The Montreal Incident - Page 4 - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Debate League, Wrestling Videos, Women of Wrestling Forums

View Poll Results: Who Was Wrong?

Vince McMahon 61 51.69%
Bret Hart 45 38.14%
Other 12 10.17%
Voters: 118. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

Old 06-24-2012, 06:11 PM   #31 (permalink)
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
paulborklaserheyma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 818
paulborklaserheyma paulborklaserheyma paulborklaserheyma paulborklaserheyma paulborklaserheyma
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

All three men are guilty about this.
Bret Hart should've jobbed since he was leaving, HBK never even wanted to job to Bret, and Vince Mcmahon stripped Bret's WWF title by force.
But from what I know, Bret Hart punched Vince right in the fact because of this. That's just something none of the wrestlers should do.
__________________
paulborklaserheyma is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 

Old 06-24-2012, 06:13 PM   #32 (permalink)
I'm known as 'Scottish-Throw' when introduced by Michael Cole.
 
Scottish-Suplex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Plymouth
Posts: 3,618
Scottish-Suplex needs to make some friendsScottish-Suplex needs to make some friendsScottish-Suplex needs to make some friendsScottish-Suplex needs to make some friendsScottish-Suplex needs to make some friendsScottish-Suplex needs to make some friendsScottish-Suplex needs to make some friendsScottish-Suplex needs to make some friendsScottish-Suplex needs to make some friendsScottish-Suplex needs to make some friendsScottish-Suplex needs to make some friends
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

I voted Vince. Bret said he would drop the title to Shawn after, either the next day or the next PPV, all Vince had to do was trust him, not act completely unprofessionally and taint the reputation of the WWE for some time to come. I suppose that's the deciding point, whether you believe Bret was gonna stick by his word, I do.

I'm not saying Bret is perfect, by the sounds of things he's became quite whiny in recent years but it all stems back to Vince's shit handling of the situation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble Trouble View Post

I hate to sound like an asshole but everything that happened to Bret since was karma.
I'm sorry, no one deserves this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvcMxmbwS2A

...for anything, especially when all they did was stand up to a jerk.
__________________

"Get up fools, this mah table now!"
Scottish-Suplex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 06:19 PM   #33 (permalink)
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
sjones8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 624
sjones8 sjones8 sjones8 sjones8 sjones8 sjones8
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave 1981 View Post
I don't think you could say who acted worse and both Bret Hart and Vince McMahon acted pretty badly and it all depends on what side you look at it from. On the side of Vince McMahon you have someone in Bret Hart who refused to lose the WWE title because the planned match was in Canada and because it was Shawn Michaels who he didn't get on with off screen and was bitter because he had replaced him as the top guy.

WWE was losing the ratings battle to WCW and had been for a long time so in his eyes he couldn't risk Bret Hart showing up on Nitro with the WWE title or without having ever lost the WWE title as it would make WWE look weak. Regardless of Bret Hart having "reasonable creative control" for the last 30 days of his contract he should have dropped the WWE title to whoever he was asked to do so to and in whatever country the match was taking place. I think Ted DiBiase said it best when he said it doesn't matter where you lose as the world is watching anyway so be it America, Canada, Germany or England it's irrelevant.

On the side of Bret Hart he was annoyed because after he had told Shawn Michaels he had no problem in losing to him later down the line Shawn Michaels had apparently told him he wouldn't be willing to do the same so didn't want to back down in their backstage feud so refused to lose to Shawn Michaels as well. After being the top star and face of the company from 1993 through to early 1996 he felt disrespected and pushed out in a way because of the way the product was going which was tailor made for people like Shawn Michaels and Stone Cold Steve Austin. I believe Bret Hart had actually stopped his children from watching post Summerslam because of the content on Raw on a weekly basis.

I've always said though that Bret Hart should have dropped the WWE title to Shawn Michaels because the plan was always for Austin/Michaels at WrestleMania 14 and it was for the good of the business and company. It's a shame that his WWE career ended the way it did because he had done a lot for WWE but he was so bitter about Shawn Michaels replacing him as top guy he refused to do anything with Shawn Michaels in which he didn't look better. There is no doubt that Shawn Michaels was a prick to people backstage and alienated a lot of people but Bret Hart wasn't really any better but did it in a sneaky way where he would try to get everyone on his side backstage.

