similar to two well-documented mistakes made by WCW on the road to their demise...
Bash at the Beach 2000 - The PPV had Hulk Hogan facing off against Jeff Jarrett for the WCW Championship. The controversy of Jarrett laying down for Hogan occurred and the crowd was bewildered, but they still got the see another main event at the end of the night, some controversy, and no one really complained much.
However...
Halloween Havoc 1998 - Diamond Dallas Page was set to face Goldberg in the main event but there was one problem... WCW ran out of time and the PPV feed was cut off for all the people that purchased it! As a result of viewers NOT being able to see the main event of the card, WCW was forced to refund
millions of dollars to their viewers!
This proves that a controversial match will always be a bigger draw than a match that never even occurs!
Maeda's "controversial" actions in his six-man tag match couldn't even compare to Brody's match that never even occurred, therefore this proves Brody to be
much more unprofessional.
Both methods of unprofessional break the magic, but shooting in a match is where the rules go beyond just annoying your opponent, audience and backstage, it becomes a brawl more than anything, it takes it from a wrestling match to a simple "street fight", magic is broken because they aren't telling a story of wrestling, where no selling does similiar, it still says "this is a wrestling match" to the audience.
I see your point, but Brody's match never fully occurred, so how could a non-existent match tell a story? And he didn't just "annoy" Luger as you so eloquently stated... he pushed Luger to the point where a man who was trying to be
professional had to act
unprofessionally by walking out on a match, only minutes after it began. So Brody not only acted unprofessional himself, but caused his opponent to do so in the process! I guess Brody actually found a way to make unprofessionalism
contagious LOL!!
I disagree here, and as stated above, they both can be similiar taken, but no selling does break the magic, but equally shooting and wrestling stiff ruins match endings, affects momentum and also affects careers, if these didn't exist, there wouldn't be reminders of "Don't try this at home" because they don't know how to wrestle, which is affectly what wrestling stiff would be in some cases.
But a stiff wrestling match is still a
wrestling match. It's still entertainment. An wrestling ring surrounded by a steel cage with
no competitors can't be put in that category.
Another matter I wanted to bring is one person that links the two together. Antonio Inoki. Both our cases have had problems with this man, where Brody and Inoki refused to put each over in their matches, Maeda refused to work in a money making programme with Inoki, because Maeda refused to do so, he cost the company money because they couldn't give the feuds people wanted. Where unprofessionalism can affect the views of how the audience see wrestling, it also is about how the company is affected from not making the most out of the available roster they have.
Absolutely. Antonio Inoki is the funny link to the occurrences that we have both cited. But, Inoki was only a link to Maeda's unprofessionalism. Brody was unprofessional in many other wrestling promotions throughout the world, as I stated earlier.
In Summary
Whilst I agree with D-Man that Brody was unprofessional in his manner of no-selling moves in his matches, it does affect the match but it's a controversial subject of wrestling that still gets further debated as wrestlers of today like Triple H and Hulk Hogan are playing out this problem, whether they are professionals or not, no selling becomes a more accepted characteristic, regardless of whether it breaks the magic, the matches tend to continue and have a resulted finish.
On the opposite hand, shooting and wrestling stiff are parts of wrestling that are unplanned and dangerous when a wrestler begins to implement them in their system. It affects the careers of wrestlers who are hurt and injured by a man who shoots in wrestling, but it's break a code of trust and respect because the more a man becomes unsafe with this method of wrestling, the less likely people are to work with them.
Once again, you're blurring two forms of "no-selling." Hogan and Triple H's versions of no-selling are a part of the
story that they tell in the ring. And the build-up for the story (as well as the direction of the characters) are determined by the booker, in this case Vince McMahon. You can't blame HHH or Hogan for acting strong during a matchup. In the end, they do exactly what they are told by their booker/promoter.
In the case of Bruiser Brody vs. Akira Maeda, while both are unprofessional in their manner, Brody's manner of no selling did affect the chemistry and magic of wrestling, but he was still a highly sought out wrestler by all companies who tried to get him to pen in a contract until his unfortunate murder, compared to Maeda who got suspended and fired because of his actions and couldn't even find work with other companies, eventually he had to start his own company to put himself back on the map. Just look at the comparison there, surely the more unprofessional man would be the one people least want to work with because he is more dangerous and unreliable compared to man who may not sell the magic of wrestling, but it's a factor we accept nowadays.
Which is why I strongly believe that while Bruiser Brody was quite an unprofessional wrestler with his no selling, he's not as unprofessional as Akira Maeda, a man who wrestles in a dangerous manner of shooting in his matches and causes more controversy wherever he goes to the point where he can't even be hired!
I've already covered Phoenix's entire
Summary and thoroughly proved it to be inconsistent. To avoid repeating myself, I highly recommend that the judges read my previous statements that completely contradict and rebut Phoenix's
Summary, clearly proving its inaccuracies.
And in closing, I'd like to mention something important...
Phoenix, in a previous post you mentioned the following:
Selling is a key part of wrestling, naturally, but where week in week out we will note of whether a wrestler is selling or not, it comes more down to their reputation to do this or not.
Since you're saying that unprofessionalism is a result of reputation (which, in wrestling, can be mistaken for self-indulgence as a result of inflated popularity), Brody's worldwide popularity in
multiple territories throughout the world tramples over Maeda's popularity in only
one territory. Therefore, in addition to my proof,
your own words insinuate that Brody was far more unprofessional than Maeda.
