The Katz Files – Arnie Katz
My RAW (4/8) Notebook
The Kingfish Arnie Katz delves into the Flair retirement, the new Big Show angle and other issues raised by RAW.
The Handicap Handicap
“I hate handicap matches,” said my wife Joyce, a long-time wrestling fan.
“I hate them, too,” I agreed as we watched two such matches on the same episode of RAW.
It’s well-known in pro wrestling that you can run a great gimmick into the ground by repeating it too often. Here’s news for WWE bookers: It’s true for bad gimmicks, too. And WWE order up handicap matches as often as college students order pizzas.
Handicap matches are worthless on so many levels that it is surprising that bookers would use them except as a rare plot point. Two of them on one show is pushing it, to say the least.
The psychology of the handicap match is weak. Two guys, each of who could possibly beat a single adversary, are teamed up and lose to that same person.
The action in a handicap match is often spotty and contrived. An all-star handicap match like the ones presented on this RAW ends up being worked to explain how the single wrestler could beat the other two. The Triple H & John Bradshaw Layfield versus John Cena match was so bogus from the opening bell that it should’ve been obvious to any fan that Layfield would try to strike Triple H, who would then retaliate.
There are alternatives to Handicap matches. JBL cold have fought Cena one-on-one with Triple H as Special Guest Referee and Randy Orton as the interested spectator.
The Flair Fall-out: Batista vs. Michaels
The execution of this angle has been nothing short of brilliant. Batista has gradually built up his anger with gestures and facial expressions before confronting Michaels in a direct way. Michaels has done a fine job with the mic and even Chris Jericho did fine with his Iago-like instigating the two men during The Highlight Reel.
Unfortunately, the angle itself is not good, because it simply doesn’t make a lot of sense. It doesn’t make sense in terms of Batista’s feeling that Michaels could, or should, do anything but what he did and it doesn’t make sense to put Batista into a situation in which he looks like a thick-headed dolt.
Batista is one of the greatest assets WWE has; he is the very image of the heroic champion. Turning him into a heel for a meaningless feud with HBK when Smackdown needs him to be strong and unambiguously heroic.
WWE did such a good job of having Shawn Michaels do the Right Thing that it is pretty much beyond argument.
It would’ve been better if William Regal said, “Two out of three” and just nominated Michaels to face Batista in another Brand Supremacy match. Terrible as that idea is, the ridiculous argument between Batista and Michaels is much, much worse.
That’s it for today. I’ll be back tomorrow with another installment of the Internet’s fastest-rising daily wrestling column.
– Arnie Katz
Crossfire4@cox.net
(4/8/08)
Loading ...