Interinactivity: 04.13.2012 – Brock Lesnar, John Cena, & The Extras
by BD on April 13, 2012

Welcome back to another thrilling edition of “Interinactivity”. I admit, I haven’t watched a lot of wrestling since WrestleMania. All right, so I haven’t watched any. I YouTubed the Brock debut and the Bryan / Shaemus reactions, but that’s it. Me not watching wrestling is not a pattern that I see changing anytime soon.

All I’ve been seeing is articles about how the WWE’s show and business is awesome now. I don’t really see how that’s the case – although this is par for the course after WWE does one passable show. Anyway, I didn’t really know how much I’d have to contribute given that I haven’t paid any attention to what’s going on outside of recaps. (Speaking of which, where’s Wheeler been at? Miss that dude’s recaps.)

But, I should have realized that there would still be more than enough material for Interinactivity. I contributed to Martin’s “Five Things I Like About Modern Pro Wrestling” article from this past week, and one of the things I said was that I enjoyed checking out wrestling fans’ reactions to stuff. This may actually be my favorite thing about modern pro wrestling. I can never predict what people will choose to like or dislike. It’s like trying to find logic in a TNA Knockout storyline. An example was when people started buying into this Shaemus push from last year – that legitimately surprised me (and still does.)

I also thought people would be all into this Brock Lesnar thing. People were all into the Rock thing at first, then everyone complained about various reasons why they had to wait a year to see the match, how little Rock was on the show, how they never had that much actual contact, how the promos were endless, etc. Now Brock is here – and he’s kicking Cena’s ass right away. They’re having a match straight away. There’s been very few promos that I’m aware of.

And yet, here we are. It amazes and amuses me to no end what bothers some people. This leads us to…


James A: I can’t stand those stupid crowd-brawls. Why waste Sheamus (the World Heavyweight Champion!), Daniel Bryan, Mark Henry and Alberto Del Rio in a stupid crowd scene which makes everyone who isn’t Brock or Cena look like idiots?

Blair: Ridiculous. What a thing to complain about.

Explain how this is being “wasted”. Is this the ONLY thing these 4 gentlemen are being used for in WWE right now? Because from what I’ve read, these 4 gentlemen all have their own things going on right now. This in no way diminishes any of those that. Are you saying that Bryan and Shaemus running out to separate Brock Lesnar and John Cena for a few minutes is somehow taking away from what they’re doing? If so, explain how. Is it a distraction that neither can afford? Because I think that’s a hilarious statement.


Law: Preach on, brother. The idea of a brawl is fine, but not at the cost of making everyone else on the active roster look like tools- leave that for the officials and backstage crew.

Blair: Drivel.

In the WWE world, compared to Brock and Cena, everyone else on the roster ARE tools. Swayze wrote in his contribution to Martin’s article that the WWE has given up on John Cena – maybe I’m missing something, but I really don’t see how that’s the case. Lesnar and Cena – they’re the height of the show – not anyone else. Not Bryan. Not Shaemus. Not Del Rio. Not Sexual Chocolate. If The Undertaker suddenly broke character to run out and try to separate them – then okay, that would be pretty random. But that’s not happening – so far, it’s the guys fighting over the ECW Title, Sexual Chocolate, and Alberto Del Rio.


Law: Why would Alberto Del Rio etc. care enough that Brock and Cena were brawling to come down to the ring and break it up?

Blair: Presumeably because someone in charge told them to go and break it up.


James A: Do you like seeing top guys reduced to extras? I despise lumberjack matches for the same reason.

Blair: Good Jesus. Who in that ring is a “top guy” besides John Cena and Brock Lesnar? Did Triple H work his way in there without me seeing it?


