PDA

View Full Version : Battle Royal Absurd Rule?



Rich Cranium
10-14-2011, 10:38 PM
Tonight on the Smackdown battle royal, Christian, who had been eliminated earlier, came back into the ring and eliminated Sheamus. I've seen this happen time and again throughout WWE battle royals including the Royal Rumble.

Quite simply, why is it that an eliminated wrestler can go back into the ring and eliminate another wrestler? It doesn't really make sense as he should not actually be eliminated and should be allowed back in.

Enlighten me with your logic.

silverine
10-14-2011, 10:42 PM
The rules of the rumble is if you go over the top you are eliminated so it technically doesn't matter how they go over the rope.

Rich Cranium
10-14-2011, 10:47 PM
The rules of the rumble is if you go over the top you are eliminated so it technically doesn't matter how they go over the rope.

I understand that but I just think there should be a rule where only participants that haven't been eliminated can eliminate someone. Perhaps I am over analyzing it but it has just been something that doesn't sit right with me.

broc808
10-14-2011, 10:52 PM
I understand that but I just think there should be a rule where only participants that haven't been eliminated can eliminate someone. Perhaps I am over analyzing it but it has just been something that doesn't sit right with me.

well Rich in all fairness it's not like it would actually affect the winner of the match, I mean ya I think it's extremely annoying as well but still the only reason they really ever do it is to build feuds but no matter how many times that happens it will still never influence a winner of a battle royal so I'm fine with it

IrkenInvader
10-14-2011, 10:56 PM
It is just for the feud, I think its great for story lines.

AreYaSerious
10-14-2011, 11:04 PM
I understand that but I just think there should be a rule where only participants that haven't been eliminated can eliminate someone. Perhaps I am over analyzing it but it has just been something that doesn't sit right with me.

There is times people have eliminated themselves, in the scenario there wasn't a participant at all. I know what your saying, I totally agree with you and all but I guess that's how it goes.

Rich Cranium
10-14-2011, 11:07 PM
To build up feuds is a great answer! Thanks and now I will row off on my little lonely canoe into the night.

URATOOL
10-14-2011, 11:12 PM
Tonight on the Smackdown battle royal, Christian, who had been eliminated earlier, came back into the ring and eliminated Sheamus. I've seen this happen time and again throughout WWE battle royals including the Royal Rumble.

Quite simply, why is it that an eliminated wrestler can go back into the ring and eliminate another wrestler? It doesn't really make sense as he should not actually be eliminated and should be allowed back in.

Enlighten me with your logic.

What's even worse is I think people have gone out with interference from people coming in who weren't even in the match!

broc808
10-14-2011, 11:17 PM
What's even worse is I think people have gone out with interference from people coming in who weren't even in the match!

oh ya all the time that happens but still it's all for building feuds which is fine by me

tnafanwwehater
10-15-2011, 12:02 AM
Tonight on the Smackdown battle royal, Christian, who had been eliminated earlier, came back into the ring and eliminated Sheamus. I've seen this happen time and again throughout WWE battle royals including the Royal Rumble.

Quite simply, why is it that an eliminated wrestler can go back into the ring and eliminate another wrestler? It doesn't really make sense as he should not actually be eliminated and should be allowed back in.

Enlighten me with your logic.


its simple bro. why didnt jake go to jail when the snake bit macho man? why didnt rikishi go to jail for runnin austin over? why didnt mcmahon fire dx when they spray painted his limo,wwe building and his private jet? its wrestling dont find logic...enjoy it :)

Robstar
10-15-2011, 12:16 AM
I know what you mean. I prefer it when they actually put the effort into baiting them to go over the top themselves, instead of doing it cheaply like they did but I understand they had one camera angle shown at any one time and if it wasn't for the commentators we actually might have missed that particular elimination as they had cut away at the time. (nice one wwe) I could tell by the way Christian was hanging around 'recovering' that he wasn't finished, you'd think the production crew would be up to speed, although it is live.

I thought this was going to be a thread about wrestlers who go out under the bottom rope and hide until the end - now that's more insulting to watch I reckon

Yano88
10-15-2011, 01:39 AM
I already made a topic on the stupidity of Battle Royals.

