Inside Pulse Wrestling | The SmarK RAW Supershow Rant

The SmarK RAW Supershow Rant – 05.21.12

by Scott Keith on May 22, 2012

The SmarK RAW Supershow Rant – 05.21.12

Live from Richmond, VA

Your hosts are Michael Cole & Jerry Lawler

John Cena starts us out, and he’s ANGRY about losing to Big Johnny. So he shrugs off the Rock loss at Wrestlemania, but THIS makes him mad? Anyway, he defends his toying with Johnny instead of beating him, by noting that Big Show would have saved his new boss had he been in any real jeopardy. He stresses over and over how crappy things are under Big Johnny, until the man himself interrupts. He’s riding a scooter and has damage to several different areas of his body, and from now on if anyone touches him, they’re fired. And the main event of No Way Out next month: John Cena v. EVIL BIG SHOW. Show does the old “I don’t owe you an explanation” thing, but then changes his mind and blames the fans. The one time they don’t swerve the obvious storyline twist and it’s the one that gives us Big Show v. Cena.

David Otunga v. John Cena

Otunga attacks and stops to pose, which allows Cena to destroy him with the usual at 1:38. Cena gets attacked by Hawkins/Rex/O’Neil/Young, but Sheamus makes the save and cleans house on the geeks. And as a result, it’s Sheamus & Cena v. three guys in a lumberjack match.

Alberto Del Rio v. Randy Orton

Santino does a run-in on Ricardo’s ring introductions and has a pretty funny exchange with him, making fun of his accent and then chasing him off with the Cobra. “That’s not even a real cobra, stupid, that’s just my arm in a cobra costume!” We also get their obnoxious announcement of the 1000^th episode, where they once again ignore any other competitors that don’t make them the longest-running show ever. Once again, dozens of other sports and wrestling shows have gone well over 1000 episodes, but they just choose not to acknowledge that. Del Rio works on the arm after the break (and between the intros, the 1000^th episode stuff, and the entrances, that’s the FOURTH commercial break already for this match!) but misses a charge and ends up on the floor. Orton comes back with the powerslam and draping DDT, but Chris Jericho runs in for the DQ at 7:20. *1/2 Jericho is still claiming to be the best in the world, although with all the jobs he’s doing on the way out it’s kind of diluting his case. I kind of thought they’d go with Sheamus v. Orton as the program, but instead it’s the insta-feud booking.

Daniel Bryan, at the top of the hour no less, is out to complain about making CM Punk tap out without getting the title out of it, so he DEMANDS A REMATCH. Well at least they have an actual issue now. Punk comes out and shows the video from Smackdown, setting up…

Daniel Bryan v. Kane

Kane beats on him in the corner, but Bryan escapes a chokeslam and hits a suicide dive on the floor. This allows Punk to grab a chair and try the same gag on Kane again, which then backfires on Bryan and it’s a DQ at 1:47. Kane chokeslams the crap out of Bryan for that, and Punk puts him in the Anaconda Vice for good measure.

Meanwhile, CM Punk has another awkward run-in with AJ, the only diva he’s ever turned down.

Christian v. Jinder Mahal

Christian quickly hits the inverted DDT, but Mahal backdrops him to the floor. Back in, Mahal controls with a butterfly suplex and chinlock, but Christian gets a sunset flip for two. The crowd still hasn’t caught on that Christian is a babyface again. Mahal escapes the Killswitch and hits a high knee, but another try finishes for Christian after a frog splash at 3:08. Just a match. *

Kelly Kelly v. Beth Phoenix

Beth beats Kelly down for two, but Kelly gets a rana. Beth comes back and misses a charge, allowing Kelly to get the GIANT SWING OF DOOM, but Beth blocks the handspring elbow with a clothesline and finishes with the Glam Slam at 2:25. Can we please never see this matchup again now? Please? ½*

John Cena & Sheamus v. Dolph Ziggler, Jack Swagger & Lord Tensai

The lumberjacks are all Team Johnny geeks, lest there was any confusion. Sheamus dominates Ziggler and slugs it out with Tensai, and we get the spot where all the heels beat up on Sheamus, but he fights them off. Back in, Tensai takes over on Sheamus and we take a break. Anyway, we come back and I’m too bored to recap this further, as Sheamus gets beat up by Tensai for a while and then Cena gets the hot tag before a big lumberjack brawl signals a Sportz Entertainment Finish at 15:00 or so. And then Cena immediately heads backstage, where the ninja-like 400 pound Big Show sneaks up on him for a knockout punch to end the show. Seriously, if they’re gonna book the entire show around John Cena, just put the damn title back on him already.