Mark: I don’t think most fans see the other wrestlers as being reduced to extras. They are just following orders. The pull-apart brawls get big heat from the crowd and put over the “hatred” between the talents involved. It’s a great way to get over main event angles, extend the feud to the next week, and as Sideshowbob intimates below, needing big name wrestlers like Henry and Sheamus to keep Cena and Brock apart makes it all seem that much more important. You see “why are Sheamus and Bryan in a stupid crowd scene?” while most see “jobbers and officials never could have kept them apart so we needed our other upper carders too.”

Blair: Ha ha… “big name”.



“Twonk” is such a great word. Okay, so it’s not a word. But I’m making it a word. It’s a title that I’m going to give to whoever has a comment that is absolute drivel on an even higher level than the rest.

Law: Too early to start a “Brock leaving date” sweepstake? Early indications seem to be that they’re really gonna drop the ball here with his return.


This has been “Interinactivity”. Remember to comment, or shoot me an e-mail at Until next time, I’m Blair A. Douglas, living proof that you don’t actually have to watch wrestling to be entertained by it, even if Scott Steiner’s Twitter feed isn’t readily available. Thanks for reading and have a great weekend.

I’ll be in my trailer.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Related Columns Articles

more articles »

JC's Top Rope Report: Hope And Worry For The Future

Forever Heel: Brock Lesnar is Allowed to be an Absent Champ

CB's World: The Sami Zayn Revolution - How NXT Has Taken Over the WWE

Harrak's Thoughts: WWE TLC 2014 (John Cena vs Seth Rollins, Dean Ambrose vs Bray Wyatt


view profile »
  • James A

    Don’t be so tetchy, old man. You know how, on those instances where you say things which other people don’t like, you like to fall back on the old stand-by “this is my opinion, I’m entitled to it, so stop making a big deal about it,” or words to that effect?

    Well, my opinion is that I can’t stand those ridiculous crowd-brawls, I’m thoroughly entitled to not like those ridiculous crowd brawls, and I don’t know why you’re making such a song and dance about it.

    Glad we got that cleared up.

    Also: “It amazes and amuses me to no end what bothers some people.” After reading this week’s Interinactivity, I totally, totally know what you mean. ;)

    Anyway, I may respond with a little more loquaciously in article-form. You have been warned.

    Oh, and you can say what you like about me, but do try to refrain from calling our readers twonks. A tad unprofessional, if I may say so.

  • flamingwombat

    Blair taking wrestling twice as seriously as the readers he makes fun of for taking wrestling seriously is one of his most endearing traits.

  • Steven

    Twonk is a great word. We used it as an isnult in the 80s, ut never got old, and I’m glad – GLAD I say – that some one’s using it again. For what it’s worth, we stole it from some UK sitcom.

    Just thought I’d throw in some positivity…

  • Blair A. Douglas

    You could have read the first paragraph to know that’s not the case. But I don’t want to scare you away from commenting by suggesting you actually read stuff, because I enjoy your comment too much.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    Really? I know I picked it up from somewhere, I just can’t think where. It does have a bit of a British sound. Brilliant.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    Oh boy, here we go – I realize it’s your opinion, and obviously you’re not the only one who has it. Of course you’re entitled to it. Where did I say you weren’t? Where are you coming up with the idea that I hate your opinion? I just don’t understand it. I typed out reasons I don’t understand it and reasons why I find it amusing above. That’s not an attack of some sort. Just like it’s not an attack when I type out something on Henry or Shaemus and everyone piles on. I’m not trying to change anyone’s opinion. I like James A – always have. And I shouldn’t need to Mr. Rogers everyone after I write one of these.

    Anyway, cue Wombat replying to this with something about “straw man argument” without really understanding what it means, and we can all go have a nice weekend. And you can say anything you want about me, but do NOT bash the word “twonk”. Don’t you dare. Fantastic word.

  • flamingwombat

    If you can criticize wrestling without watching it, surely I can criticize your columns without reading them.

  • flamingwombat

    “A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.”

    That’s the definition, and that’s exactly what you often (try to) do.

  • Mike Gojira

    You’d have to look at clips of Blair’s articles to really see life through his eyes.

