Wrestlemania XXVIII (Includes Raw Spoiler)

by Guest Tue 21 Feb 2012, 9:47 am

At WrestleMania XXVIII, two of the most decorated figures in WWE history, The Undertaker and Triple H, will engage in battle once more – this time, inside the diabolical Hell in a Cell. According to Triple H, when he and The Phenom exit the Cell on April 1, it will mark the end of an era.

After initially resisting The Deadman’s challenge to a WrestleMania rematch – dismissing it as bad for business – WWE COO Triple H has finally relented. If The Game succeeds in his years-long quest to end The Undertaker’s closely guarded WrestleMania Streak, he will have achieved the ultimate victory, to the perhaps-irreparable detriment of the esteemed Undertaker “brand.”

Hinging on this match are not only the professional legacies of two true icons, but also the future of WWE as a whole, Triple H claims.

Although there is always a temptation to write off terms such as “legacy” and “icon” as hyperbolic, in the case of The Phenom and The King of Kings, such deference is more than merited.

Their bodies of work speak for themselves. The Undertaker and Triple H have collectively logged 39 years in WWE rings. Combined, they account for a remarkable 20 WWE and World Heavyweight Championship reigns. There’s not a single major Superstar of the modern era – from WWE Hall of Famers Shawn Michaels and "Stone Cold" Steve Austin to future Hall of Famers The Rock and Mick Foley – who hasn’t fallen to The Phenom and The Game at one point or another.

With both battle-tested veterans in the twilight of their respective careers and a tinge of finality hanging in the air, The Undertaker and Triple H undoubtedly view WrestleMania XXVIII as an all-or-nothing equation. For The Phenom, it's about improving The Streak to an unparalleled 20-0, and keeping the one prize that has belonged only to him. As for The Game, he may never have another chance to snap The Streak and snare that one prize which has eluded him all these years.

Yet, when these two august legends collide inside The Deadman’s domain – a stipulation suggested by The Game – the paramount concern for both Superstars could well be survival.

The Hell in a Cell structure is a fitting venue, considering the histories of the participants involved. The Phenom and The Game have ventured inside the Cell more times than anyone else. Even though the heinous cage is most closely linked to The Undertaker – he fought HBK in the very first Hell in a Cell Match, in October 1997 – Triple H has actually proven more victorious, racking up a 6-2 record compared to The Undertaker’s 5-5-1 record.

The addition of the Cell will only intensify this war. Neither Superstar has been able to shake the physical and emotional aftereffects of their No Holds Barred Match at last year’s WrestleMania. Surviving both The Undertaker’s Tombstone and Last Ride, Triple H unleashed a Tombstone of his own – as well as an unprecedented three Pedigrees – before having to turn to his weapon of last resort, the sledgehammer. Yet as The Cerebral Assassin prepared to strike The Undertaker, The Phenom deftly maneuvered Triple H into his Hell’s Gate submission hold, ultimately forcing an exhausted Game – who knew he had reached his limit – to tap.

A year removed, The Undertaker remains vexed by that encounter’s final scene of medical personnel carting his battered body away from the ring. Since his return in January, The Deadman has been obsessed with destroying The Game and reasserting The Streak’s dominance. Triple H, who managed to walk away from the hellacious confrontation, is also unsatisfied, having come within a hair of achieving the unthinkable.

Adding another dimension to this contest is the giant disparity in how each competitor views The Streak. Nothing has served to deify The Phenom more than The Streak, and as such, The Undertaker is intent on preserving it for posterity. Although The Game is acutely aware of The Streak’s import, his responsibilities as WWE COO cause him to cast it in another, more capitalistic light. By seemingly discounting The Streak as a mere commodity – an opportunity for licensing deals and merchandising – is Triple H inviting even more wrath from an already driven Undertaker, who assuredly sees The Streak as sacrosanct?

At WrestleMania XXVIII, the rivalry between these two time-honored warriors will finally reach its culmination. Just how far is The Undertaker willing to go to defend The Streak and, in turn, his own legacy? Can the Cerebral Assassin actually best The Phenom on the day when he appears to be at his most unbeatable? Just as important, at what ruinous price will victory be attained this time around, when they battle inside the confines of a structure made famous by The Undertaker – the unforgiving Hell in a Cell?

http://www.wwe.com/shows/wrestlemania/28/undertaker-triple-h-hell-in-a-cell

by sodhat Tue 21 Feb 2012, 9:55 am

It's actually a little doubtful for me at the moment, and it does seem plausible that Taker may not have any more left in him after this one.

