Why Are We Obsessed With Clean Finishes?

[The Brain]

Last night we saw Seth Rollins vs. Dean Ambrose in a Hell in a Cell match as the main event of a WWE pay per view. Last night we saw Seth Rollins vs. Dean Ambrose in a Hell in a Cell match as the main event of a WWE pay per view.

That wasn't a mistake on my part. I typed that out twice just so you could have the opportunity to have it sink in a bit more. The way I've heard a lot of people talk about these guys over the past few years that sounds like a wet dream come true. This is what so many have been asking for and they finally got it. It's just not enough though is it? I didn't read the whole thing but the LD from last night has a lot of complaints about the finish. You would think that was the first time someone lost a match due to outside interference.

I don't mean to be so condescending (well I guess I do since I thought these things out and clicked submit reply instead of said it to someone in the heat of the moment) but my arrogant attitude aside what was really the problem with the finish last night? I don't want to fall into the trap of putting a giant IWC label on everyone and assume everyone except me has the same opinion but why are so many obsessed with a clean finish? This is professional wrestling. Outside interference and controversial finishes have been a part of wrestling for decades. This is nothing new. In fact that beloved Attitude Era that did such big business and everyone craves so much (damn that condescending attitude and IWC label rearing its ugly head again) was full of controversial finishes. You hardly ever saw a clean one in a big match in those days. Why is it so important all of a sudden to have clean finishes all the time?

I'm in the middle of Road Warrior Animal's book. In just about every significant match he discusses there is hardly ever a clean finish. Most were DQ, double DQ, or double count out. Even the titles the won and lost in Japan were a result of count out in order “to protect everyone involved.” I was surprised that the most dominant tag team of all time rarely got a clean win unless it was against clearly weaker opponents (mostly job or borderline job guys) but the point is even during wrestling's two big boom periods even some of the most popular stars rarely got what would be considered clean wins.

Far be it for me to tell anyone what they should or should not like. Maybe if we were members of this forum in 1987 or 1997 we would be complaining about the finishes then too. It just seemed to me by the way some people were talking that they were surprised by this kind of finish because stuff like that never happens in main event matches, when in reality it's happened for years and years.

 

[Kidpolean]

Last night we saw Seth Rollins vs. Dean Ambrose in a Hell in a Cell match as the main event of a WWE pay per view. Last night we saw Seth Rollins vs. Dean Ambrose in a Hell in a Cell match as the main event of a WWE pay per view.

That wasn't a mistake on my part. I typed that out twice just so you could have the opportunity to have it sink in a bit more. The way I've heard a lot of people talk about these guys over the past few years that sounds like a wet dream come true. This is what so many have been asking for and they finally got it. It's just not enough though is it? I didn't read the whole thing but the LD from last night has a lot of complaints about the finish. You would think that was the first time someone lost a match due to outside interference.

I don't mean to be so condescending (well I guess I do since I thought these things out and clicked submit reply instead of said it to someone in the heat of the moment) but my arrogant attitude aside what was really the problem with the finish last night? I don't want to fall into the trap of putting a giant IWC label on everyone and assume everyone except me has the same opinion but why are so many obsessed with a clean finish? This is professional wrestling. Outside interference and controversial finishes have been a part of wrestling for decades. This is nothing new. In fact that beloved Attitude Era that did such big business and everyone craves so much (damn that condescending attitude and IWC label rearing its ugly head again) was full of controversial finishes. You hardly ever saw a clean one in a big match in those days. Why is it so important all of a sudden to have clean finishes all the time?

I'm in the middle of Road Warrior Animal's book. In just about every significant match he discusses there is hardly ever a clean finish. Most were DQ, double DQ, or double count out. Even the titles the won and lost in Japan were a result of count out in order “to protect everyone involved.” I was surprised that the most dominant tag team of all time rarely got a clean win unless it was against clearly weaker opponents (mostly job or borderline job guys) but the point is even during wrestling's two big boom periods even some of the most popular stars rarely got what would be considered clean wins.

Far be it for me to tell anyone what they should or should not like. Maybe if we were members of this forum in 1987 or 1997 we would be complaining about the finishes then too. It just seemed to me by the way some people were talking that they were surprised by this kind of finish because stuff like that never happens in main event matches, when in reality it's happened for years and years.

