The Return of Blood? Smackdown Spoilers

Just read the spoilers for Friday's Smackdown. Read the following then give me thoughts...

Cody Rhodes beats Randy Orton by DQ when Orton goes crazy and beats him bloody. Blood is pouring as Orton beats Cody with his mask, a chair and the ringside bell. Officials come down to clean Cody up before Orton puts him through the announcers table with an RKO. Orton comes back down and RKO's Cody again before ending the segment. I'm not sure how it will come off on TV but the crowd went from being shocked to loving it to back to shocked. Orton was great and Cody bled like crazy.


Do you think we will see this on Friday?

I do, didn't HHH try and get it sorted before his match with punk aswell

About damn time. I know it has its risks, but so do suplex's (just ask Flair).

If used properly and not excessivly it can bring the X Factor to a feud. How pants have the past HiaC matches been? Not saying that the lack of blood is the key factor, but its hard to sell "The most brutal match in WWE history" without the crimson flowing a bit.

Im not going to lie...I absolutly cannot bloody (no pun intended, well maybe a little) wait for Smackdown this week!! This has always been my point with the use of it...if used excessively, *cough FLAIR* then it only weakens the programme...but used at the correct time & it really can add a great deal. If you want to build up Ortons credibility heading to HIAC & put out the fact he is more dangerous than ever what better way than over the top attack resulting in a beaten, bloody body!?.....

And lets be honest, even a 5 yr old kid senses that when hit with a sledgehammer, steel steps & chairs someone should have at least some kind of cut lol!!

Having said all that..smackdown will now no doubt 'lose signal' or cut to a break come friday night before returning to see a cleaned up Cody put through a table!

i hope to god that blading is coming back , im a little tired of the supposed PG Era , with the god awful HIAC match , look at Kane vs Undertaker last year - had this not been PG , that match might have been a contender for match of the year , seeing as they are both Hell In A Cell vets .

"officials come down to clean cody up" before pg when had anyone ever come down to clean someone up, sounds to me like hes been cut accidently and they just wanted to remove the blood

blood or no blood ,should not make much difference.

Miz Came To Play wrote: look at Kane vs Undertaker last year - had this not been PG , that match might have been a contender for match of the year , seeing as they are both Hell In A Cell vets .

I don't hink anything could have saved that snooze fest tbh

Miz Came To Play wrote:i hope to god that blading is coming back , im a little tired of the supposed PG Era , with the god awful HIAC match , look at Kane vs Undertaker last year - had this not been PG , that match might have been a contender for match of the year , seeing as they are both Hell In A Cell vets .

Don't think I've ever disagreed with a comment more. 'Blading' in my opinion is the most damaging and stupid concept to ever enter pro-wrestling. It only creates an atmosphere were performers try to outdo each other by harming themselves. I always believed pro-wrestling was about appearing to do super human and extreme things in a safe manner, not harming yourself or your colleagues.

I also believe WWE should remain PG, it's a larger than life cartoon world aimed at children and young adults. Fair play if as an adult you still enjoy it (I've read all the Harry Potter books at 25 years old), no shame in that. But WWE is pantomime violence in my view.

I'd love to see someone write a post defending blading in a responsible manner

I can't in a responsible manner but it's necessary in HIAC matches and elimination chambers. I hate the PG era it has made me switch off.

Bonesaw's ready wrote:
I also believe WWE should remain PG, it's a larger than life cartoon world aimed at children and young adults. Fair play if as an adult you still enjoy it (I've read all the Harry Potter books at 25 years old), no shame in that. But WWE is pantomime violence in my view.

While I don't think it's logical to try and defend the art of blading, but I believe that your description of wrestling as a 'larger than life cartoon' is some what disrespectful. For me wrestling is an artform and a performnce in it's own right and I would think the thousands that practice up and down the world agree with me. While blading is not a sensible practice, wrestling in itself when viewed from a logical standpoint is not a hugely sensible thing to do, most reports suggest that any who perform on a regular basis suffer much of thir lives in pain and I have a huge amount of respect for them on this basis. So why do so many do it, I can't believe it is financially motivated as only very few (even in WWE) make the big money required to justify the punishment endured, and even the risk of death, in the ring and obviously winning/losing, championships and main events are decided on the whim of a booker so it can't be about that type of glory from a traditional sporting standpoint. I believe the vast amount of those who lace up a pair of boots do so for their passion to wrestle and their pride in there performances, it is in this context I belive blading starts in some ways to make sense. The apperance of blood, when used correctly, can legitimise a performance in the ring, in the same way that overuse can tarnish it. While some say that cutting yourself is against the spirit of wrestling, does it not make sense that from a performance aspect that pretnding to be hit by lets say the corner of the ring steps and drawing blood not make things more realistic than no blood at all. Wrestling as we all tell those who insult it, is not fake, it is indeed a performance but a very physical performance, these men (and women) do get hurt but they hurt on their terms to create a performance and tell a stroy which they obviously have a lot of pride in. It is in this context I feel blading can make sense, blood is an aspect of nearly every form of combat and one that would probably be realistically unavoidable in the exagerrated contexted of a wresling match. So if these performers want to cut themselves , I would certainally never hold a gun to anyones head if they did not wish to do so, to draw their blood, on their terms, which will in their minds legitimise their performance, then who are we to deny them that right.