What better way to go out than in the structure that he is so synonymous with?

But then I think, can Taker lose in a HIAC, at WrestleMania? I don't think it will happen, I think he still wins and extends the streak for another year. But probably at a price to his health.

by Mr H Tue 21 Feb 2012, 10:12 am

I voted HHH. Mainly out of hope than expectation.

Is Triple H, the egomaniacal, big footing, heir to the throne really going to let Taker go over him for a third time at Wrestlemania? If so, it will be HHH's 9th, thats right, 9th loss on the Grandest Stage of them All. Will Triple H really want to be remembered as the guy who tried and failed to end the streak 3 times?

I've got a feeling that Taker will offer HHH the streak like he did to Orton, but HHH will accept and the streak will be broken. I dont think Paul Levesque the man could resist.

by Kay Fabe Tue 21 Feb 2012, 10:36 am

Loses at WrestleMania don't really matter to Haitch and never have for a long time now, during his prime January 2000 - January 2004 he won 3 of the 4 WrestleMania matches, however it was what he did all year round that mattered to him, HHH was always wise enough in my opinion to take a big hit in a big match as it'll overshadow his dominance throughout the rest of the year as is proven today when we tend to measure his WrestleMania career as a gauge on how his career has panned out, he lost four World Title matches in a row during the mid naughties, two of which were Triple Threats, by which time he was free from any stigma that losing brings

Losses at WrestleMania don't mean much for Triple H when you look at the type of matches in which he lost, since 1999 the only matches he's had barring one at WrestleMania have been World Title Matches and streak matches, it would be inconcievable to believe he'd have such a high profile record and not lose his fair share

As for the match, absolutely zero interest in it, no brainer that Taker will win yet again with absolutely nothing new or exciting coming in the aftermath

by sodhat Tue 21 Feb 2012, 10:52 am

Can you really be that confident though Gaffer?

Kayfabe aside, I'm genuinely wondering whether Taker has said that this will be his last Mania and he's asked HHH to end the streak and his career.

by Guest Tue 21 Feb 2012, 10:59 am

If Taker is going out with a bang, what better way than a HITC.
Im undecided on the winner.

On the one hand I cant see the streak being broken, but on the other, if it is indeed Taker's last match, then it could be possible.

I think the match itself will be a crowd pleaser. I can see some good spots in it.

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:02 am

I don't think there is enough mutual respect there for Taker to let HHH go over.

by sodhat Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:03 am

King Beer wrote:I don't think there is enough mutual respect there for Taker to let HHH go over.

I wondered that too. What is their relationship actually like? And who has the power now that HHH is effectively the 'next guy'..?

Where is Crips when you need him?!

by Samo Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:04 am

The way these promos are building up, it makes me wonder if they really will end it. I think this has the potential to be as unpredictable as the HBK matches.

by Kay Fabe Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:15 am

sodhat wrote:Can you really be that confident though Gaffer?

Personally, yes, I couldn't be more confident

I do think the streak should and will be broken but definitely not by Triple H, for me the whole notion of another match between these two is just a mammoth waste of time

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:20 am

sodhat wrote:
King Beer wrote:I don't think there is enough mutual respect there for Taker to let HHH go over.

I wondered that too. What is their relationship actually like? And who has the power now that HHH is effectively the 'next guy'..?

Where is Crips when you need him?!

There is a mutual respect there, it always has been, but Taker has always been the guy people went to when HHH rubbed people up the wrong way. I just can't see him agreeing that HHH should take the streak.

by sodhat Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:27 am

I wonder then whether HHH will play on his indecision between doing what is good for business and his competitive spirit. Maybe he'll be indecisive when he gets the chance to finish Taker and it'll cost him the match...

That way he can lose but have enough of an ego rub to say "I could have beaten him", and then he can retire saying he doesn't have the competitive edge anymore.

by Kay Fabe Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:32 am

Is that not what he says he did last year?

I hope the both of them go to the top of the cell, fall through it, right through the ring never to be seen again because neither of them are interested in anything but self preservation

by liverbnz Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:34 am

King Beer wrote:I don't think there is enough mutual respect there for Taker to let HHH go over.

