Jim Ross comments on wave of suspensions + my reaction

Send News


click for his blog post

It is really well written and pretty even-handed and reasonable and you should definitely give it a look.

However, I do take issue with one thing. I do not think it is unreasonable for fans or writers to criticize the company or its policies even if those people aren't around to really understand what is going on behind those closed doors.

It is because we're not behind closed doors that we wonder why such a giant loophole was allowed to go unplugged for a period of 18 months.
It isn't unfair to ask whether the WWE is suspending these performers out of a desire to see things change or because Congress is watching. It is not unfair because the WWE's own actions lend themselves to those questions.
Maybe WWE has the best interest of its performers in mind and is genuinely sincere about the wellness policy. If that is the case than the company should welcome criticism. Sometimes, it is the people most heavily involved that can't see the error in their planning. I believe it is commonly called not being able to see the forrest through the trees.
WWE's actions will ultimately prove their sincerity. If they do everything right, silence the critics on this issue, then everyone wins. If the critics come back with a different thing to criticize then so be it. You're never going to please everyone, but neither should you dismiss their views because they don't walk in your shoes.
I'm not suggesting that JR was implying that nobody should criticize the WWE but I've been around long enough to understand that he will be accused of it by some. I only chose to expand on that because I think the important message is that if you're going to be a critic, you need to be a reasoned and thought out critic. Going on a blog and swearing and accusing WWE of this and that and hurling insults at company management isn't the most effective coarse of action.

Earlier this week I said that the WWE should've been naming names the entire time the wellness policy has been in place. I feel that was always necessary for the purposes of public trust and employee accountability. So much of WWE's problem is trust related and their lack of it among the general population as a whole and even their own fanbase. I can't suggest that WWE hasn't brought a lot of that upon themselves through past actions.

I have called Dr. David Black Dr. Nick Riviera because of his willingness to say what ever is necessary to avoid the issue. His recent characterization of the rash of deaths in the industry as a bunch of coincidences in the Washington Post has earned him that label, at least for now. See also Phil Astin's Lawyer which resulted in the Lyonel Huts handle.

I have more recently picked on Ken Anderson (Kennedy) and referred to him as a lyer. I feel justified in those comments given that his name has been linked to signature pharmacy in this current investigation when he went on National TV and in the News media and said he ceased using steroids when the Wellness policy was put in place. He lied to be a good company man, or at least that's why I think he lied, even though I do believe the company would prefer he been truthful or not spoken at all.

So, I do believe criticism and asking questions is more than valid but like Jim Ross, I ask that you do so in a reasoned and thought out manner.

©2007 Combat Hooligans. Duplication of the content from this website without permission by its author(s) is prohibited. Any news, reports and commentary used from this site must be accompanied by a link to www.combat-hooligans.com