Get Flair and his blade back!

Dr Gregory House MD wrote:

Bonesaw's ready wrote:
I also believe WWE should remain PG, it's a larger than life cartoon world aimed at children and young adults. Fair play if as an adult you still enjoy it (I've read all the Harry Potter books at 25 years old), no shame in that. But WWE is pantomime violence in my view.

While I don't think it's logical to try and defend the art of blading, but I believe that your description of wrestling as a 'larger than life cartoon' is some what disrespectful. For me wrestling is an artform and a performnce in it's own right and I would think the thousands that practice up and down the world agree with me. While blading is not a sensible practice, wrestling in itself when viewed from a logical standpoint is not a hugely sensible thing to do, most reports suggest that any who perform on a regular basis suffer much of thir lives in pain and I have a huge amount of respect for them on this basis. So why do so many do it, I can't believe it is financially motivated as only very few (even in WWE) make the big money required to justify the punishment endured, and even the risk of death, in the ring and obviously winning/losing, championships and main events are decided on the whim of a booker so it can't be about that type of glory from a traditional sporting standpoint. I believe the vast amount of those who lace up a pair of boots do so for their passion to wrestle and their pride in there performances, it is in this context I belive blading starts in some ways to make sense. The apperance of blood, when used correctly, can legitimise a performance in the ring, in the same way that overuse can tarnish it. While some say that cutting yourself is against the spirit of wrestling, does it not make sense that from a performance aspect that pretnding to be hit by lets say the corner of the ring steps and drawing blood not make things more realistic than no blood at all. Wrestling as we all tell those who insult it, is not fake, it is indeed a performance but a very physical performance, these men (and women) do get hurt but they hurt on their terms to create a performance and tell a stroy which they obviously have a lot of pride in. It is in this context I feel blading can make sense, blood is an aspect of nearly every form of combat and one that would probably be realistically unavoidable in the exagerrated contexted of a wresling match. So if these performers want to cut themselves , I would certainally never hold a gun to anyones head if they did not wish to do so, to draw their blood, on their terms, which will in their minds legitimise their performance, then who are we to deny them that right.

Very good post. In calling the WWE a cartoon world I wasn't implying that those behind the scenes didn't take it seriously. I can see what you're saying about performers wanting to add legitimacy to their performance by adding realism, in this case blading. But I just can't get over the skewed logic that performers would injure themselves (even superficially) to legitimise staged violence. The whole point is to make it look like it hurts, to cross the line and take a blade to yourself is counter-productive.

You make a good point about overuse. At times in the attitude era, people would blade ridiculously frequently. To the point where at almost every PPV a performer would be 'busted wide open'. With the audience so desensitised to it, they were cutting themselves for no reason. At times I think followers of pro-wrestling take the most extreme things as acceptable, in what other industry would performers be allowed to hurt themselves for their art? Maybe it's to appease the detractors who laugh at pro-wrestling as a predetermined sport, or maybe a wrestler's willingness to please his/her boss by putting his/her health at risk. After all, pro-wrestling is not like a legitimate sport where simply being the best gets you to the top.

I think sometimes it helps to take a step back, forget what you know about WWE and think 'hang on, is it okay that they're doing this?'.

Bonesaw's ready wrote:

Dr Gregory House MD wrote:

Bonesaw's ready wrote:
I also believe WWE should remain PG, it's a larger than life cartoon world aimed at children and young adults. Fair play if as an adult you still enjoy it (I've read all the Harry Potter books at 25 years old), no shame in that. But WWE is pantomime violence in my view.

