 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Some people just don't get it.
Eric Walker seems to be one of those people.
Eric's latest column centered around this Web site (although if you read his new column you'd think it was at least three different ones) and our reactions to the horrid CSWF show, a card he worked on as a referee- aka, he got paid to be there.
I took umbrage with his positive "review" of a show that stunk on level after level, and he decided to respond with a column and viewpoint so far out in left field that it should be playing for the Red Sox under the Green Monster.
To sum it up, if you're not "in the biz" then you have no right to talk about "the biz." Also, it's OK for someone to refer to themselves as a "reporter" while they're getting paid to do a job or be part of a show, and therefore it's OK to not point out any possible negative aspects of said show because these are people this "reporter" has to deal with "in the locker room."
Christ, where do you even start with that kind of logic? Here are some...err, "highlights," followed by my comments:
He states:
"Sometimes, I get responses about my columns and reviews that really
interest me. This one REALLY interested me. When you get a chance read
my results from the CSWF show. That was such a pathetic show. We were
the rowdy guys in the front row, right by where you took the bump to the
floor.
Damn!! That show sucked ( with the exception of the ladies, slyk/crowbar, and hamrick)
"This was sent to me by ANOTHER internet reporter. On his site, they ripped the show to shreds then had some fun at my expense with an article picking apart my review of the show."
Another bad start to a column- this is clearly an e-mail sent to him written by someone from this Web site, and he's referring to my previous column. All part of the same Web site.
"For the record, my review was not harsh and I spoke of the good points of the show. I admitted to him that ripping a show, especially one I am on and get paychecks from, is not in my best interest."
"And why would I not slam an indy show I am at or work on? Why would I not pick matches apart and insult the workers on the show? Well, for many reasons."
"1. Unlike 99.9% of the people that write on the internet, I have to be in the locker rooms and face the people who I just slammed. I really wonder how brave guys who insult wrestlers and shows online would be if they had to face these people just days later?"
Let's get something straight right off the bat.
We do it every night. After every show. And have been doing it for years. It's not a badge of honor or a measure of manhood to "face" these people, as you make it out to be, it's just a fact. At a show last year, the WWE's "Dr." Tom Pritchard was told flat out that the company he worked for sucked (and why), the company's flagship show sucked (and why), and specific workers were named to him as ones who sucked (and why).
No one's looking for a job here.
It's also not a badge of honor or something to be impressed by to be in an indy wrestling show's locker room.
"I can see a guy like Justice Pain or Homocide handling an ass ripping online very well. I can see them walking up to the person and thanking them for their well-intended opinions of the show and their match. They would even invite the guy to come join them for a beer later.
Ok, they would stomp the guy a new ass. I don't blame them either"
Well, that's mature. What a warped, asinine outlook on receiving criticism.
If you can't take criticism, you don't deserve to be in the business. If any guy too a shot at me or anyone else, they'd either be mowing my lawn or in handcuffs at the end of the night. I addressed that in an earlier column called Customer Service in the Wrestling Business.
If I ever saw Homicide have a bad match, I'd mention it. If he asked me about it, I'd tell him why. That goes for him or anyone else in the business.
In case you haven't figured it out, no one's disagreed with us yet. Try looking at the things we criticize and why we criticize them.
"2. I like working. Does anyone think I would get booked on shows if I ripped other shows? I wouldn't book a guy who I thought would turn around and slam the show on the internet or elsewhere. It's common business sense."
That's fine. But don't call yourself a "reporter" or a "wrestling reporter," because you're not. I don't call myself a "reporter" and neither does anyone else on the Web site my columns are on.
We're fans of wrestling. That's it. We don't have any delusions of grandeur or get all excited about being in an indy fed's locker room.
And you don't seem to comprehend that if you WORK for a company, you should STATE that you do in your recap so readers know you're biased. Hell, Bob Ryder even does that. Working for a company then writing a glowing review passing yourself off as an unbiased reporter is doing your readers a great disservice.