The Pulse:

No, I’m not quitting when we get to the three hour RAWs, don’t worry. I wish I was, though, because now I have to go through four weeks of buildup to JOHN CENA V. BIG SHOW and probably another four weeks to the rematch as well. And if you think these shows are dull, just wait until they have to add another hour of content.

Tags: big show, chris jericho, cm punk, Daniel Bryan, john cena, Johnny Ace, monday night raw, randy orton, Raw, Supershow

Related Recaps & Reviews Articles

10 Thoughts: WWE Raw 5.13.13 (John Cena, Triple H, Ryback, Brock Lesnar)

The SmarK RAW Rant - 05.13.13

WWE Monday Night RAW LIVE Results for 5/13/13: Brock Lesnar, Triple H, John Cena, Ryback

A2Z Analysiz – ROH Bryan Danielson: World Champion (Samoa Joe, Colt Cabana)

Scott Keith

view profile »

cott Keith is a wrestling blogger and general smart-ass, residing at rspwfaq.net, aka Scott's Blog of Doom! Scott began slacking off in Computing Science classes in university, and discovered the wonderful world of writing online in 1993, and has never looked back since then. Scott was best known for being a part of CBS's short-lived Wrestleline.com project in 1999, where he reviewed WCW's Thunder TV show, and eventually Monday Night RAW. After the closure of that site, he moved to 411wrestling.com (later 411mania) and did RAW and Smackdown rants there until moving to Insidepulse.com. Meanwhile, Scott launched his own semi-famous sites, Rantsylvania.com and TheSmarks.com (featured in Entertainment Weekly...once.) before deciding on the lower-drama world of blogging instead in 2006. Since then, Scott has resided at rspwfaq.com (and later rspwfaq.net when traffic threatened to bring down the previous server!), covering WWE RAW and trying to stay awake through it. Oh, did I mention that he also published five books? Starting in 2001 with The Buzz on Pro Wrestling, followed by four books for Kensington Publishing, including Tonight...In This Very Ring, Wrestling's One Ring Circus, Wrestling's Made Men, and finally Dungeon of Death. Scott lives in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, with his wife and ridiculously cute daughter. For more information on Scott Keith, you can visit your local library. Or just go to his blog at www.rspwfaq.net. Either way.

Follow on Twitter · Follow on Facebook · Email Scott Keith

Recent Posts »

Blair A. Douglas

Where did they say that you weren’t okay watching gay porn? Was the joke inaccurate as well as not particularly funny? (Your words.)
Blair A. Douglas

Hey, check it out! You did it again. They’re getting easier and easier to spot:
You said: “Wait… your closing caveat is that you’re right because I obviously have a problem with Scott Keith? Or Wikipedia? Seriously? That’s what you’re going to close with. Utterly ridiculous.”
And again… you’re attributing something to me that I didn’t say. I asked IF you thought I was somehow getting inaccurate info from Keith’s recap. I didn’t say you had a problem with him or his recap. I asked a question. And I don’t see anywhere that I implied that you couldn’t trust WikiPedia. I said I couldn’t write a review off WikiPedia. But WikiPedia still tells me exactly what happened.

I don’t know whether Brodus or Miz dance fine or not. The fact that they’re dancing at all is what’s terrible. Get it?

And yeah, I can totally give my viewpoint on RAW without having seen it. I wouldn’t call it a review, but you’re right, it doesn’t really matter what I call it. I would think that “review” means I’m reviewing the show as a whole, which, obviously, I haven’t done. But I do know what happened. You saw it. I read about it. You’re right, I know only what I’ve been told, by the live coverage and Scott Keith in this case. Is the review inaccurate? No? Then we got the same information. If you need me to throw the word “SOUND” in there to help you along, I guess I can do that. First time anyone’s asked me for that.