Still to this day Bret Hart tries to take credit for everything good in WWE back then as seen by his interview with Arda Ocal recently and he talks of how the ratings plummeted as soon as he left and that Shawn Michaels didn't carry or represent WWE anywhere like he did although i posted the ratings from when Shawn Michaels was WWE champion through 1996 and in 1997 against Bret Hart as WWE champion from late 1995 to WrestleMania 12 and again from post Summerslam and the ratings were more or less the same outside of a few times when Raw hit a 4.0 or over for the first time ever and Shawn Michaels was WWE champion.

People always talk about Hulk Hogan refusing to lose to people so in the sense Bret Hart was just as bad but played the victim for why he refused to lose when if he really wanted to claim the moral high ground he should have lost and then he would have been seen as the bigger man and walked away with the full respect of everyone for doing what was right for business. The way he did it though he did what was best for him and him going to WCW as WWE champion or without losing could have killed off WWE for good so in a way he forced the hand of Vince McMahon in to doing what he did. One thing i don't get though is why Triple H never gets any heat for what happened seeing as it was his idea and he was in on the whole thing as well.
You nailed it.

All three of them were at fault.
__________________

Jay and Beyonce's reaction whenever they watch an episode of Impact! Wrestling.
sjones8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 06:37 PM   #34 (permalink)
Getting over in the mid-card
 
dave 1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,760
dave 1981 is getting a pushdave 1981 is getting a pushdave 1981 is getting a pushdave 1981 is getting a pushdave 1981 is getting a pushdave 1981 is getting a pushdave 1981 is getting a pushdave 1981 is getting a pushdave 1981 is getting a pushdave 1981 is getting a pushdave 1981 is getting a push
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tready93 View Post
Reading this thread and finding out that Shawn wouldn't job to Bret, i honestly have to say all three have a part to blame on themselves,
Michaels for being an idiot and not jobbing to Bret which is selfish and rediculous,
he was lucky he was already over at that point, maybe that's we're his big ego came from, knowing that he likely wouldn't get fired.
Bret has a part to blame for not wantiong to drop the title, fair enough Michaels started this but he firstly should have been the bigger man about it, i guess another thing to do with ego, and also he should have known by now what the business means to Vince and him retaining the title and going to WCW would've just meant he was still WWF champion just without a title to show for it.
The thing was that Shawn Michaels wasn't asked to lose to Bret Hart and what Shawn Michaels was simply saying that he wouldn't be willing to do the same which was hyperthetical because it was never asked for. Vince McMahon has said that even if he didn't like having to do something Shawn Michaels would always do what he was asked but he would let it be known he wasn't happy about doing it. Bret Hart was actually ASKED to lose to Shawn Michaels because he was LEAVING the company and Vince McMahon wanted to do Austin/Michaels at WrestleMania 14 so Bret Hart losing was what was right for business and for the company he was leaving.
__________________
dave 1981 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 06:48 PM   #35 (permalink)
The One Who Knocks
 
Cynic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 5,344
Cynic Cynic Cynic Cynic Cynic Cynic Cynic Cynic Cynic Cynic Cynic
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanPelley View Post
I've yet to see any reasoning to how the fault is Bret's. People like to bring up that he refused to drop the Title to Shawn, yet don't mention that it was Shawn who did that first. Bret was just returning the favor for Shawn's douchey ways.
Shawn being a douche doesn't justify Bret Hart refusing to do his job. If Bret Hart was really the virtuous role model he's always claimed to be, he would've done the right thing and put him over. Bret was already set for life with a new contract with the company that he was (it appeared anyway) going to join up with to destroy the company that made him a star in the first place. Losing on the way out is a time-honored wrestling tradition, but Mr. Tradition himself turned out to be a hypocrite in the end.

The biggest thing that always gets me about Bret Hart in this instance was this: did he REALLY think Vince McMahon was gonna let him do what Bret wanted to do, which was walk out on Raw the next night, hand over the WWF Title, and say "thanks for the memories, I'm gonna go work for your competitor, here's your stupid belt back"?