I agree. What's funny to me is that the AE is so loved yet this is probably the era that contained the most non clean finishes. Every main even involved the corporation, the ministry, or just about any random person on the roster interfering. Every match had a spot where the ref was knocked out. Hell look at WM15's finish, it was ridiculous. If that happened today people would be pissed and threaten to stop watching.

 

[LBGetBack]

When the match appears to be the final one of a LONG feud(this went on for a good 5-6 months, right?), there should be a decisive finish. The time for all the shenanigans was earlier in the feud.(and we got them....nobody complained like this back then).

Blowoff match to a feud? C'mon, don't give us that.

Not to mention, it was corny as hell. Smoke and holograms or something, followed by Bray's awful spider walk(just waiting for someone to stomp him out when he does that). Terrible.

 

[Starkiller]

I think because all of the classic matches, most memorable matches have had clean finishes. Usually I find a controversial finish usually degrades the match. Also, a controversial finish is a way of protecting a wrestlers stalk. That's why me personally, I always loved seeing guys like bret even as a champion be able to put guys over clean and ot hurting his stalk. Guys today like orton, punk have put guys over clean and were able to do it without hurting their value. Then comes guys like Cena. It seems won't put anyone over Clean because it could be a risk to his character.

Cena did put over Brock Clean at SS, and the rock at WM which are 2 stars with legend status. So it doesn't hurt him any since he always gets his redemption match.

He did put over Bryan Clean at SS when he pretty much had to since Bryan was basically an overwhelming top face with everyone and their grandma, but not to make excuses, Cena did have a bandaged up elbow that match and had to immediately talk about getting surgery to repair it Which sidelined him a few weeks. Maybe if cena didn't have that Injury and was 100% it would of been a different finish.


I think the reason why people dont like controversial finishes is because it's too predictable and is a cop out to save face.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

I grew up as a fan of Jim Crockett Promotions in the 80s, so I've got two words for you:

Dusty Finish.

If you've ever been subjected to those on a never-ending basis, you would be partial to clean finishes too.

 

[davy g]

I too am from the old school I grew up with Verne Gagnes' promotion, so to me its like us as fans already know that this is fake, so please don't make it anymore phony then it already is . The Attitude Era was before the popularity of reality shows and UFC, figure in that you have Brock as champion and it makes it seem as if WWE is trying to be somewhat realistic, then when you factor in this is a unescapable structure, it adds to the frustration. And may I add who wouldn't in true life just kick Bray Wyatts face in, if he came at you upside down like that !!

 

[Mudlup50]

A controversial finish is a way of protecting a wrestlers stalk. That's why me personally, I always loved seeing guys like bret even as a champion be able to put guys over clean and not hurting his stalk.

Stalk? Are you sure you don't mean stock? Not being a dick just curious if there's a term I don't know hidden in there


Anyway to the main point, I think the problem is that a DQ finish seems to happen every...single...week. On Raw for instance, Cena was about to win and Kane interfered. Okay whatever. Last night, like 4 people interfered for Rollins! Yet Ambrose still looked like the better wrestler? What about last week on Raw what happened in the main event? Probably a dirty finish. How about at Night Of Champions? Anybody remember that Cena/Lesnar match's ending? O yea...dirty finish

I personally don't have a problem with them if there's a point. And not to start a feud. To be fair, even then I'll make a pass for it. When Seth interfered I was okay with it, knowing that Lesnar would be gone meant Cena needed something for his character to do...seems fair to me. But for Dean/Seth who have been feuding on and off for 5 months, to end their Hell In A Cell match dirty...just rubs me the wrong way.

It felt like a cop out, we don't want either guy to lose so how about we make it so Dean is basically having a 1 v 5 match...yea thanks WWE. Kane was to be expected, Mercury and Noble...okay I guess they're Rollins' bitches now too, but also Bray Wyatt? And it's not even like he sided with the Authority..he's just targeting Dean. If a few weeks ago we saw some hinting towards this, it'd be different. It just seems like WWE had no idea what to do with: the match, Dean and Bray so they put together a crappy finish like this.

But I'm not trying to complain here xD just trying to explain why I was upset with it. Also add to that, Cena won his rematch and Ziggler dominated Cesaro in a 2 of 3 falls match and my results looked like crap.