  • James A

    Too late, chum. My solicitors will be in touch.

    I didn’t once suggest that you hated my opinion. I didn’t even mention “attack” or “Sheamus.” I mean, you kinda labelled my words “laughable” and “ridiculous.” But I like to think that we’ve back-and-forthed about enough issues by now to not take that sort of stuff personally. Now, stop putting words in my mouth, will you?

    Allow me to explain myself. I dislike large-scale crowd brawls in general because they’re messy, and having a dozen feuds going on in the ring at once is uniformly awful booking. Remember all of those WCW/TNA main events which ended in run-ins? Exactly my point.

    The scene from Raw, however, was even worse, because not only did a hundred guys run in only to prove themselves utterly powerless against the strength of Lesnar and Cena, but none of them were even named! They were simply, according to Cole, “the entire locker-room.” And they were all made to look weak against the might of Cena and Lesnar.

    Cynical Bastard (I think) made a great point: he said that it was cool to see Lesnar having to be restrained by The World’s Strongest Man. I agree, but unfortunately it’s a moot point because for the purposes of the angle, Henry was just a nameless face in the crowd, unacknowledged by commentary – and Lesnar shrugged him off twice!

    Furthermore, the men feuding over SmackDown’s top title were stood right next to one another and weren’t batting an eyelid. Now THAT’S laughable. What did it achieve apart from completely shattering fans’ suspension of disbelief? More to the point, what did WWE achieve by showing Sheamus and Daniel Bryan brushed off like paper dolls that it couldn’t have otherwise achieved through having Cena and Lesnar shrug off random referees and security guards with no credibility to lose?

    More than that, though, my problem comes once again down to WWE’s steadfast carelessness with the World Heavyweight Championship.

    Now, this is just my opinion, mind, but I think that having Sheamus, Del Rio and Bryan run in as part of a stupid crowd scene alongside Yoshi Tatsu and Dustin Rhodes is a bad thing. You implied it yourself: it makes the the World Heavyweight Championship look like the WWECW Title.

    Here’s where you might say “Psh… like WWE cares about SmackDown’s title. Don’t you people remember the 18-second match from two weeks ago?”

    I hope you won’t say that, though, because it’s tantamount to a circular argument. “Of course WWE is going to treat the belt as unimportant, because it’s obviously unimportant, because it’s treated as being so unimportant.” I mean, you wouldn’t be wrong to say that Sheamus as champ is less important than Punk, but just because that’s how it IS, doesn’t mean that’s how it should be presented on television.

    It annoyed me that the World Heavyweight Champion (the holder of the second-biggest title in the company, the belt that has been at the centre of so many classic feuds in recent years, the belt around which the entire main event scene on SmackDown revolves!) was one of the nameless men in the fray, while someone like CM Punk wasn’t.

    Yes, Punk is a bigger name with the #1 belt, but does that mean that the #2 champ should be made to look insignificant? Of course not. It’s bad business, and a slap in the face to any fans who DO buy into Sheamus. It irritates me that the WWE Champion and his challenger were absent from the whole fiasco, because it means that someone in the back said to themselves, “we won’t send Punk and Jericho out – this will detract from their feud / aura / importance.” That same person then said “Sheamus, Bryan and Del Rio, the three guys currently feuding over the WHC? Yeah, they can go out, that’s fine.”

    So the holder of the company’s #2 belt and his two challengers went out, weren’t even named, and were thrown in all directions by Cena and Brock. And that shouldn’t have happened.

    And that, Blair, is why I thought that the crowd run-in sucked the proverbial big one.

    With that said, I thought that the Brock / Cena confrontation as a whole was excellently done. If WWE had used random “security guards” instead of wrestlers it would have been perfect. Lesnar’s intensity is a breath of fresh air.

  • James A

    Furthermore, there has been zero twonk bashing from my corner. Not in public, anyway. That sort of thing is indecent.