This is spot on for me and should erradicate any hope of the streak being broken this year. From a kayfabe point of view, The Undertaker is actually being built as a sort of underdog, but he'll win, as he should. HHH doesn't need to break the streak. His legacy is set in stone, deservedly or not.

by sodhat Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:36 am

Wasn't how I saw last year Gaffer, it was more HHH saying he nearly destroyed Taker and now he knows he can finish him this year, as opposed to not having the guts to go through with it.

Think it's different now, now that we know he is in a position of power and the 'good for business' line can be used by him.

by Kay Fabe Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:38 am

Did HHH not scream 'stay down' at him last year then stop himself from using the sledgehammer?

by sodhat Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:42 am

the-gaffer wrote:Did HHH not scream 'stay down' at him last year then stop himself from using the sledgehammer?

Yeah, but my reading of that was that it was more to do with pity for destroying him. Maybe I'm wrong though, but I could definitely see HHH losing, retiring, and saying he can no longer wrestle and compete because he can no longer commit to beating people when it could be bad for business.

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:46 am

If there is any god in this world, then Taker will absolutely batter HHH to the point where HHH is begging him to stop.

If they want the streak to live on for a few more years and have more realistic challengers then they cannot bury it or Taker.

Hopefully HHH; or Paul in this case will realise this. HHH has buried half the roster, if he wants any sort of future in the business he has to make sure that the next group coming through develop that edge and become the new breed. Especially with all this talk of Taker carrying things on. You can't cripple the man who's sposed to be the man to take down cause you wanna sit out back and eat cake.

by Kay Fabe Tue 21 Feb 2012, 11:49 am

I didn't get it last year, he was telling Shawn that unlike him he would go that extra mile to beat Taker, a place Shawn hasn't got in him yet when push came to shove he didn't go to 'that place' either yet he says he now knows what it'll take, it's all to groundhog day for me

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 12:05 pm

I'm hoping it's all a charade, just HHH talking down to Taker, making people think he's actually got him beat and that he will actually take the streak. I think having HHH underestimate Taker will draw more interest than if they both went about saying they would win. But Taker has to win and win convincingly. HHH doesn't need the pay off, but after last year and the build up, Taker does.

I would be very surprised if there is any physical contact between them between now and mania.

by djcc2004 Tue 21 Feb 2012, 12:54 pm

the-gaffer wrote:Loses at WrestleMania don't really matter to Haitch and never have for a long time now, during his prime January 2000 - January 2004 he won 3 of the 4 WrestleMania matches, however it was what he did all year round that mattered to him, HHH was always wise enough in my opinion to take a big hit in a big match as it'll overshadow his dominance throughout the rest of the year as is proven today when we tend to measure his WrestleMania career as a gauge on how his career has panned out, he lost four World Title matches in a row during the mid naughties, two of which were Triple Threats, by which time he was free from any stigma that losing brings

Losses at WrestleMania don't mean much for Triple H when you look at the type of matches in which he lost, since 1999 the only matches he's had barring one at WrestleMania have been World Title Matches and streak matches, it would be inconcievable to believe he'd have such a high profile record and not lose his fair share

As for the match, absolutely zero interest in it, no brainer that Taker will win yet again with absolutely nothing new or exciting coming in the aftermath

Gaffer i dont think i have ever heard you state you are intersted in anything the wwe produce, you always seem to negative about everything they do and i sometimes wonder why you are a fan.....

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:05 pm

djcc2004 wrote:
the-gaffer wrote:Loses at WrestleMania don't really matter to Haitch and never have for a long time now, during his prime January 2000 - January 2004 he won 3 of the 4 WrestleMania matches, however it was what he did all year round that mattered to him, HHH was always wise enough in my opinion to take a big hit in a big match as it'll overshadow his dominance throughout the rest of the year as is proven today when we tend to measure his WrestleMania career as a gauge on how his career has panned out, he lost four World Title matches in a row during the mid naughties, two of which were Triple Threats, by which time he was free from any stigma that losing brings

Losses at WrestleMania don't mean much for Triple H when you look at the type of matches in which he lost, since 1999 the only matches he's had barring one at WrestleMania have been World Title Matches and streak matches, it would be inconcievable to believe he'd have such a high profile record and not lose his fair share

As for the match, absolutely zero interest in it, no brainer that Taker will win yet again with absolutely nothing new or exciting coming in the aftermath

Gaffer i dont think i have ever heard you state you are intersted in anything the wwe produce, you always seem to negative about everything they do and i sometimes wonder why you are a fan.....

