Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2011 WZ Wrestling Awards' started by klunderbunker, Dec 20, 2011.
To anyone who votes Sting vs Hardy at VR how can something that lasted a minute or less be the Worst MATCH of the Year.
You know I love TNA, loyal to the product but boy Morgan vs Crimson was horrible.Restart the match 3 times and the same outcome happens! Even after the match, their weak brawl made me question why these two were even feuding?
Sting vs. Jeff Hardy was a main event on a pay per view... Most of the other matches on the list are not main event matches. It was shameful for TNA to even allow Jeff Hardy to hit the ring. They should have called an audible and not allowed the match to take place. Instead, they let it happen, and the real losers were the fans.
Because it was the main event of that PPV involving two of your biggest stars; one of whom was heavily under the influence to the point where it needed a shoot finish. There really is no defense here.
Regardless of any defense you may have for this, I don't see any way this match can lose in this category.
Sting vs Hardy was fifteen seconds of shit, Cole vs Lawler was fifteen minutes. If I had to chose one to sit through a second time I would take Victory Road every single day of the week, and I defy anyone to claim otherwise.
It was a main event that lasted under a minute because Jeff Hardy was fucked up. Quite simple.
It was better than pretty much any women's match this year, but I don't consider what they do to be "wrestling."
Jeff Hardy vs. Sting.
I don't care how long it was. The bell rang - they wrestled - the bell rang again. That's a match, and an absolutely disgraceful one at that.
A fair spin, no doubt; but people payed to see Hardy/Sting, nobody bought tickets or the PPV for the sole purpose of Lawler/Cole. It was an under card match people were dreading to begin with, a unanimous piss break before the match even started.
Wow, the spin in this thread already. Jeff Hardy vs. Sting was the main event of a pay per view with a world title on the line. It was the most embarassing match in the history of the modern era, and that says alot. The match was a colossal failure on so many levels. It showed the unprofessionalism of Jeff Hardy and TNA management. It's Hardy vs. Sting, and there isn't a close second choice.
Exactly my thoughts. It was also interesting. Jim Ross v. Cole was horrible and was 20 minuites.
Could have sworn I nominated Miz vs Cena from WrestleMania. As far as main events that missed the mark go, that solidly rivals Hardy vs Sting.
RVD vs Hardy and Hogan vs Sting straight up don't have any place on that list. I blame the parents.
Cole vs Lawler at WM27, I had to sit through that shit live and it was so fucking stupid I wish I could have gotten a refund.
When one guy is too high to perform, that match wins (or loses) by default. Stinger deserved better, as did every TNA fan.
I choose Matt Hardy vs RVD. One, because I hate Matt Hardy. Two, because it will probably annoy Coco. He'll play it off all nonchalant, but deep down, he'll be furious.
Sting/ Hardy was essentially damage control. Lawler/ Cole and the tag match involving them at Extreme Rules was actually thought of as an idea worth going on PPV, no less. Of the two the match at ER annoyed me more because of Cole's idiotic mocking of JR and that he won his second match in succession. Cole has no right to do any of that.
I'm going with Cole VS Lawler from Mania 27. WWE spent so much time building this feud, and they actually let Cole win? Michael Cole really didn't need anymore heat during this time, because he was the most hated heel in WWE. Jerry Lawler FINALLY gets his match at Wrestlemania, and this was supposed to be his moment. He was supposed to silence the annoying weasel. Lawler had to endure months of verbal torture from Cole, and King's dead mother was dragged into this feud. The build for this feud was so well done, but the match was atrocious, and the ending was incredibly stupid.
They dragged Lawler's mama into the feud and the match was 15 minutes too long.
I've never seen Sting vs Hardy, is that a good thing?
WM27 - no Sheamus despite the long term implication that he would face Triple H; Kane & Barrett reduced to being participants in a squash multi-man despite both having been part of taking out the Taker and a logical three way / handicap match for the streak is thrown away.
What was kept after an ongoing buildup (and used a real life tragedy to build heat for what was always going to be a comedy match)? Jerry Lawler versus Michael Cole at the biggest show of the year and, worse still, it was allocated 14 minutes. Say what you will about Victory Road, one guy messed over his colleagues and the fans; by setting up Lawler vs Cole the WWe, as an organisation, insulted it's wrestlers and fans and that was deliberate.
When your advertised main event match ends up involving a wrestler completely smashed and under the influence that you actually let compete in a bout for the world title against a legend like Sting when you could have easily done something a little more impromptu if Jeff was in such bad conditioning, such as perhaps finding a replacement. Then there really isn't any contender. Just on the mere fact of how unprofessionally that whole situation was handled it gets my vote. Despite how shit every match involving Cole was this year at least he didn't show up to any pay-per-view fucked up and his company further more giving him the ok to stumble around like a clueless idiot and make a complete mockery of the company he was working for in the process.
I get this.
I mean seriously they could've added someone into the mix and made it a 3 way dance with Hardy and Sting. Hardy gets eliminated first, leaving the other two to duke it out and give a credible M.E.
But Cole vs Lawler still gets my vote. I got IBS because of that and not even in my bowels, that's reason enough.
At least Sting vs. Jeff Hardy ended before it got any worse. Disappointing given the expectations, but quick and relatively painless, like ripping of waxing strip. I mean band-aid. A manly band-aid that is covering up a cut I got from playing football.
Cole vs. Lawler at Mania dragged on FOREVER, and the returns on the beating Cole took at the end was not worth the hour we had to sit through to get there. In retrospect it probably was less than an hour, but it sure didn't feel like it was much less than that.
Sting vs. Hardy helped ruin a show that nobody really expected to be a masterpiece. Cole vs. Lawler helped ruin WrestleMania. Which is the bigger crime? I think it's obvious.
The category isn't Worst Travesty in Wrestling of the Year, it's Worst Match. If you take away the expectations what do you have? A minute long squash that nobody would have even reviewed and a fifteen minute disaster of a 61 year old man trying to drag his untrained and untalented announce partner kicking and screaming to a passable match. He failed.
Since when do you say "straight up." I don't like it, not one bit.
Yeah, worst travesty that also happened to be a main event match. It was a fucking mess, start to finish, regardless of it's length.
I'm a Jeff Hardy fan...... Remember
"If you take away expectations" Yeah, kinda like if you take away Michael Cole and replace him with anyone on the roster it's no longer in this category. If ands and buts BROTHER.
Cole/Lawler was nothing put a piss break from the beginning, it's not like it was a main event match for the company's top championship.