While I don't think it's logical to try and defend the art of blading, but I believe that your description of wrestling as a 'larger than life cartoon' is some what disrespectful. For me wrestling is an artform and a performnce in it's own right and I would think the thousands that practice up and down the world agree with me. While blading is not a sensible practice, wrestling in itself when viewed from a logical standpoint is not a hugely sensible thing to do, most reports suggest that any who perform on a regular basis suffer much of thir lives in pain and I have a huge amount of respect for them on this basis. So why do so many do it, I can't believe it is financially motivated as only very few (even in WWE) make the big money required to justify the punishment endured, and even the risk of death, in the ring and obviously winning/losing, championships and main events are decided on the whim of a booker so it can't be about that type of glory from a traditional sporting standpoint. I believe the vast amount of those who lace up a pair of boots do so for their passion to wrestle and their pride in there performances, it is in this context I belive blading starts in some ways to make sense. The apperance of blood, when used correctly, can legitimise a performance in the ring, in the same way that overuse can tarnish it. While some say that cutting yourself is against the spirit of wrestling, does it not make sense that from a performance aspect that pretnding to be hit by lets say the corner of the ring steps and drawing blood not make things more realistic than no blood at all. Wrestling as we all tell those who insult it, is not fake, it is indeed a performance but a very physical performance, these men (and women) do get hurt but they hurt on their terms to create a performance and tell a stroy which they obviously have a lot of pride in. It is in this context I feel blading can make sense, blood is an aspect of nearly every form of combat and one that would probably be realistically unavoidable in the exagerrated contexted of a wresling match. So if these performers want to cut themselves , I would certainally never hold a gun to anyones head if they did not wish to do so, to draw their blood, on their terms, which will in their minds legitimise their performance, then who are we to deny them that right.

Very good post. In calling the WWE a cartoon world I wasn't implying that those behind the scenes didn't take it seriously. I can see what you're saying about performers wanting to add legitimacy to their performance by adding realism, in this case blading. But I just can't get over the skewed logic that performers would injure themselves (even superficially) to legitimise staged violence. The whole point is to make it look like it hurts, to cross the line and take a blade to yourself is counter-productive.

You make a good point about overuse. At times in the attitude era, people would blade ridiculously frequently. To the point where at almost every PPV a performer would be 'busted wide open'. With the audience so desensitised to it, they were cutting themselves for no reason. At times I think followers of pro-wrestling take the most extreme things as acceptable, in what other industry would performers be allowed to hurt themselves for their art? Maybe it's to appease the detractors who laugh at pro-wrestling as a predetermined sport, or maybe a wrestler's willingness to please his/her boss by putting his/her health at risk. After all, pro-wrestling is not like a legitimate sport where simply being the best gets you to the top.

I think sometimes it helps to take a step back, forget what you know about WWE and think 'hang on, is it okay that they're doing this?'.

I am not for one second trying to suggest that cutting ones self is sensible practice, and not something I would force or encourage anyone in wrestling to do, I was mearly trying to highlight what I feel the logic is behind it. I agree with what you say about desensitisation, a few years ago The MCMG were punished by TNA for refusing to blade in a midcard PPV match, the exact details of which escape me right now, I read about this in Powerslam and the tone of their article put the focus frimly on the strangeness of Sabin and Shelly's refusal to cut themselves. I agree that TNA's decision to punish them for not being willing to mutilate their own foreheads (although it may help explain why Ric Flair is so high up the card) and that as a group of wrestling fans Powerslam were so desiesitised to how odd or horrific this request would seem in a normal working environment, it was pretty shocking. But i still have to go back to my point that really I don't feel we have any right to deny these men (and women) the right to make their performance the best they feel it can be, and if they think getting colour where appropriate (in the modern world of wrestling match layouts im sure these things are discussed with the road agents etc beforehand to prevent any potential oversaturation of blood) would help legitimise and enhance their performance, then that is their choice and I respect them for it.

If you look at actors who need to gain a helluva lot of weight for certain roles or take up smoking for certain roles then it shows that Pro Wrestling isn't the only form of entertainment that requires a performer to act in an unnatural way, a way that could be damaging to your health.

I couldn't possibly give a logical defence of blading, I do believe that in moderation then there is a place for it, would the image of Steve Austin's face at WrestleMania XIII have been as powerful without blood? Would the WWF have been able to sell the destruction of HiaC if Shawn Michaels wasn't bleeding at Badd Blood?

On the other hand would John Cena have been more over if he was dripping from blood after his I Quit match with Miz where we're lead to believe Miz brutalised him

That's the first I've heard about that MCMG story. Shocking. TNA and Powerslam magazine should be ashamed of themselves

there is a picture of cody sat up being attended to, it seems to me that he wasn't meant to be cut, it really does

I've saw a few pictures of it, very reminicent of the way Eddie was bleeding against JBL

the-gaffer wrote:I've saw a few pictures of it, very reminicent of the way Eddie was bleeding against JBL

Was that the one when JBL smashed Eddie over the head with a chair? That one was horrendous.