  • James A


    Top stuff, Wombat. I think you’ve won this round.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    You had the first paragraph right.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    You’re not even trying anymore – you don’t have to watch wrestling to keep up with it any more than you need to watch baseball to keep up with it.

  • Blair A. Douglas

  • Blair A. Douglas

    That was far too easy. What else you got?

  • Blair A. Douglas

    Well, I’m glad you aren’t taking this personally or anything. You never can tell on here. I would disagree that that World Heavyweight Title is anywhere NEAR as important as the RAW belt.

    And I guess since it’s pretty evident that Cena and Brock are THE big deal in WWE now – none of the guys in that ring are getting anywhere NEAR that level on the card – ever. For that reason, I don’t see it as a huge stretch that they’re able to go through the rest of the roster without much effort. If Punk or Jericho had been out there, I’d say the same thing. That’s just my opinion – and it’s the same thing with how Rock and Cena went through Miz and Truth with pretty much zero effort last year. Tonnes of people complained about The Miz being treated that way – well, no shit. It’s The Rock and John Cena. He’s the Miz. Big difference.

    Now, if it were Punk and Jericho, in the same position in the pecking order as they are now, I might see your point. But it’s not. You won’t see anyone else on RAW treated as NEAR as big a deal as Cena and Lesnar, until whatever they’re going through has run it’s course.

  • James A

    Of course I didn’t take it personally. If I really wanted to get back at you I could have slyly edited it when I proof-read it yesterday… If you think I’m not going to retort after having my words called laughable, though, you have another thing coming.

    And of course the SmackDown title isn’t as important as the Raw title or Brock / Cena right now! I know that, and you know that, and WWE certainly knows that. But it’s absolutely more important than Yoshi Tatsu and Road Dogg! All WWE does when it makes its #2 champion look weak is shoot itself in the foot.

    After all, sooner or later WWE will realise that it still has an entire Friday night show that it needs to build around the Big Gold Belt. Worse, WWE will need to put the belt around the waist of someone really important, like Edge, Batista, Taker and Orton were.

    Anyway: fear ye not, Douglas. James A remains a fan of Blair A too. We’ll agree on something one day, I’m sure. ;)

  • Finn McInnes

    Picking nits over who runs out during a pull apart brawl seems somehow both utterly ridiculous and yet entirely appropriate for an Interinactivity column.

    I’ve seen these sort of things for years in WWF/WWE and it is not without historical precedence for upper mid-carders (like Del Rio, Henry, Shaemus and Bryan) to get involved and for the principals of said pull apart brawl to make the upper mid-carders like useless tools in the process. It’s traditionally how that formula works.

    Andre attacked Hogan and took out both British Bulldogs, Jake the Snake, Junkyard Dog and Tito Santanna without even taking one hand off Hulk’s throat. Hacksaw Duggan had to come hit him with the 2X4 to break the hold.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    Finn winns.

  • CB40

    lol what does that even mean Mike?

  • Mike Gojira

    Because he watches clips of wrestling on Youtube and bases his opinion on that and hearsay around the web, so I thought it would be appropriate for wombat to do the same with Blair’s columns. Geez, CB! Get with the program.

  • flamingwombat

    I could go back and find dozens of instances of you intentionally misstating others’ opinions for the sake of your columns. Also, I notice you’ve been ignoring the Daniel Bryan column where he says he thinks the main reason he got the bizarro reaction in Miami is because fans were upset with the shortness of the match (something several of us offered as a reason, which you considered ludicrious).

  • flamingwombat

    Ha, straw man! I was speaking of criticizing the product, and you changed the argument to “keeping up with it” instead to counter me. See what you do?

