Originally Posted by Last Chancery
I agree with a lot of what everybody's saying, re: Triple H vs. Brock, but the match didn't do much for me, personally. The selling and psychology was excellent, that much I'll agree with, but the atmosphere and the lack of crowd involvement killed the big fight feel. At Extreme Rules, the crowd was silent, stunned by what they had witnessed. Pretty hard to tame a Chicago crowd like that. But LA didn't go quiet because they were shocked, they did it because they were bored. Or so it seemed, and so it felt.
I'm glad Brock won, as I still believe he should have at ER, but the match itself was too plodding and focused for my liking. Brock focused way too much on the kimura and the arm, and it made the whole thing feel very one-note and bland. I mean, he did the same thing with Cena, except he mixed it up a lot more and they used the stipulation a lot better. I don't understand the need to make this match a no-DQ affair since the stipulation was never quite put into place, and when it was the referee practically ignored it. Brock low-blowing Trips almost forced the ref to disqualify him, yet the announcers stated that the match would be no-DQ and no count out? I don't.. get it.
It was a normal match, which during the time I thought was stupid (ie 1 fall, DQs, count outs), but HHH asked before to "let them fight". He basically told the ref personally to not DQ or count someone out because he wanted to beat the chit out of Lesnar (only thing that bothers me is that they should have made the match a no DQ if that's what he wanted).
I originally hated that sub plot in the match, but considering it bit HHH really hard in the ass, I thought it gave a feel of great irony. It's so easy to hate HHH :-P.