He's got a point? EC should've been the PPV go home for Mania. The one that gets everyone buzzing. Yet it was entirely predictable and boring.

He's right to be negative about HHH v Taker because whilst we all hope deep down that Taker will kick his ass and HHH will retire, the fact is HHH could end up burying Taker again and nobody wants to see that.

The WWE is so hot and cold at the moment with it's directional booking that you can never really have a firm interest anymore.

Take Santino for example. Major praise for his work at EC. Really stepped it up and the fans loved it. Easily pop of the night, yet he'll eventually go back to being the joke character. So why waste all that time with him in EC? Why not have someone with a chance in there? Even if they don't win it builds it up for MITB? What was the point of Khali's 1 minute cameo?

It's stuff like that that makes you lose interest and become frustrated with the product.

When i read Taker v HHH was gonna be HIAC i almost marked out. But the little voice in my head that has been let down constantly over the last 5 years tells me 'don't get excited, they'll screw it up', and they prove it right 90% of the time.

by talkingpoint Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:12 pm

the-gaffer wrote:I didn't get it last year, he was telling Shawn that unlike him he would go that extra mile to beat Taker, a place Shawn hasn't got in him yet when push came to shove he didn't go to 'that place' either yet he says he now knows what it'll take, it's all to groundhog day for me

I understand how you're feeling, HHH's reasoning seemed strange to me too at first but what I really like about this angle is the fact that in hindsight HHH felt he came out the stronger man and Taker is blatently desparate for a rematch. It's the complete opposite of the HBK angle at Mania 26 where HBK had to chase Taker all the way up to the EC when he cost Taker the title. Now Taker is in a position of 'weakness' - his legacy has been tarnished in his eyes and he wants to end the streak on his terms not HHH's. I also liked the way HHH used his executive persona emphasising his head was ruling his heart. It's in keeping with HHH's character as COO and is logical considering the year HHH has had in Taker's absence.

However, Taker's language and the content of his promo definitely screamed of finality and totality to me. You can't use the word apocalypse without connotations of all our destruction and (ironically) the end of the world as we know it. This year has to be the last year we see Taker at Mania, the language and angle of the promos can't have it any other way. This the cause of my fear for the match: how are they going to end a 20 year long streak? If Taker wins emphatically restoring his Phenom reputation then we'll be disappointed that HHH was used 3 times just as a filler to get to 20-0; if HHH wins what are the ramifications going to be for Taker's career and how will his legacy be remembered? If it's a draw how would that work? The ending of this match has to be as perfect as humanly possible to give both men their credibility. That is a tall order!

by djcc2004 Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:13 pm

In your opinion he is right to be negative about HHH v Taker, but this is not Nesicarilly everyones opinion.

At the end of the day everyone is going to have their own opinion and i respect that , but i get sick of seeing the same people on this site being negative about everything. I just think to myself why bother watching if you hate it so much? and gaffer is a prime example

i know i have a rep for going all "R-Truth" on people, but at the end of the day i just get sick of seeing people moaning about wwe

by Kay Fabe Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:14 pm

djcc2004 wrote:
the-gaffer wrote:Loses at WrestleMania don't really matter to Haitch and never have for a long time now, during his prime January 2000 - January 2004 he won 3 of the 4 WrestleMania matches, however it was what he did all year round that mattered to him, HHH was always wise enough in my opinion to take a big hit in a big match as it'll overshadow his dominance throughout the rest of the year as is proven today when we tend to measure his WrestleMania career as a gauge on how his career has panned out, he lost four World Title matches in a row during the mid naughties, two of which were Triple Threats, by which time he was free from any stigma that losing brings

Losses at WrestleMania don't mean much for Triple H when you look at the type of matches in which he lost, since 1999 the only matches he's had barring one at WrestleMania have been World Title Matches and streak matches, it would be inconcievable to believe he'd have such a high profile record and not lose his fair share

As for the match, absolutely zero interest in it, no brainer that Taker will win yet again with absolutely nothing new or exciting coming in the aftermath

Gaffer i dont think i have ever heard you state you are intersted in anything the wwe produce, you always seem to negative about everything they do and i sometimes wonder why you are a fan.....