Shawn Michaels was an asshole. Vince McMahon was a liar. But Bret Hart was a hypocrite and ultimately the one who forced Vince and Shawn to do what they HAD to do for the sake of the WWF. Bret Hart is not only at the most fault, in my eyes, he's the only one at fault.

(I like Bret Hart, by the way, but I've always felt this way about Montreal.)
__________________
Cynic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 08:39 PM   #36 (permalink)
Challenging SCOTT STEINER's authority
 
tducey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: In a house
Posts: 4,564
tducey needs to make some friendstducey needs to make some friendstducey needs to make some friendstducey needs to make some friendstducey needs to make some friendstducey needs to make some friendstducey needs to make some friendstducey needs to make some friendstducey needs to make some friends
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Bret Hart. Who cares if it was in Canada? Bret was all but certain to walk out of the WWF and go to WCW, Vince couldn't risk Bret's leaving with the title.
__________________
This meme courtesy of a WWE meme page on Facebook

What's MC Funk doing in the Impact Zone?

tducey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 08:48 PM   #37 (permalink)
Searching for a new identity
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: DMV
Posts: 5,744
#Mark is getting a push#Mark is getting a push#Mark is getting a push#Mark is getting a push#Mark is getting a push#Mark is getting a push#Mark is getting a push#Mark is getting a push#Mark is getting a push#Mark is getting a push#Mark is getting a push
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

It just shows how much regard Vince has for his talent. He treats them like circus acts, but hey, I guess it worked out for him in the end.

Also, I find it odd that Bret was so much more hurt by the screwjob then he was Owen's death. I understand that what Vince did was some fucked up shit, but you'd think he'd be more mad at the guy for forcing his brother to do a stunt that led to his death, but nope.. He's more upset about some dropping a fictional/artificial title belt.
__________________
#Mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 09:49 PM   #38 (permalink)
The Face Of The Company
 
dxbender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,322
dxbender is getting a pushdxbender is getting a pushdxbender is getting a pushdxbender is getting a pushdxbender is getting a pushdxbender is getting a pushdxbender is getting a pushdxbender is getting a pushdxbender is getting a pushdxbender is getting a pushdxbender is getting a push
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

The thing I never got, is why they didn't just cancel the match? Would canceling the match have been more controversial than going through with the match KNOWING not only the fans, but Bret would be real mad. I think they'd have been less mad if the match was just cancelled, than they ended up being with the screwjob.
__________________
dxbender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 11:03 PM   #39 (permalink)
Asking Meltzer to rate my matches
 
KO Bossy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: East of the Pacific Ocean, West of London, England, South of Mars, North of Hell
Posts: 8,136
KO Bossy KO Bossy KO Bossy KO Bossy KO Bossy KO Bossy KO Bossy KO Bossy KO Bossy KO Bossy KO Bossy
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble Trouble View Post
If it so humiliating to Bret, why did he come back, basically squashing the beef with Vince and HBK? That leads me to believe either Bret was more in the wrong than people admit or that it was all a work, with the plan for the 2 to have a rematch down the line but injuries said otherwise.

Losing the title in Canada should have been the least of Bret's worries. I've heard that WWE, upon signing, makes you list the 5 most embarrassing things that could happen in your career and then tells you eventually, they will happen.

Bret refusing to drop the title because HBK saying he wouldn't return favor is the equivalent of me saying "since you ratted me out to the police, I'm telling on you too". Still doesn't make either situation right. And the fact that they were shooting a documentary during the screwjob, the fact that Mr. McMahon was born from it, Owen stayed in WWE and Bret worked with Vince again less than a decade after the incident strongly tells me this was a work. Nobody can keep their story together and because of his reputation, HBK is always going to be the bad guy. And IMO, Bret still wanted his victory back from 1996.

Let me ask you this, lets say you're Vince McMahon. Now, you're known for screwing over talent in the past (Wendi Richter in '85), you've had the rival promotions WHC on your TV show and your competition had one of your titles thrown in the trash, killing that championship for about 3 years. Bret is known to throw temper tantrums, so how are you going to pretend that there is no chance Bret won't throw your title in the trash, especially as, after you said, Vince constantly standing by HBK?