 

[Navi]

Last night we saw Seth Rollins vs. Dean Ambrose in a Hell in a Cell match as the main event of a WWE pay per view. Last night we saw Seth Rollins vs. Dean Ambrose in a Hell in a Cell match as the main event of a WWE pay per view.

That wasn't a mistake on my part. I typed that out twice just so you could have the opportunity to have it sink in a bit more. The way I've heard a lot of people talk about these guys over the past few years that sounds like a wet dream come true. This is what so many have been asking for and they finally got it. It's just not enough though is it? I didn't read the whole thing but the LD from last night has a lot of complaints about the finish. You would think that was the first time someone lost a match due to outside interference.

Since I was one of the ones complaining last night I can answer it for you, but only for my own reasons.

One of the best things to happen in wrestling for a long time happened a couple of years ago. We saw the Shield emerge and unlike other factions, these three guys, each in their own way, in my opinion, made the perfect wrestler. Ambrose was nuts and a brawler, Rollins the brains and the high flyer and Reigns the powerhouse finisher. For two years these three acted on their own, taking on everyone and anyone who came along. They didn't need anyone else and didn't play well with others. The Shield by far is one of the best factions that the WWE ever produced, and they were booked perfectly.

5 months ago that all came to an end when Rollins turned his back and sold the other two out. I've been waiting for 5 months to see Rollins get what's coming to him, and that's the beating of a lifetime, kayafe terms only, not in reality.

All this time Ambrose has tried to get his hands on him and failed. Either Rollins has run away, or hid behind others. Like another poster said, we've had shenanigans a plenty in this feud. No matter who they've tried to put into the middle of it, the crux of the feud has always been Ambrose getting revenge for what Rollins did to him and Reigns and last night was his chance.

It was almost a perfect match right from the get go. Ambrose on top of the cage acting like the Lunatic Fringe he is, and taking on more than one, which has become the norm. When he finally got Rollins in that cell I was hoping it would be something special and it was, right up until the lights went out. Again there was interference, not by Kane, or HHH or any of the usual players, but by of all people Bray Wyatt. The guy who can't get elevated in this sport, even though some of the best have tried.

Now I know clean finishes are few and far between now, God knows we have to keep the soap opera going, but in this case, it was needed. This is the one feud this year that actually had a good storyline with it, it had feeling behind it and they ruined it. Am I pissed off, no more disappointed than anything else. A clean finish wouldn't have hurt either one of these guys. Everyone wanted to see Rollins get his ass handed to him, and Ambrose deserved to win with all he's been through.

So there you go, that's how I feel about it, and some of the history as to why I feel that way. Take it for what it is.

 

[Starkiller]

Stalk? Are you sure you don't mean stock? Not being a dick just curious if there's a term I don't know hidden in there


Anyway to the main point, I think the problem is that a DQ finish seems to happen every...single...week. On Raw for instance, Cena was about to win and Kane interfered. Okay whatever. Last night, like 4 people interfered for Rollins! Yet Ambrose still looked like the better wrestler? What about last week on Raw what happened in the main event? Probably a dirty finish. How about at Night Of Champions? Anybody remember that Cena/Lesnar match's ending? O yea...dirty finish

I personally don't have a problem with them if there's a point. And not to start a feud. To be fair, even then I'll make a pass for it. When Seth interfered I was okay with it, knowing that Lesnar would be gone meant Cena needed something for his character to do...seems fair to me. But for Dean/Seth who have been feuding on and off for 5 months, to end their Hell In A Cell match dirty...just rubs me the wrong way.

It felt like a cop out, we don't want either guy to lose so how about we make it so Dean is basically having a 1 v 5 match...yea thanks WWE. Kane was to be expected, Mercury and Noble...okay I guess they're Rollins' bitches now too, but also Bray Wyatt? And it's not even like he sided with the Authority..he's just targeting Dean. If a few weeks ago we saw some hinting towards this, it'd be different. It just seems like WWE had no idea what to do with: the match, Dean and Bray so they put together a crappy finish like this.

But I'm not trying to complain here xD just trying to explain why I was upset with it. Also add to that, Cena won his rematch and Ziggler dominated Cesaro in a 2 of 3 falls match and my results looked like crap.