    No, you don’t need to watch baseball to keep up with it, but you certainly have to watch loads of it to be informed enough to write columns criticizing it. “Hi, this is Jason Stark at with my weekly column about all the most disappointing players in baseball this season, based on the commercials I’ve seen for MLB Live 2012.” Foolishness.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    Right. You’re splitting hairs – but, since the hair you split makes the same exact point, of course I can criticize it without watching it. Because I still know exactly what’s going on. Watching commercials? You’re being silly. I’m not watching commercials. I’m seeing actual visuals of the things I care to watch, and what I don’t watch, I read about. If you can see a baseball players’ RBI or other stats online, of course you can make the determination that they suck without watching the games.

    This is literally the exact kind of thing I find funny.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    I thought you were being sarcastic before. Man, you guys are killing me today. All right then Gojey, what am I missing by YouTubeing what I care to watch and reading recaps of the rest?

  • Blair A. Douglas

    You probably could, because when I type things like “a bunch of people” or something along those lines, you take it to mean “EVERYONE ON INSIDE PULSE EXCEPT BLAIR”. Which is a bit odd, to say the least. But it does make for some fun exchanges.

    Also – what exactly did you expect Bryan to say? “I got that reaction in Miami because I’m awesome and Shaemus, who my employer and one of my bosses in particular think is awesome… actually really sucks. He’s worthless” I wasn’t expecting him to bash Shaemus or put himself over at Shaemus’ expense, because I don’t think Bryan is an idiot. He’s seen what happens to guys who don’t tow the line. He doesn’t want to go back to being dropped on his head 5 times a night in the indy’s. Who would?

  • flamingwombat

    Ah, so now Bryan is lying in interviews just to protect the wrestlers you don’t like. He he. Well, I’ll give you this: at least that’s not a straw man argument. We’ll have to come up with a name for that one.

    No, see, you don’t say “a bunch of people” you say things like “ALL I’ve been seeing is articles about how the WWE’s show and business is awesome now. ” (really? every single column?) and “People were all into the Rock thing at first, then EVERYONE complained about various reasons why they had to wait a year to see the match”. (really? everyone?) What’s a “bit odd” is you consistently attributing opinions to the entire insidepulse Universe(tm) and then trying to imply you do the opposite.

    I get that you are the shock jock style columnist here and your job is to attract commentors by saying outrageous things; that’s fine (or at least was before they starting hiring other columnists who do the exact same thing) and I wouldn’t mind that. Even your condescension towards the product, while a bit silly, would be ok, but it’s the constant (willfully distorted) attacks on the site’s other columnists and readers that sort of sticks in the craw.

  • flamingwombat

    “If you can see a baseball players’ RBI or other stats online, of course you can make the determination that they suck without watching the games.”

    Maybe you can, but you surely can’t write informed columns about that player.

  • Jonah Kue

    Play nice, you two.

  • Jonah Kue

    After reading this thread of comments, I’ve come to realize the distinguishing traits on an idealistic (and somewhat out of touch) perspective on wrestling and a realistic one.

    Sadly, the latter is one carried by a minority. Thanks for repping, Blair. Keep the Interactivity coming.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    Oh wow. So you take “ALL I’ve been seeing” and “EVERYONE complained” to mean LITERALLY “all” and LITERALLY “everyone”, then?

    Shock jock style columnist… another amazing term for me. DEFINITELY I try to approach these things from a place of humor, because honestly, that’s the only way I know how to do it. I’ve never claimed otherwise. It’s an absurd (and can be absurdly entertaining) industry, and I couldn’t write the way some of these other guys do – I don’t know how they do it. But I don’t really need to, because we’ve got guys that do that, and they’re good at it. So I do things differently. I’ve never claimed to be someone who should be taken all that seriously. I just call it like i see it.

    The other odd thing is that when I make replies, like the one above, you say things like “AH SO BRYAN IS LYING IN INTERVIEWS” which isn’t something that I said. Yet, when I write a paragraph like the one directly above this, you’ll say something along the lines of “I NEVER SAID YOU CLAIMED YOU SHOULD BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.” The straw is definitely on the other foot.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    Kue, you know my articles’ comment section is reserved for the nutters.