Schucks, you got me

UFC UFC UFC

by djcc2004 Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:19 pm

[quote="the-gaffer"]

djcc2004 wrote:
the-gaffer wrote:Loses at WrestleMania don't really matter to Haitch and never have for a long time now, during his prime January 2000 - January 2004 he won 3 of the 4 WrestleMania matches, however it was what he did all year round that mattered to him, HHH was always wise enough in my opinion to take a big hit in a big match as it'll overshadow his dominance throughout the rest of the year as is proven today when we tend to measure his WrestleMania career as a gauge on how his career has panned out, he lost four World Title matches in a row during the mid naughties, two of which were Triple Threats, by which time he was free from any stigma that losing brings

Losses at WrestleMania don't mean much for Triple H when you look at the type of matches in which he lost, since 1999 the only matches he's had barring one at WrestleMania have been World Title Matches and streak matches, it would be inconcievable to believe he'd have such a high profile record and not lose his fair share

As for the match, absolutely zero interest in it, no brainer that Taker will win yet again with absolutely nothing new or exciting coming in the aftermath

Gaffer i dont think i have ever heard you state you are intersted in anything the wwe produce, you always seem to negative about everything they do and i sometimes wonder why you are a fan.....

Schucks, you got me

UFC UFC UFC[/quote

Good one Gaffer, i cant stop laughing

by Kay Fabe Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:28 pm

djcc2004 wrote:In your opinion he is right to be negative about HHH v Taker, but this is not Nesicarilly everyones opinion.

At the end of the day everyone is going to have their own opinion and i respect that , but i get sick of seeing the same people on this site being negative about everything. I just think to myself why bother watching if you hate it so much? and gaffer is a prime example

i know i have a rep for going all "R-Truth" on people, but at the end of the day i just get sick of seeing people moaning about wwe

It's like a football team isn't it, you might not like how they play at times but it won't stop you watching, you might not always like who they sign or how they use players but you won't stop going

If people want to see another Undertaker/HHH match then that's fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion, same as people who don't want to see it, if you or anyone else are sick of people being negative then be positive, make your reasoning for liking it clear, you never know, you might make someone see things in a different light

As for 'hating' the product, I absolutely love the fact that Punk and Danielson are the World Champions, I love that Christian got a shot last year too, I like Sheamus, Cody Rhodes and see a lot of potential in Drew McIntyre, all of whom get plenty of TV time and all of whom I think I'm positive about, I don't believe they get helped in the same way guys like Austin, Rock, Taker, HHH and Mankind where all helped in the mid-late 90s though or how Lesnar, Batista, Cena and Orton were helped in the early to mid 00s

I don't crap on something for the sake of it, I look at the positives and negatives from it then base my opinion on that, is it right or wrong? Who knows, it's my own opinion though

As for you going R-Truth on people, unless going R-Truth means appearing out of no-where and making a point before disappearing then I don't know what you mean as I've no recollection of ever seeing you on here

"and that's the truth..."

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:32 pm

djcc2004 wrote:In your opinion he is right to be negative about HHH v Taker, but this is not Nesicarilly everyones opinion.

At the end of the day everyone is going to have their own opinion and i respect that , but i get sick of seeing the same people on this site being negative about everything. I just think to myself why bother watching if you hate it so much? and gaffer is a prime example

i know i have a rep for going all "R-Truth" on people, but at the end of the day i just get sick of seeing people moaning about wwe

I didn't realise you had a rep....

But to be fair, if you don't wanna see moaning then don't come on a forum. You won't get everyone saying it's brilliant and not everyone is gonna agree.

by djcc2004 Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:33 pm

the-gaffer wrote:
djcc2004 wrote:In your opinion he is right to be negative about HHH v Taker, but this is not Nesicarilly everyones opinion.