"3. Indy shows are going to have bad matches because indy wrestlers are still learning. Lets face it, a kid 2 months out of wrestling school isn't gonna be able to carry a 20 minute match. It's easy to get jaded after seeing indy guys like AJ Styles, Low KI, and Steve Corino be able to do "4 Star matches with a ring post" that you forget that you might be watching some kid's 2nd or 3rd match."
OK, after reading this, it's pretty obvious that you're oblivious to what was written, except of course the part that was written about you.
Firehawk, Jackie Dreamer, and Smokey M. aren't rookies in the business, and they're horrible. Sorry. They've each been in the business long enough that if they haven't been able to figure out how to present a passable looking match, then it's not going to happen in the future. I wrote specific reasons why I wasn't blown away by their work in the last column.
If you actually bothered to read my column, you'd have noticed that I praised, among others, the following (with comments):
Slyk Wagner Brown ("an untapped well of a wrestler")
Morbeus and Brian Fury ("better 'effort' than the opening match but
thanks
to the booking of this card, they had too much to live up to")
April Hunter ("super talent")
EZ Money ("great wrestler")
The column is still up on the site, so I'd recommend checking it out to see what you clearly missed.
(BTW, the first match was just atrocious. Spots were botched, the wrestlers didn't connect with all 76 people there, and there wasn't one thing done in that match that anyone else couldn't do in their living room. So get the blinders off and forget about padding your wallet if you're going to be a real "reporter.")
"What good is it to slam that kid? What would I gain? I can do more by intercepting the kid in the back and give him constructive criticism and tell him the good points of his match and what to work on more. Slamming him online might burst his confidence and make him quit the business he busted his ass to get into."
I couldn't care less about "bursting the confidence" of Firehawk, who resembles Abdullah the Butcher minus the talent (and who happened to be the promoter working one of the last three matches of the card). I don't care about Smokey M., who has no skill outside a passable mimicry of The Rock circa 1998, and thinks that's enough to get by in the business. And I definitely couldn't care less about Jackie Dreamer, who as the booker did a horrible job in the ring and out of it- and showed total contempt for the audience he's expecting to come back for another show with his shit attitude and smart-ass remarks.
Go back and name ONE THING outside of that first match that was a "slam." And then remember that first match, then look at what I wrote, and realize exactly WHY it got ripped.
"Or, he might go out next time and try something he is not ready to do and kill himself so no one can say his matches suck. Trust me, I've heard guys say it."
Well if they're so easily led and desperate then they REALLY need to reassess their priorities. How stupid to put yourself at risk out of fear of criticism from someone on the Internet- or a newsletter.
"If you think I don't rip shows, I do. But, I do in the back and at meetings. Case in point, I reviewed in July a show I did and made the show sound halfway decent online."
And, in turn, totally deceiving anyone who read your column. There is NO SUCH THING as a "biased reporter." You're not doing "reviews"- you're a shill. Nothing wrong with that, but don't you dare pass judgment on someone else because they're not getting paid to write a nice review, like you clearly are.
"In reality, the show couldn't have sucked worse if they had TRIED to make it suck. The show was so horrible I wanted the 5 hours of my life back I spent there that day."
Something like the CSWF show, then.
"I did not slam the show here, but a few days later at a meeting I did. Here were some of my to the wrestler's faces comments I made."
Oh, boy...
"You need to learn a new move. It's called the lock up."
"1984 called, it wants it's gimmick back."
"How many tickets did you sell to get on the show?"
"For the record, this locker room couldn't carry Ring Of Honor's jockstrap"
"You missed more spots than a blind housekeeper."
"Your booking was more confused than a baby at a topless bar."
"The WWE is suing you guys to stop using the term wrestling show."
"No one here is ready to move on. If you think you are, go. I will happily write about your flameout."
"Not bad, huh? Don't you wish you would read that in one of my columns? Wouldn't that be fun to read, huh?"