Where you do have a point is that people can miss things. Yeah, that can happen – but the guys we have are good, which you know, and the idea that I’d watch the show because I might catch something they missed is weird.
Blair A. Douglas

Also – in the future, we should start asking RAW Trivia as a sort of skill-testing question on these threads. Questions that only someone who had SEEN the show with their eyes would be able to answer. We don’t want people like me who haven’t SEEN the show with their eyes to be able to offer an opinion on here. Their opinions aren’t valid and they shouldn’t be able to offer them.
flamingwombat

I have no points to make about wrestling. I just enjoy pointing out the general inanities of your posts. (Except on a thread like this where you are pretty much getting humiliated. I do feel sympathy, you know).

I do love however when you bust out the martyr card. You’re the one who shits over everyone’s opinions, but then has a hissy fit when someone disagrees with you. You can’t say “my opinions are as good as yours” unless you allow the reverse to also be true.
James A

“If you’re suggesting that I have reason to doubt the review, well then that’s an issue you have with the person reviewing it, not me.”

Did you say that? Yes. Yes you did.
Was it your closing caveat? Yes. Yes it was.
“I didn’t say you had a problem with him or his recap.” Yeah, you pretty much did.

“I said I couldn’t write a review off WikiPedia. But WikiPedia still tells me exactly what happened.” Exactly? No it doesn’t. That’s WHY you can’t write a review based on it. You’re actually supporting a point with evidence which disproves it. That’s insane. I thought we were making real progress here, Blair. Give me a shout when you’re done chasing your own tail.

You know the sad thing? As the above demonstrates, I haven’t taken anything you said out of context. The things you say are just so ridiculous that quoting you makes it sound like I am. You genuinely believe that it’s fine to make faux-educated “observations” based solely on hearsay, on secondary sources, on Chinese whispers, on the subjective opinions of others. How IS life working out for you in that castle of sand, Blair. Do you live in 1984?

Heck, I feel bad for you.
James A

…. They didn’t say that. That was me building on their original set-up. I turned an insult into a narrative which I found more palatable. I literally just explained that.

Sorry… which of us has problems reading?
James A

Hear hear!
Law

Y’know, if I’ve learned anything from this, it’s that IP needs to sort out how replied comments are displayed. This would be considerably less entertaining if the columns weren’t so narrow, making everything look more rant-like.
Blair A. Douglas

First things first – no one’s playing a martyr card, Wombat. Saying I don’t watch wrestling regularly is a fact. I’m not trying to push anyone into similar behavior or say that I know better. So no, but what I am doing is explaining how my points are valid. But you’re a moron, so it’s not like I expected you to know the difference. Or you might just be drunk again. Who knows.

James – thanks for reposting what I wrote. That’s right, “IF” you’re suggesting that there’s a problem with the review. That’s what I typed. And you turned that into “I have a problem with Scott Keith?!” And yeah, “worth watching” and “terrible” are pretty far apart to me. And, I’m not getting my OPINION from Keith. I’m getting results from Keith. I’ve said that before.

This type of thing is EXACTLY what I’m talking about. What you say I do to arguments, you do ALL the time. If that joint article we talked about doing ever sees the light of day, I shudder to think of it’s length.

This whole thing has been truly hilarious. Thank you James. I’m pretty sure there’s not much left to say, and neither one of us is going to convince the other, so I don’t know what we can say from here. But thanks for coming this far with me – I never realized ANYONE could have SUCH an aversion to the opinions of those who don’t actually WATCH the show. The idea that we both know exactly what happened on a wrestling show, but that your opinion is somehow more valid than mine because you watched it and I read about it… is amazing. I can’t see any logic in that at all when applied to something like wrestling.

I’m not trying to be a pain in the ass, and I’m not defending a point of view that I know to be wrong just to not be wrong. I HONESTLY just can’t see it.

You’re better informed on a wrestling show even though we both know exactly what happened… because you saw it, and I read about it. And there’s no discrepancies in what I read to what you saw… yet still, your point of view is more valid and mine can’t be relied upon.

Crazy. I hope no one else plans on writing their opinions having not seen the show. Who knew that was so offensive?!
Cynical Bastard

Are you C(K)or(e)y’s brother or something? Whatever happened to that troll?
Blair A. Douglas

This guy makes way more sense. Corey is the brother who spent way too long in the womb.
http://martyrshow.com/ KON

James, Blair, what the fuck? Take a step back and realise that you’ve both spent hours of your lives trying to one up each other in the comments section of a wrestling website.