Sorry 'stock' not stalk. You are correct, I tend to have many discrepancies as I'm mostly posting from my smart phone and using swype text, so sometimes the auto correct puts in the wrong word. I really should re read my posts more....


But k agree with your points. Why are they so worried, with a cop out finish, everyone wins.

 

[Alastor]

I was one of those in the LD as well. I was for a clean finish in that match because Ambrose and Rollins seemed like a personal feud that deserved it. From the career threatening cinderblocks spot I felt it warranted a decisive victory in who is the better man. I'm not one of those that is against outside interference but I don't like it when someone with no history with the participants interrupt for no reason and has a decisive impact on the outcome of a very personal feud. Sure Wyatts have run ins with the shield but that doesn't explain why he would pick a side in this fight. It just felt like a macguffin instead of finishing the Ambrose/Rollins feud.

I don't think we are surprised things like this happen, doesn't mean we have to agree it was the 'most logical' ending.

 

[MC_Live]

I'm hopeful for two reasons coming out of last night. 1) Ambrose and Wyatt will be awesome and 2) Ambrose and Rollins aren't done. If they get a finish like that, then they will have unfinished business. And that means somewhere down the line, Ambrose Rollins part II will happen.

As far as complaining about the finish, it depends on how you look at it. I think that PPV's are suppose to be about finality. Leave the screwy nonsense finishes to RAW and SmackDown on free TV. When money is paid, their should be a clean winner and a clean loser. Just think about it. After around 4 or 5 months, it was finally time to see Ambrose pin Rollins. Finally, he would get his moment to stand victorious, and I paid $9.99 to see it. And then... Wyatt. It's a little disappointing. But like I said, I'm hopeful.

 

[Navi]

I'm hopeful for two reasons coming out of last night. 1) Ambrose and Wyatt will be awesome and 2) Ambrose and Rollins aren't done. If they get a finish like that, then they will have unfinished business. And that means somewhere down the line, Ambrose Rollins part II will happen.

As far as complaining about the finish, it depends on how you look at it. I think that PPV's are suppose to be about finality. Leave the screwy nonsense finishes to RAW and SmackDown on free TV. When money is paid, their should be a clean winner and a clean loser. Just think about it. After around 4 or 5 months, it was finally time to see Ambrose pin Rollins. Finally, he would get his moment to stand victorious, and I paid $9.99 to see it. And then... Wyatt. It's a little disappointing. But like I said, I'm hopeful.

I think that Wyatt is crap in the ring, great on the mic, but all he has is that spider walk of his. Other than that he's really nothing. So I have little faith in this upcoming feud. Ambrose will be great and Wyatt will be the same as he's been in all his other feuds, nothing.

And I totally agree about PPV's being about ending feuds, especially this one which has gone on and brought so many along with it. The WWE took the cheap way out and in another 3 months when the Ambrose/Wyatt feud is finished, the air will already be out of the balloon. Fans like myself who invested an interest into it will have lost interest, and quite honestly I'm not willing to be dragged along for another 5 months. it's over, Rollins won and Ambrose and the fans got screwed over again.

 

[SquizzRodgers]

I think as wrestling a fans, we all expect certain things to happen from time to time regarding how a match will end. Interference, DQ, count-outs, etc.

The problem I have is that a PPV main event should almost always have a clean finish. People are expected to spend their money to watch a show, so as a business who decides outcomes, why would you want to make your customers feel cheated. The whole point of a PPV main event is to settle a score or battle for a title. People want to see a winner. Not a match ending just to set up another feud. That's what free television is for.

And the talk of protecting guys thru finishes has always drove me crazy. If two guys put on a hell of a match and the finish is that one guy hits his finisher and scores the pin fall, how does that hurt the loser? You're wrestling in the main event or a top match, so it's understood your opponent is quality. And if you go toe to toe with your opponent and lose because of one mistake it doesn't hurt anyone going forward, in fact I'd argue it makes the character better by allowing them to use the learn from my mistakes mentality, or the it was his night mentality. Unless you get squashed, a clean loss doesn't hurt a character.

And just to add, two of my biggest problems right now are these god damn false finishes where every big match is almost required now to have multiple kick outs of finishers. I blame Taker-HBK WM25 for that. Brilliant match, but since than everybody has copied that formula it seems. And the other is the god damn trading wins and losses on TV. I'm not clamoring to bring back jobbers, but if everybody is the same than who am I investing in?