You must have come across as a real jackass in that "meeting."
I don't believe for a second you said any one of those things, because if you did, any wrestler with an ounce of self-respect would have knocked out half of your teeth. And if you said any kind of laughable shit like the Ring of Honor jockstrap comment, you'd have been stuffed into the nearest locker. What a disrespectful ingrate you'd be seen as- and wannabe tough guy talk like that is just asking for retaliation.
"Well, it's not happening. Ripping shows online is not my style. I will give my criticisms in the back where they belong. At least I will do it face to face."
Just like everyone else- in case you still don't get it, we do the same thing. We at least have the courage to stand up for our convictions, no matter what the cost. We've been comped at shows before and if they were bad, we wrote they were bad. But most importantly, we wrote WHY they were bad.
You're not doing anyone any favors lying about a promotion's show, or how good or bad a worker is, or writing (since I'm sure you never said any of that to anyone) immature comments like the ones you wrote above.
"Oh yeah, and to all the other reporters out there. I've said it before, I'll say it again. UNTIL you go through wrestling school, until you work on shows or for that matter TAKE A BUMP, you have little if any right to rip apart any wrestling show."
And your credibility just got flushed right down the toilet.
So...by your "logic," anyone who hasn't worked on a movie or acted in a movie or directed a movie has no right to comment on it or review it?
Unless you've been a senator or in Congress or President of the United States, or even a local yokel councilman, you're not allowed to comment on politics?
Unless I was an insurance policy, I'm not allowed to sell one or discuss the good or bad aspects of one?
If you go to a wrestling show, you're not allowed to "rip" it apart, even if it was awful, because you're not a part of the business?
This response didn't work for Lance Storm, and it doesn't work for you. What a fucking stupid, narrow-minded, elitist wannabe statement to make.
Let's make it crystal clear- I'm a fan, if I don't like something I paid money to see, I've got every right, and even moreso than you do, to write about it.
"The kids you see out there might not be the next Chris Benoit. They might not be able to do 4 Star matches. The booking may not make sense. There will be promoters who "Triple H" their shows and put themselves over. BUT, until you can do what they do, don't rip them for doing it."
That's just an unbelievably whacked out, tunnel vision view of and response
to criticism.
Any retard can book better than "Jackie Dreamer."
Anyone can do the same moves in their living room as were done in that
first match.
And I'll rip it anytime.
"Oh yeah, write this list down."
Pimping your "resume" impresses no one, either.
"You see a review from these shows, you can expect a degree of bias. I still won't slam a show I'm at that I'm not working on or work for, but those may get glossed over a bit more."
Since that's the case, do yourself and your readers the following service:
- Proclaim that your column where you discuss the show is NOT a "review"
- If it's a show you worked on/got paid to work on/got paid to be there/booked/whatever,
report just the match and angle results if you're so
fearful of jeapordizing your future paydays.
- Admit where it's appropriate to do so that you're a shill, and not a
reporter.
- Be honest with yourself and the people who take the time to read your
columns.
We are.
----
The comments and statements
do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Brett Schwan and the Wrestling
Clothesline (although many times, he comes damn close!). Please
feel free to email HIM with any comments, complaints, etc.
Jim has been watching wrestling for over 20 years and has followed and reported on indy wrestling for over 6 years. He's also a fan of the New York Giants, New York Yankees, St. John's Red Storm basketball, Alabama Crimson Tide football, and the New Jersey Devils, but please don't hold that against him.
Contact Jim at BilJim2@hotmail.com
----
Previous Columns:
Watching Tazz is Tough Enough
Seven in Two
Getting Your Moneys Worth
How Not to Run and Indy
If That's What it Takes, They Don't Have It!
Customer Service in the Wrestling Business
Consider the Source
How Much Would You Pay?
Living Off The Past
Enough
Already
What
A Cop Out
Climbing
the Psychic Hotline
Subtleties
Pure Carny Scum
Will Bleed For Food
Review...of a Review
---