Yeah, I'm not sure if Rhodes got busted open Hardway but it looked like he lost a lot of blood, doubt they'll show it being so brutal on SD, I'm expecting heavy editing

He got busted open by the ring bell. You're right gaff, it will be heavily edited. Just seen a pic of it. He was bleeding, badly.

Orton saying on Twitter it will not be shown.

theres your answer then

I wonder if Orton looked at himself after and said STUPID, STUPID!!!

I watched smackdown yesterday, and it cut after Orton hit a DDT. That was on youtube though so might be different on sky.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAtz4Kce_aw

there's some pictures a guy from the crowd took

there's an awful lot of blood

fernando wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAtz4Kce_aw

there's some pictures a guy from the crowd took

there's an awful lot of blood

they did they're best to cut it out on Sky!

SKY didn't cut it to be fair, it was WWE that make the cuts

I would like to see WWE make something of it though if they go for Randy and Cody having a non-title feud soon. Cody could come out (at a PPV where the material would be more acceptable) and cut a promo showing what happened "after the cameras were cut".

the-gaffer wrote:SKY didn't cut it to be fair, it was WWE that make the cuts

yeah thats what I meant!

I guess that the WWE are gauging how well the live crowds take it before they show it on tv?

doubt it to be honest, it was just a mistake, if it was live it woulda been stopped, as it was taped they could finish the segment knowing they could 'fix' it

I instantly thought the same but I then had a doubt over the weekend when they were promoting the Hell in a Cell PPV and they showed the likes of Foley falling onto the tacks, through the cage, Umaga going over the side, guys faces being dragged over the wire etc, it seemed a very non PG video so now I do ownder if they are gauging if they could have some crimson in the Hell in a Cell PPV.

To be fair, judging by the pictures that I've seen I dont think that amount of blood can come from an accident of being clocked by a ring bell, It would of had to have been a major mishap on Ortons part for that to happen, I think it was intentional on wwe's part.

It looked pretty accidental to me

Your about the only one that must have seen it unedited then

Here's a fan video of it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmkIeFk0v9k&feature=player_embedded

I've seen the version on youtube (italia Smackdown) you can clearly hear the bell & there looks to be no signs of blading

Have a read of this.....

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/864011-wwe-randy-orton-why-wwe-must-punish-him-for-his-huge-botch

It's on BleacherReport Brady do we have to?

Ok cheers Hero, but even after seeing that I still stand by what I said, there is no chance a cut opens up like that all by its self, with in a minute the blood is all over his face. I've cut the side of my forehead open before and it never did that, I would even go as far as to say was there a chance he cut himself when he went down on his knees after being hit.(couldn't quite see so just guessing)

Either way Im not convinced it just happened that way. I think WWE wanted some cheap publicity and doing it on a show that doesn't go out live was a safe bet. Also Id be interested in the veiwing figures because even I tuned in to see how it would be cut and edited.

Hero wrote:It's on BleacherReport Brady do we have to?

Fair point!!... I just googled it & stumbled on it granted most of the stuff on there doesn't carry much credibility

Brady12 wrote:I've seen the version on youtube (italia Smackdown) you can clearly hear the bell & there looks to be no signs of blading

Have a read of this.....

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/864011-wwe-randy-orton-why-wwe-must-punish-him-for-his-huge-botch

Ok so this report is just this guy's opinion and take on it maybe a botch maybe not.

It definitely wasn't a blade job, he got busted open hardway

I must admit I'm quite confused here.

1) The attack on Cody, was it planned?

2) Cody bleeding, was it meant to happen or did Orton actually crack him over the head properly with the bell?

1) was planned

2) orton actually wacked him the bell and busted him open the hard way.

Spoiler:

Wow. Surely there's something illegal in that? That's pretty much assault isn't it?

If what Fernando has said is true and WWE don't throw the book at Orton, I think there could be a few p*ssed off members in the roster.

I think the bell shot was planned but orton botched it big style

Orton didn't mean it, he botched, he meant to whack him bell side but his hand was supposed to be the meat in the bell/head sandwich, it didn't happen, Orton and Rhodes are pretty tight, no doubt they trust each other impeccably, just one of those things, watch the fan vid, you see Orton covering Rhodes right away, this is when Cody supposedly told Orton he's good to finish the segment