 

[Bythedockofthebay]

I think that alot of times people overthink this stuff. To me Heels getting clean wins is just stupid most of the time. There are time IE. Brock Lesnar, it makes total sense. But honestly, Logic should dictate Faces beat heels clean, Heels have to cheat to win.

The main reason Heels are Heels is because without cheating they can't beat the more talented face. Face vs Face matches should be clean imo. That goes without saying. But the seth story is easy to tell. He turned on the shield to get ahead because he needed the help of the authority to become a success. He'd be the man left behind in the group.

In no way should Seth beat Dean, Roman, or Cena clean. Because if he does why does he need the authority? Just like Shawn Michaels in 1997 with Taker. Imo the best HITC ever. Shawn couldn't beat Taker straight up, in no way. But Shawn could get lucky, or cheat to beat him. Shawn was far luckier than Seth. Shawn had Kane come out and help him. Think shawn knew about that? Think Kane and Shawn discussed it? NO!!!!

The only thing that I will say kind of hurts is the fact Kane and Taker had a built in story. That's the only thing this was missing. Why did Bray do it? That's the only question. Why didn't they have SOME encounter with Bray and Dean before hand. Even something small would've work.

Unless they make this about the Wyatt's being more dominate than the shield, and Bray's tired of people talking about the shield being invincible (the wyatts owned the shield in matches) and how they dominated the wrestling world. There's nothing there.

This match needed to be dirty, it needed to be done that way or the story doesn't make sense. Seth should've won, it's their first encounter in the ring. But there's a slight mistake on the WWE's part. They needed a little more logic. But I have no problem with Seth going over dirty. I loved that, just wish it would've been a little more logical.

 

[MERPER]

I am not obsessed with them, but I want them in major matches/rivalries to close the book on the story...

I hate weeks/months of build up only to spoil the match. I don't need clean finishes all the time, but give it to us when we should get it.

That is not 2 straight PPV's where the main event was ruined. And for what? What is to gain that couldn't be done the following night on RAW?

Your main event is the main event for a reason. Let it end. Don't mess with it. Hell, let the match play out THEN an interference occur. Wyatt easily could have come out and attacked Ambrose AFTER he won the match.

Rollins ended a good championship match and for what? For WWE to realize their screw up and not even let Cena feud with Rollins afterward? Total B.S.

 

[Bythedockofthebay]

I am not obsessed with them, but I want them in major matches/rivalries to close the book on the story...

I hate weeks/months of build up only to spoil the match. I don't need clean finishes all the time, but give it to us when we should get it.

That is not 2 straight PPV's where the main event was ruined. And for what? What is to gain that couldn't be done the following night on RAW?

How was it ruined? Is it because you think Seth should go over clean? Because if so the Authority angle makes little sense. Why does Seth need to join the Authority if he can break out on his own? Or do you think Dean should've won?

Your main event is the main event for a reason. Let it end. Don't mess with it. Hell, let the match play out THEN an interference occur. Wyatt easily could have come out and attacked Ambrose AFTER he won the match.

Because to me that makes no sense, Dean should beat Seth or Seth needing to cheat makes no sense. Seth should need help to handle dean, or he wouldn't run from Dean every time they've come near each other.

Rollins ended a good championship match and for what? For WWE to realize their screw up and not even let Cena feud with Rollins afterward? Total B.S.

Well, I can tell you I didn't like the finish of that match BUT it made perfect sense. Seth, knowing that Lesnar was beat down took his shot. Cena was clearly in control of the match and had more go than Lesnar at that point. Why go after the guy who's in better shape? Take sense out of the picture and cash in. Made perfect sense, not to mention, he'd get the honor of being the one who beat the one in twenty one and one, and how many chances will he honestly have to do that?

 

[MERPER]

How was it ruined? Is it because you think Seth should go over clean? Because if so the Authority angle makes little sense. Why does Seth need to join the Authority if he can break out on his own? Or do you think Dean should've won?


Because to me that makes no sense, Dean should beat Seth or Seth needing to cheat makes no sense. Seth should need help to handle dean, or he wouldn't run from Dean every time they've come near each other.