And not only the fact that anyone or anything can eliminate you...

Also the stupidity from leaving the ring from bottom rope and come back at the last minute for the win.

Really if Miz managed to win with that method I would have sent an insult mail to WWE lol.

With that said... yes, Battle Royals sucks pretty bad in logics and rulings...

It's not credible anymore...

Super Kicked
10-15-2011, 01:39 AM
I know what you mean. I prefer it when they actually put the effort into baiting them to go over the top themselves, instead of doing it cheaply like they did but I understand they had one camera angle shown at any one time and if it wasn't for the commentators we actually might have missed that particular elimination as they had cut away at the time. (nice one wwe) I could tell by the way Christian was hanging around 'recovering' that he wasn't finished, you'd think the production crew would be up to speed, although it is live.

I thought this was going to be a thread about wrestlers who go out under the bottom rope and hide until the end - now that's more insulting to watch I reckon

Agreed. Correct me if I am wrong but if this rule were the case, would we not have a Santino rumble victory? That would be awesome.

Peter Kaymakcian
10-15-2011, 01:49 AM
Here is the answer plain and simple. A battle royal is essentially a no-DQ match so therefore outside interference is allowed. There is nothing the referees can do since there are no rules except if you go over the top you are eliminated.

As for the point of going underneath the ropes well again it goes into the rules of the match. It is an over the top rope battle royal meaning the bottom rope is completely legal.

Y2Jryder
10-15-2011, 03:56 AM
So you also think it's ridiculous if someone cheat to win a title??

Yano88
10-15-2011, 03:58 AM
So you also think it's ridiculous if someone cheat to win a title??

I find ridicoulos that people actually compete in a battle royal.

For common logic everyone should try to leave the ring via bottom rope and return at the last moment.

What's the point in fighting in the ring?

Super Kicked
10-15-2011, 04:16 AM
The novalty of the battle royal has worn off for me. The royal rumble used to be my most anticipated matche because you never knew what was going to happen, or what was legal. Now if you see someone go under the bottom rope you know he's coming back in at the last moment, if they have two hands on the top rope they are going to skin the cat, or if someone is being slowly lifted over the ropes they will drop to the apron and just roll back in - although a baseball slide would eliminate those types of guys (Rey freakin Mysterio) everytime.

The only thing exciting about rumbles for me now is waiting to see what crazy crap John Morrison is going to do.

Y2J___Y2J
10-15-2011, 05:18 AM
It's pro wrestling .. it's all just to further a storyline.

Polly-Pablo
10-15-2011, 05:41 AM
I find it ridiculous that Cody went out within a few minutes.......way to put your IC champ over!

*and yes, I am and always will be a Cody 'mark'*

URATOOL
10-15-2011, 06:10 AM
I find it ridiculous that Cody went out within a few minutes.......way to put your IC champ over!

*and yes, I am and always will be a Cody 'mark'*

I found it really funny. The crowd should have thrown bags at him.

Polly-Pablo
10-15-2011, 06:34 AM
I found it really funny. The crowd should have thrown bags at him.

Which would make you a non Cody mark then......

Juvenile Junkie
10-15-2011, 06:35 AM
Tonight on the Smackdown battle royal, Christian, who had been eliminated earlier, came back into the ring and eliminated Sheamus. I've seen this happen time and again throughout WWE battle royals including the Royal Rumble.

Quite simply, why is it that an eliminated wrestler can go back into the ring and eliminate another wrestler? It doesn't really make sense as he should not actually be eliminated and should be allowed back in.

Enlighten me with your logic.

well a team who can't make the play offs can beat a team who still can,thus ending the other team's play off chances.

No,wrestling is being booked by idiots,its trying its utmost to ensure that MMA succeeds

Juvenile Junkie
10-15-2011, 06:38 AM
Which would make you a non Cody mark then......

nothing wrong with that.

Polly-Pablo
10-15-2011, 06:39 AM
nothing wrong with that.

I never said there was...it was a statement of fact, not a question of whether he should be or not.....