What WWE can learn from old school British wrestling

[arkady]

A few months ago, Steve Regal tweeted a link to a YouTube channel that had many matches from Britain's "World of Sport" program that ran in the '70s and '80s.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6YW9Xcp07s[/YOUTUBE]

I have discovered a whole new way to love wrestling.

The big, cartoon characters are few and far between, matches are much more technical, and still brilliant.

I know there are fans of this style in the WWE, and I think the WWE can take a few things from it:

1. Knockouts - any time a wrestler is down and released, they must stand before a count of 10, or be considered knocked out.

This really adds a whole new dimension to beatdown - especially with continuation moves banned (i.e. if your opponent was down, and you'd released them, you had to allow them to stand - I wouldn't introduce that to WWE, though). It gets a more rhythmic quality to it, there's extra tension as the face tries to get back to their feet, knowing they'll be pounced on the moment they stand. It also gives really dominant guys a way to really dominate their opponent.

2. Public warnings - the referees had more bite in those days, and could issue a public warning to a wrestler breaking the rules, but not enough to get themselves disqualified. A third public warning resulted in a disqualification.

Introducing this forced heels to be more sneaky to get away with cheating (making them look smarter) and could more realistically lead to faces being unfairly disqualified. Also, referees in modern wrestling really lack any power to enforce the rules, except threat of DQ.

There's also an amusing moment in one match (I forget which) where the referee tries to break a hold on the ropes, by putting one guy in a headlock and pulling him away.

3. More face vs. face matches - these matches show pure wrestling at its finest, with stories being told through hold and counter-hold, as well as the feel-good effect and demonstrations of good sportsmanship. A rarity these days.


Can I see it happening? Never.
Should it happen? What do you think?

 

[Silly Willy Nilly Vanilly in the Milly]

I will agree and say that Old Skool Brit Wrestling is good.
Now, in order:
1. Knockouts - any time a wrestler is down and released, they must stand before a count of 10, or be considered knocked out.
That does seem pretty interesting, but isn't that pretty much LMS?
2. Public warnings - the referees had more bite in those days, and could issue a public warning to a wrestler breaking the rules, but not enough to get themselves disqualified. A third public warning resulted in a disqualification.
I am not really sure how to see that one... it depends on how the wrestler sells "breaking the rules."
3. More face vs. face matches - these matches show pure wrestling at its finest, with stories being told through hold and counter-hold, as well as the feel-good effect and demonstrations of good sportsmanship. A rarity these days.
Yes and no. It makes for good TV, because people really have to pay attention and see which face they prefer. On the other hand, traditional face vs. heel is just as entertaining.
Just my personal thoughts.

 

[arkady]

1. Knockouts - any time a wrestler is down and released, they must stand before a count of 10, or be considered knocked out.
That does seem pretty interesting, but isn't that pretty much LMS?

The key difference between this and Last Man Standing is that pins and submissions don't count for LMS.

 

[Peoples_Champ]

Do you know how long it took to get the first strike in that match? 7:38. Seven and a half minutes of holds. The current consumers of the product wouldn't support a grappling match, they want action. There are elements of a grappling match that should be incorporated (HBK, Angle, Bret all had grappling elements involved in their matches), but to have something purely grappling oriented is ridiculous IMO.

As someone else mentioned, WWE already has the Last Man Standing match. Incorporating that into every match would dilute the prestige of the LMS match. I agree referees should be more vocal and a bigger influence on the decision, but going beyond the current rules is a bad idea as well. I would like to see referees give out a few more DQs once in awhile, just to show that they should be respected.

Random face v. face matches is a good idea, but they need to have a storyline to it. Why are 'good guys' fighting each other? A champion could do this easily by saying he's going to take all comers (or hell, Laurinitis saying Punk has to face his friend *insert face name here* could work too). But the point is that there needs to be a rationale behind it.

 

[arkady]

Do you know how long it took to get the first strike in that match? 7:38. Seven and a half minutes of holds. The current consumers of the product wouldn't support a grappling match, they want action. There are elements of a grappling match that should be incorporated (HBK, Angle, Bret all had grappling elements involved in their matches), but to have something purely grappling oriented is ridiculous IMO.

I hate to say it, but I think you're right about this. It's a shame that fans of wrestling couldn't appreciate skilful grappling. That said - the pops and fans reaction to Jericho vs Punk at WM28 when they started doing chain reversals was amazing, so maybe they could appreciate it.

I certainly think, however, that wrestling - particularly in the US - is too orientated towards punchkick and that they could certainly afford to be more grapple heavy.

As someone else mentioned, WWE already has the Last Man Standing match. Incorporating that into every match would dilute the prestige of the LMS match.

Disagree here. Most matches would still be finished by pinfall or submission, and LMS would be special in that those finishes can't be used, and you have no choice but to beat your opponent into lying down.

I agree referees should be more vocal and a bigger influence on the decision, but going beyond the current rules is a bad idea as well. I would like to see referees give out a few more DQs once in awhile, just to show that they should be respected.

The public warning system would give referees more teeth. Then again, so would referees doing this more often:

[YOUTUBE]http://youtu.be/7XGqWWJGGgQ?t=1m15s[/YOUTUBE]
(Referee puts a wrestler in a headlock to break up a hold)

The public warnings are a tool to be used, and - I think - a good addition to the storyteller's toolbox. As I said, you could use them to make the face feel persecuted by the referee, or you could use them to show the heel getting caught out.

Random face v. face matches is a good idea, but they need to have a storyline to it. Why are 'good guys' fighting each other? A champion could do this easily by saying he's going to take all comers (or hell, Laurinitis saying Punk has to face his friend *insert face name here* could work too). But the point is that there needs to be a rationale behind it.

Why do they need a story? Not every match needs a story going into it. These guys are wrestlers, and they chose to wrestle to prove they are the best wrestlers. Any combat sport promotion could say "right, you two are similar styles, and about the same prestige. Let's see who's better."

It's not main event stuff, but having some simple, entertaining matches where the writers don't have to come up with background would lead to more time for the main event storylines, as well as make the main events that much more special because of the very fact they have storylines.

Who wouldn't enjoy stuff like this on the midcard more regularly?

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Byx1qM50C_I&feature=plcp&context=C4086ab9VDvjVQa1PpcFMzDUHQ_ghUgW6fbRtqmQVJeGs30cCgacM=[/YOUTUBE]