It's only 2 choices for me, Bret couldn't be trusted or the whole thing was a work that backfired.
I already stated that Bret refusing to drop the title to HBK was Bret reasonably looking out for himself. Again, this is an industry that heavily relies on TRUST. When two guys get in the ring, they're performing scripted moves on each other that if gone wrong can kill people. Only a few inches on a 5 Star Frog Splash separate someone from taking the move regularly and almost having your trachea crushed a la Triple H at Survivor Series years back. You have to place your life into the hands of another wrestler and pray that they are competent and trustworthy enough to properly execute the move and not cripple you. Also, Vince has the same relationship-they trust him to hire competent, trustworthy guys and treat them properly, and Vince trusts them to go out there and be professionals-to make sure they don't break kayfabe, to work their matches to the best of their abilities, etc. Now, if I, as Bret Hart, am told by douchebag, drugged out Shawn Michaels that he isn't going to do his professional job for me, he is violating the trust we have. Why would I risk my life by getting into the ring with a guy like that? He might 'drop' me on my head because of our personal issues backstage. Why would I risk him breaking kayfabe and embarrassing me and the company?

Yet another big problem was when Vince pulled that swerve he, Michaels and his inside cronies were in on. That violated the trust of EVERYBODY in the company and brought to light the fact that Vince was capable of doing something like that. No longer could people go out there and feel completely secure about their standing in the company, or how their match would turn out. If Vince had a problem with you, he might just screw you over the same way he did Bret and embarrass you in front of the people in attendance and the ones watching on tv. When you're expecting guys to go out there and potentially hurt each other so YOU can make money, you don't fuck with your trusting relationship, because the second they don't trust you, they stop working. Vince is incredibly lucky more people didn't leave. Can you imagine if Austin had been so pissed by what happened that he left and went to WCW? We'd see a very different wrestling industry today, one very possibly NOT run by the WWE.

As for your speculation about Bret wanting his victory back, that's just what it is-speculation. Owen stayed because he was contractually obligated to-if he didn't, they'd have sued him and depending on the terms he may have wound up in prison.

Also, Vince and Bret had, by all means, a very good relationship up until the screwjob. You'd think that 2 guys who had a working relationship and personal friendship that went well for over 15 years would have at least given each other the benefit of the doubt. Vince had no reason to think Bret would do that because Bret at least hadn't violated his trust. And you want to talk about people who couldn't be trusted...you think Shawn Michaels, who was heavily abusing drugs and liquor, who ruined the pushes and careers of many guys in the past and who was a self centered prima donna in and outside of the ring COULD be trusted? Shawn didn't want to lose to Austin at WM14 and only under threat of physical violence from Undertaker did he concede-he very nearly stopped Attitude from happening. And yet Bret, the one who gave absolutely no reason not to be trusted in the past, was clearly the untrustworthy one...what sorta fucked up logic is that?

That's what it comes down to, really. I do not understand the logic of people who blame Bret considering what happened and HBK's state at the time. Even in some fucked up reality if Bret was being an unprofessional jerk, he STILL didn't deserve what happened to him. It was completely the wrong way to handle the situation.
__________________


"The taller the chefs hat the greater the chef.... FOOLS .... Who said I was a chef?!"
KO Bossy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2012, 11:06 PM   #40 (permalink)
Learning to break kayfabe
 
Razor Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 237
Razor Mike is an after thoughtRazor Mike is an after thought
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Vince McMahon- should have trusted Bret Hart.
Razor Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


VerticalSports
Baseball Forum Golf Forum Boxing Forum Snowmobile Forum
Basketball Forum Soccer Forum MMA Forum PWC Forum
Football Forum Cricket Forum Wrestling Forum ATV Forum
Hockey Forum Volleyball Forum Paintball Forum Snowboarding Forum
Tennis Forum Rugby Forums Lacrosse Forum Skiing Forums
Copyright (C) Verticalscope Inc Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2
Powered by vBulletin Copyright 2000-2009 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007, PixelFX Studios