Well, I can tell you I didn't like the finish of that match BUT it made perfect sense. Seth, knowing that Lesnar was beat down took his shot. Cena was clearly in control of the match and had more go than Lesnar at that point. Why go after the guy who's in better shape? Take sense out of the picture and cash in. Made perfect sense, not to mention, he'd get the honor of being the one who beat the one in twenty one and one, and how many chances will he honestly have to do that?

To answer your first 2 points, then why have any main event match ever finish clean? Usually we see one guy be the aggressor while the other backs away leading up to the match. Why bother letting any finish clean ever? Interfere in them all.

As to the final point, Seth never ended up giving up his briefcase so his interference was miserable and made no sense.

As a matter of fact, you currently have a guy carrying around a briefcase for a chance at a championship that isn't being put in play more than once every few months because your champion doesn't show up to events...

awesome booking, planning and writing by a group of creative writers who are out of touch with the audience

 

[Bythedockofthebay]

To answer your first 2 points, then why have any main event match ever finish clean? Usually we see one guy be the aggressor while the other backs away leading up to the match. Why bother letting any finish clean ever? Interfere in them all.

Because the heroes need to win sometimes? Good guys don't need to cheat that's why they are the good guys most of the time. Only in extreme cases, and at HITC the only real way for seth to not win via being better than Dean (which again doesn't make sense) was due to unexpected interference. That said as far as a guy backing away IE. Lesnar, most of the time it's due to someone like Lesnar saying that they don't do things unless they're getting a PPV pay day. But you also see Lesnar back away, not run for his life like Seth did. Plus the Hero hardly ever RUNS at Lesnar. Due to him being Brock Lesnar. You see them hold their ground like any hero would, but they won't make the first move because well they have doubts. Dean and Cena had no doubts about whooping Seth's ass. Seth can't take them, it's pretty clear. Thus seth going over needs to be done via help from others.

As to the final point, Seth never ended up giving up his briefcase so his interference was miserable and made no sense.

As a matter of fact, you currently have a guy carrying around a briefcase for a chance at a championship that isn't being put in play more than once every few months because your champion doesn't show up to events...

awesome booking, planning and writing by a group of creative writers who are out of touch with the audience

Oh I agree Seth should either cash in or they should stop talking about it. Try and make us forget about it. We wouldn't but never bringing it up and then having it sprung on us out of no where would be cool. That said, seth did TRY to cash in. It didn't happen but it made sense for him to TRY to cash in on the rare occurrence that he's actually had the chance. Just saying.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

I was one of those in the LD as well. I was for a clean finish in that match because Ambrose and Rollins seemed like a personal feud that deserved it. From the career threatening cinderblocks spot I felt it warranted a decisive victory in who is the better man. I'm not one of those that is against outside interference but I don't like it when someone with no history with the participants interrupt for no reason and has a decisive impact on the outcome of a very personal feud. Sure Wyatts have run ins with the shield but that doesn't explain why he would pick a side in this fight. It just felt like a macguffin instead of finishing the Ambrose/Rollins feud.

I don't think we are surprised things like this happen, doesn't mean we have to agree it was the 'most logical' ending.

That's EXACTLY the reason they did what they did and everyone seems to have missed it... The feud isn't "over", the use of Bray showed that that Wyatt/Shield stuff from earlier in the year wasn't "over" either.

WWE is trying to create new rivalries that will last YEARS... not be over in a few months. They want Rollins v Ambrose to be like Edge v Cena was, Bray v Ambrose to be a Cena v Orton... if we're all serious about "we want these guys" then we're gonna have to see them face off a lot over the years... WWE let's Ambrose use the cinderblock last night...what good does it do? if he pins Rollins he gets a measure of payback... but it's done... onto the next feud and you can say he "vanquished" Rollins...

Now of course if the plan is to involve all 3 Shield guys at Mania in the title match...last night was perfect... it left unanswered questions... Ambrose still has to get that revenge on Rollins, Rollins can't say he vanquished him without help...the feud continues so the next time they do it, be it in 6 months, a year or 4 years...there is something to play for.

Look back at some of the best feuds that never got a pay-off... Rick Martel vs Tito... they never got that one on one resolution... but every year without fail in the Rumble they'd go right for each other and it was on again... they split at Mania 5 but could have reignited the feud at Mania 8 if WWE had wanted to cos they didn't just have Martel go over, which would have been the obvious.