At the end of the day everyone is going to have their own opinion and i respect that , but i get sick of seeing the same people on this site being negative about everything. I just think to myself why bother watching if you hate it so much? and gaffer is a prime example

i know i have a rep for going all "R-Truth" on people, but at the end of the day i just get sick of seeing people moaning about wwe

It's like a football team isn't it, you might not like how they play at times but it won't stop you watching, you might not always like who they sign or how they use players but you won't stop going

If people want to see another Undertaker/HHH match then that's fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion, same as people who don't want to see it, if you or anyone else are sick of people being negative then be positive, make your reasoning for liking it clear, you never know, you might make someone see things in a different light

As for 'hating' the product, I absolutely love the fact that Punk and Danielson are the World Champions, I love that Christian got a shot last year too, I like Sheamus, Cody Rhodes and see a lot of potential in Drew McIntyre, all of whom get plenty of TV time and all of whom I think I'm positive about, I don't believe they get helped in the same way guys like Austin, Rock, Taker, HHH and Mankind where all helped in the mid-late 90s though or how Lesnar, Batista, Cena and Orton were helped in the early to mid 00s

I don't crap on something for the sake of it, I look at the positives and negatives from it then base my opinion on that, is it right or wrong? Who knows, it's my own opinion though

As for you going R-Truth on people, unless going R-Truth means appearing out of no-where and making a point before disappearing then I don't know what you mean as I've no recollection of ever seeing you on here "and that's the truth..."

It Means your gonna get got gaffer

by MtotheC Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:44 pm

djcc2004 wrote:In your opinion he is right to be negative about HHH v Taker, but this is not Nesicarilly everyones opinion.

At the end of the day everyone is going to have their own opinion and i respect that , but i get sick of seeing the same people on this site being negative about everything. I just think to myself why bother watching if you hate it so much? and gaffer is a prime example

i know i have a rep for going all "R-Truth" on people, but at the end of the day i just get sick of seeing people moaning about wwe

I dont recall gaff ever saying that everyone should be of the opinion that it is boring, just that he is!

If you CAN respect other opinions then respect it, if you dont agree with it agure your case as to why. Thats why we are all here at the end of day.

You can still be a fan and not enjoy the product, but love or interest in the sport keeps you watching. I just find it lame when people dont agree with others opinions and then get all 'R-Truth' as you put it.

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:47 pm

djcc2004 wrote:
the-gaffer wrote:
djcc2004 wrote:In your opinion he is right to be negative about HHH v Taker, but this is not Nesicarilly everyones opinion.

At the end of the day everyone is going to have their own opinion and i respect that , but i get sick of seeing the same people on this site being negative about everything. I just think to myself why bother watching if you hate it so much? and gaffer is a prime example

i know i have a rep for going all "R-Truth" on people, but at the end of the day i just get sick of seeing people moaning about wwe

It's like a football team isn't it, you might not like how they play at times but it won't stop you watching, you might not always like who they sign or how they use players but you won't stop going

If people want to see another Undertaker/HHH match then that's fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion, same as people who don't want to see it, if you or anyone else are sick of people being negative then be positive, make your reasoning for liking it clear, you never know, you might make someone see things in a different light

As for 'hating' the product, I absolutely love the fact that Punk and Danielson are the World Champions, I love that Christian got a shot last year too, I like Sheamus, Cody Rhodes and see a lot of potential in Drew McIntyre, all of whom get plenty of TV time and all of whom I think I'm positive about, I don't believe they get helped in the same way guys like Austin, Rock, Taker, HHH and Mankind where all helped in the mid-late 90s though or how Lesnar, Batista, Cena and Orton were helped in the early to mid 00s

I don't crap on something for the sake of it, I look at the positives and negatives from it then base my opinion on that, is it right or wrong? Who knows, it's my own opinion though

As for you going R-Truth on people, unless going R-Truth means appearing out of no-where and making a point before disappearing then I don't know what you mean as I've no recollection of ever seeing you on here "and that's the truth..."

It Means your gonna get got gaffer

Oh good lord.....

by Kay Fabe Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:51 pm

dum dum de dum dum de duuuuuuum

Internet Warriors are go

by Mr H Tue 21 Feb 2012, 1:59 pm

It's you're gonna get got.

Not your.

Anyway, I for one am probably the most negative person on the board about the WWE. I'm an old school mark, i always compare the product to that of years gone by and would rather see a returning Stone Cold Steve Austin vs Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania than Dolph Ziggler or Cody Rhodes in a World Title match. I cant help it, thats just the way i am.