    Out of touch implies they were once in touch. It’s still real to them. Nothing wrong with that, though. It’s one of the things that make writing here fun.

    Otherwise, thank you sir!

  • flamingwombat

    This comment is so cute, I’d feel bad responding negatively to it. 可愛い!!

  • flamingwombat

    Yes, I do admit I often take the words “all” and “everyone” to mean “all” and “everyone”, but only for the reason that that’s what they mean.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    Well, I’m very sorry to hear that. I assumed your common sense would kick in at some point. But regardless, that’s your crutch, not mine.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    Of course I can. In fact, both qualitative and qualitative results would provide a MORE accurate basis for an argument that simply watching that player would.

    This is tremendous.

  • flamingwombat

    Apology accepted. I do have experience copy editing, so if in the future if you’d like some help bridging the vast gulf between what you think you are writing and what you actually write, I am more than willing to offer my services. As a peace offering per se.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    Perhaps we’d be better served teaching you a skill that involves something other than editing things to make them all sound like a computer manual. I’m willing to help you. You’re like my Tin Man.

  • Owangotang

    I think wrestling as an active form of entertainment in my life is ending with “and then the Rock pinned John Cena clean in the Main Event of Wrestlemania 28…and Adam lived happily ever after”

  • Cristo

    I prefer Prannock.

  • C-to

    Bill James bitch!

  • James A

    Idealistic? Out of touch? Et tu, Jonah…? Say it ain’t so!

  • Mike Gojira

    I am being sarcastic. I thought wombat said something funny and I added to it. Don’t take it personally, Blair.

  • Blair A. Douglas

    But… But… I was looking forward to hearing your answer!

  • Jonah Kue

    The grammar disaster “if in the future if you’d like some help…” following the “experience in copy editing” statement is hilarious.

    Thanks, Wom.

  • CB40


  • Blair A. Douglas

    Not bad. Not bad.

  • Law

    Hi. Twonk of the week here. And, for the record, not only am I British, but I do watch Raw. I’ve read InsidePulse since the split from the other site- I was a Scott Keith acolyte, and have previously enjoyed the likes of Eric S, Hyatte and GRUT. So now you know where I’m coming from, as much as I know where you are.

    I’m not convinced calling out your readers is a very professional step, but it’s the internet, I’m a big boy, and I’m sure you’ll allow me the right to respond. We both know your opinion matters no more or less than mine, columnist or not, and the same goes for anyone not affiliated directly with the company in question.

    Blair, when you are ready to discuss with me maturely how that comment (incidentally, I’d appreciate it if you made it clear that all of the quotations you’ve made were from one post) earned me such an accolade as “Twonk of the week”, I’m all ears. I will put my points to you for making that statement thusly:

    1. In reference to the previous week’s Raw, a replay of Brock kicking Cena’s hat was shown. Why? This serves only to make Brock Lesnar look like a prat (another great British word you’re free to utilise). There was no reason to show that replay- the replay of him destroying Cena, fine, it made him look an unstoppable monster. The replay of him kicking Cena’s hat is ludicrous.

    2. Brock Lesnar was then officially re-introduced by John Laurenitis, and given time to speak in the ring. Establishing this link to an authority figure- and one who is ridiculed for his own attempts to cut promos- does no good for Brock Lesnar. Laurenitis is not the person to speak for Lesnar, and Lesnar as muscle for the GM is a waste of both his ability and character development. Likewise, not letting him near a live microphone is a lesson the company should’ve learned long ago.

    3. Brock Lesnar was later shown speaking in his natural soft voice backstage, stumbling over words as he always has. Brock Lesnar is supposed to be a physically threatening menace. Giving him mic time undermines that hugely.

  • flamingwombat

    Ha ha, you got me. No wait, that’s exactly what I wanted to type, so no, no you didn’t. Nice try sticking up for your bro though!

Featured Poll

What Did You Think Of WWE TLCS 2014?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Recent Comments

Search Pulse