It's like how Jericho went right back to Orton punting him all those years ago in his promos last month after the seemingly "random attack" started the feud again... it wasn't random... Orton likes to take cheap shots at Jericho and it means they will always be foes.

Rivalries don't just "end" if they're done right, a battle gets won or lost... but the war goes on... Cena v Orton perhaps has finally now reached it's end with that match.

Clean finishes can be valuable but not all the time, Ziggler proved at HIAC that anyone can, on a given night get a surprising clean win. Cesaro will be back in his future, he'll want revenge for that embarrasment, not skulk off cos Zig has to fight someone else now... he might bide his time but that's how you create stars and rivalries that last the ages... sometimes people have an off night, or get screwed by a hologram or a friend you should have seen turning on you attacks.

Guys like Cena and Brock have had years of these kind of matches to build to the point where now the storylines are less important. Guys like Ambrose and Rollins need those stories early to get to that stage so if you're having too many clean wins now, it'll prevent them getting there.

 

[Rusty]

Rivalries don't just "end" if they're done right, a battle gets won or lost... but the war goes on... Cena v Orton perhaps has finally now reached it's end with that match.

Arguably the stupidest comment I've seen on here. That rivalry will never end for as long as both are active competitors.

But ANYWAY on to the topic... I'm a big believer in clean finishes just like the next guy, but hey.. you know what nobody has really mentioned... maybe, just maybe Seth Rollins won the feud.

The only way he can do that without Ambrose looking weaker in comparison, is to have outside interference which not only saves face for Ambrose, but begins his next rivalry.

Also.. Ambrose and Rollins will compete later down the track no doubt, possibly even Wrestlemania in some capacity I'm thinking. Sometimes not everything has to have a definitive end point. Not every freaking main event has to end clean. Every babyface doesn't have to completely get the last laugh on their rival. Why? Because that's too predictable. You know, the whole reason why people dislike John Cena is 'cause he always wins (even though he doesn't). But smarks think that a heel must win clean (they shouldn't), but they also think a babyface must always win the decider (they shouldn't). If every rivalry ended in the same way.. why would you watch? Why would you even bother, if you KNEW how every main feud was going to end? That's like watching a movie knowing the ending beforehand, or hell, watching a fucking football game when you already know the final score.

Plus, it helps jerks like us find something to talk about.

 

[laodaron]

There are a few really simple ways to explain this:

A few things before we begin, though. Wrestling exists in a fantasy world called kayfabe. In this world of kayfabe, things like winning and losing matter in terms of story, in terms of chances, and in terms of ranking. While, as adults, we all know that the finishes are predetermined, and that getting a push/getting buried are real things, in kayfabe, the characters do NOT know these things. Once you think about it, it gets quite confusing. But, the character of Dean Ambrose did not know that Bray Wyatt was going to sneak in on him. The character of Seth Rollins did not know he would get help from Bray Wyatt. This is why clean wins matter, because the gimmicks require a certain bit of credibility inside of the world of kayfabe in order to continue.

Number 1 - A clean finish indicates a superior competitor. One guy has to triumph over the other.
Number 2 - A clean finish shows confidence from creative (non-kayfabe), and it shows that creative is putting in work for the character.
Number 3 - A clean finish is generally the only way that titles and belts can change hands, so there is a higher value placed on a pin or a submission.

There are more reasons, but my issue was not with the actual run in ending to HiaC. My issue is who actually did the run in, and that new feud with Ambrose.

 

[Rusty]

There are a few really simple ways to explain this:

I'd love to hear them.

A few things before we begin, though. Wrestling exists in a fantasy world called kayfabe. In this world of kayfabe, things like winning and losing matter in terms of story,

Really? How come John Cena lost to Dean Ambrose for a shot to compete in the main event against Seth Rollins, but is now the #1 contender?

in terms of chances

See above.

and in terms of ranking.

Roman Reigns will all the time and I'm pretty sure he hasn't got a one on one WWE Championship match yet. So, false again.

While, as adults, we all know that the finishes are predetermined, and that getting a push/getting buried are real things, in kayfabe, the characters do NOT know these things.