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:05 pm

Mr H wrote:It's you're gonna get got.

Not your.

Anyway, I for one am probably the most negative person on the board about the WWE. I'm an old school mark, i always compare the product to that of years gone by and would rather see a returning Stone Cold Steve Austin vs Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania than Dolph Ziggler or Cody Rhodes in a World Title match. I cant help it, thats just the way i am.

Shut up.

by Mr H Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:07 pm

King Beer wrote:
Mr H wrote:It's you're gonna get got.

Not your.

Anyway, I for one am probably the most negative person on the board about the WWE. I'm an old school mark, i always compare the product to that of years gone by and would rather see a returning Stone Cold Steve Austin vs Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania than Dolph Ziggler or Cody Rhodes in a World Title match. I cant help it, thats just the way i am.

Shut up.

Would you like to be assassinated?

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:08 pm

Mr H wrote:
King Beer wrote:
Mr H wrote:It's you're gonna get got.

Not your.

Anyway, I for one am probably the most negative person on the board about the WWE. I'm an old school mark, i always compare the product to that of years gone by and would rather see a returning Stone Cold Steve Austin vs Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania than Dolph Ziggler or Cody Rhodes in a World Title match. I cant help it, thats just the way i am.

Shut up.

Would you like to be assassinated?

Bring it on.

by djcc2004 Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:20 pm

Mr H wrote:It's you're gonna get got.

Not your.

Anyway, I for one am probably the most negative person on the board about the WWE. I'm an old school mark, i always compare the product to that of years gone by and would rather see a returning Stone Cold Steve Austin vs Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania than Dolph Ziggler or Cody Rhodes in a World Title match. I cant help it, thats just the way i am.

haha its so easy to make it all kick off on 606v2

you have a little pop at someone and everyone trys to get involved, even to point out "its not your it should be you're"

good one thumbsup

by Guest Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:25 pm

Lets keep it sensible please chaps.

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:26 pm

Y I Man wrote:Lets keep it sensible please chaps.

Or you'll get got.

by Celtic Warrior Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:30 pm

Mr H wrote:
King Beer wrote:
Mr H wrote:It's you're gonna get got.

Not your.

Anyway, I for one am probably the most negative person on the board about the WWE. I'm an old school mark, i always compare the product to that of years gone by and would rather see a returning Stone Cold Steve Austin vs Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania than Dolph Ziggler or Cody Rhodes in a World Title match. I cant help it, thats just the way i am.

Shut up.

Would you like to be assassinated?

Is this another name for my hitlist?

by Kay Fabe Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:31 pm

djcc2004 wrote:
Mr H wrote:It's you're gonna get got.

Not your.

Anyway, I for one am probably the most negative person on the board about the WWE. I'm an old school mark, i always compare the product to that of years gone by and would rather see a returning Stone Cold Steve Austin vs Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania than Dolph Ziggler or Cody Rhodes in a World Title match. I cant help it, thats just the way i am.

haha its so easy to make it all kick off on 606v2

you have a little pop at someone and everyone trys to get involved, even to point out "its not your it should be you're"

good one

A pop? It was a bitch that backfired when you choose to ignore the points I gave you in reply

by djcc2004 Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:52 pm

gaffer grow up

by Samo Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:52 pm

djcc2004 wrote:gaffer grow up

by MtotheC Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:55 pm

djcc2004 wrote:gaffer grow up

tool

by djcc2004 Tue 21 Feb 2012, 2:59 pm

MtotheC wrote:
djcc2004 wrote:gaffer grow up

tool

spanner

by Kay Fabe Tue 21 Feb 2012, 3:00 pm

djcc2004 wrote:gaffer grow up

No problem R-Truth

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 3:00 pm

Gaffer is no friend of Little Jimmy.

by Ent Tue 21 Feb 2012, 3:01 pm

the-gaffer wrote:
djcc2004 wrote:gaffer grow up

No problem R-Truth

Now now children.

by Guest Tue 21 Feb 2012, 3:01 pm

Y I Man wrote:Lets keep it sensible please chaps.

by Beer Tue 21 Feb 2012, 3:02 pm

King Beer wrote:
Y I Man wrote:Lets keep it sensible please chaps.

Or you'll get got.

by Sponsored content

Quite Simple - Who Wins