What’s worse is the fact that it’s not a highbrow comments section like you’d find below something written by myself, oh no, you’re doing this is the comments section of a Scott Keith recap. Do either of you seriously want to be thought of as the champion of a place usually reserved for such high calibre comments as “Scot, ur wife iz fat” and “u wrong, fukin idot”?

*insert laughing emoticon here*

Seriously, wrestling comments section ≠ real life.
Blair A. Douglas

Oh please. I had lots of downtime today, as I normally do when I travel for business. Someone’s gotta class this joint up!
Wowsers

Maybe you should switch to writing about something you’re actually knowledgable about? Then you wouldn’t get into these situations. Just an idea.

P.S. No one is really going to take an adult who calls other people names seriously.
P.P.S. The above statement assumes you are an adult. This assumption has yet to be proved correct.
Cristo

I watched this RAW, it was fucking terrible.
James A

Look… I’ve already said I’m pretty much done here, and you have yet to present any convincing evidence for your absurd viewpoint. I’m sorry, but that’s how it is. I’ll end this by reminding you that there ARE several enormous factual qualitative discrepancies between what you merely read and what I observed. I’ve listed several, and you’ve been unable to account for them. So thank YOU, Blair, for having the most selective memory of anyone I’ve ever come across. Now you’re scrabbling at minutiae, splitting hairs over “worth watching” not being negative enough for you, and I just can’t see this as anything but you clutching at straws because you’ve lost faith in your own argument. You haven’t been misquoted once, either. You genuinely implied that I had “problems” with the writer of a recap, to which I responded accordingly. By calling you out on your bullshit. In the nicest possible way.
Law

I didn’t watch this RAW, I only read this review. It was fucking terrible.
Blair A. Douglas

Hey that’s fine, I understand. I was done some time ago, then YOU started grasping at the straws that I was “implying” you had a problem with Keith. I typed it, so I’d know what I was inferring. You said that a recap is second hand knowledge, and then I illustrated that the recap was indeed accurate. You took that as me saying you had a problem with Keith. Again… I wrote it, so I’d know if I was implying it. And I wasn’t. And the “errors” in my viewpoint on RAW, like the “butt buddies” thing, I already explained what I meant by that… Which should have been obvious, but again… You’re grasping at straws. That’s my “evidence”. You truly believe I’m grasping at straws and don’t believe my own argument. That’s fine. I think you do believe in YOUR own argument, but I think you’re grasping at straws as well.

Anyway, I had fun. Don’t be mad about my “bullshit” argument dude, because I think your idea is pure bullshit and I’m not mad! However, I am sorry if it went too long for your liking. As I said earlier, I had some travel downtime for work and wanted to try and hash it out. I should have known better than to try to reason with you on this though, which is why Swayze would just say “you’re an idiot” and be done with it. I didn’t want to go that route, because I don’t think you’re an idiot, but, looking back, it would have been more efficient.

For an example, “Wowsers” SOUNDS like a pretty big idiot. See? I threw “SOUNDS” in there just for you, James. Have a good one boss!
James A

A pleasure as always, Blair.
flamingwombat

I’m glad Keith’s reviews are accurate, because now we know Sheamus had a 4-star match on TV last week!

I can’t wait for the passive aggressive column of the century that’s going to come out of this. I haven’t read it yet, but the reviews say it’s terrible, and that’s good enough for me!
Blair A. Douglas

I abandoned my article for tomorrow. I figured everyone had had enough. We covered everything and neither of us is gonna budge. The one I got going up has a question about Miz and Swagger from Sideshow Bob!

Also, as I said, I take the review of what happened, not his opinion. But, was the 4-star match in question the one Ginger Abortion had with Orton on SmackDown? Because I actually did look that one up after Mike and Kelly’s review, and I agree, it is quite good. 4 stars good? Of course not. But good. Is that the match you mean?
flamingwombat

That’s a shame. I was looking forward to the column, despite the reviews.
CB40

If I am not mistaken, I think Scott kind of grades TV matches on a little bit of a curve compared with PPV matches. However, Sheamus-Orton last week was a very solid 30-minute TV match, and it was well-done. Hopefully three-hour Raws will have matches like that to fill the extra time, instead of five dance-offs, four commercial breaks, three clowns, 2 midgets and 1 Miz match.