Is that what Mark Madden tells you? I'm pretty sure the characters are played by, you know, REAL people.

Once you think about it, it gets quite confusing.

I thought you said at the beginning you were going to explain it in a simple manner?

But, the character of Dean Ambrose did not know that Bray Wyatt was going to sneak in on him. The character of Seth Rollins did not know he would get help from Bray Wyatt. This is why clean wins matter, because the gimmicks require a certain bit of credibility inside of the world of kayfabe in order to continue.

I'm not sure if you're aware, but this is professional wrestling. It is scripted (which you stated before), meaning that clean wins and losses are not part of any "ranking" system or even seen as a requirement to build credibility. Santino Marella was the IC champion for months, he won the belt by being picked out of the crowd as a "fan". What credibility did he have? Clean wins only matter in, you know, real fighting.

Number 1 - A clean finish indicates a superior competitor. One guy has to triumph over the other.

Why? Brock Lesnar wins clean all the time and yet he's an afterthought at this point.

Number 2 - A clean finish shows confidence from creative (non-kayfabe), and it shows that creative is putting in work for the character.

I'd say at Hell in a Cell, the non-finish indicates creative has confident in BOTH Rollins and Ambrose that either guy couldn't take the fall without slightly damaging the other, since they're both stars.

Number 3 - A clean finish is generally the only way that titles and belts can change hands, so there is a higher value placed on a pin or a submission.

You're kidding me right? I guess we should just get rid of the whole concept of Mr Money in the Bank too then.

There are more reasons, but my issue was not with the actual run in ending to HiaC. My issue is who actually did the run in, and that new feud with Ambrose.

Awesome, what better way to introduce a new feud than to intervene in the old one. Instantly makes Wyatt relevant again.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I agree that some have what's almost a borderline fetish concerning clean finishes. Every match on the HIAC card with the exception of the main event had a clean finish, yet I've heard some gripe about this match, the only match on the card without a clean finish, hurt the entire ppv because it wasn't a clean finish. Wish I could say that I was surprised but it's pretty typical 'cuz WWE just can't win. Business as usual. Hell, if Rollins had won clean, I'm sure there'd be fans or various dirt sheet writers complaining about how Ambrose losing clean made him look weak or vice versa.

Here's the thing: heels cheat. It's a simple, age old concept in professional wrestling that some fans just don't want to grasp or seen done away with for some reason. It's almost as if some fans are only going to be happy if every single wrestler on the roster is this nigh invincible, take no shit from anybody anti-hero. Ric Flair cheated in every way imaginable to win so many big matches and he's a legend, but guys today are held to different standards. Why? Just because we're older?

 

[Starkiller]

Wait, that is true isn't it. Cena lost to get a #1 contender match which he won and now gets another title shot. So even when cena loses, he wins. Lol

 

[Mustang Sally]

The alternate endings serve two purposes: they enable the company producing the pro wrestling to stage matches without testing the patience of the fans in attendance.....and, they give the company the means to keep performer's reputations intact while stringing fans along to the next match-up in the series.

Wrestling today is nothing like it was in the 1920's when guys like George Hackenschmidt fought Frank Gotch (I looked this stuff up...really!) in 2-hour contests in which the two would struggle on the mat and hardly move a muscle for 45 minutes. Can you imagine the people who attend Raw standing for that today? Watching matches last night, I kept marveling how folks who had front row seats were looking everywhere but at the ring directly in front of them. They are the people with the best vantage points; only heaven knows what the fans further back were staring at. The point is that today's "fans" don't want real wrestling matches; they want a show with high impact moves and a quick ending. To that, the pro wrestling industry created "alternate" endings that would curl the hair of George Hackenschmidt. Everyone but the true wrestling fans go home happy.

Then, the industry also nurtured the notion that it would hurt the public's perception of the product if they saw their heroes lose cleanly all the time. Promoters long before Vince McMahon came up with the idea of endings that allow the company to bring the match to an end without having the loser's reputation or momentum curbed by saddling a clean loss on his record.

In other pro sports, you win or you lose; that's part of the beauty of the spectacle.......but in wrestling, you can have your cake and eat it, too.

Who won and lost the Seth Rollins-Dean Ambrose match at HIAC? That's the point; since both guys move on to something else without having been cleanly defeated, it doesn't really matter.