The Montreal Incident - Page 5 - 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, 11:45 PM   #41 (permalink)
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
paulborklaserheyma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 815
paulborklaserheyma 251 - 500paulborklaserheyma 251 - 500paulborklaserheyma 251 - 500paulborklaserheyma 251 - 500paulborklaserheyma 251 - 500
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Mike View Post
Vince McMahon- should have trusted Bret Hart.
Trust Bret on what? beating HBK clean and leave to WCW with WWF title?
__________________
paulborklaserheyma is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 

Old 06-25-2012, 01:19 AM   #42 (permalink)
Been there, done that, and got the T-shirt, son, and you're just doing reruns.
 
Elipses Corter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Washington D.C.
Posts: 10,211
Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KO Bossy View Post
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 problem I have with your post is the fact that Vince already pulled a "screwjob" 8 years prior, based on Wendi Richter deciding not to resign with WWE. Go back to 1991, when Vince paid Ric Flair to show up on WWF TV with the WCW Title. Go back to 1995, where Luger had jumped ship the day after competing for WWE, without letting Vince know ahead of time. Madusa, in a similar situation, signed with WCW while holding a WWE belt, showed up on Nitro and threw it in the trash. Now, my opinion is that Vince did the right thing, as history shows that trust was thrown out the window years ago, when it comes down to money.

None of us can say whether or not Bret would have shown up on Nitro with the WWE Title. But at the same time, is it wrong for Vince to prevent the possibility of that happening? And answer this: What was the reason Bret left WWE for?

Again with trust. Did Flair give WCW a reason not trust him? Did Wendi Richter, Lex Luger or Madusa give Vince reasons not to trust them? And look what happened. All of them either screwed over their boss or got screwed over for not wanting to do business and lose their titles, eventhough they weren't under contract or signed with the competition. And I know HBK has done tons of fucked up shit, so he's automatically the scapegoat. Look at the relationship Hogan and Vince had. Hogan, giving Vince the impression he was retiring, sat out the remainder of his contract. And 6 months later, he signs with the competition. History has shown there is no such thing as loyalty or trust from the wrestlers to the promoters, what makes Vince/Bret so different? How can you say that Bret wouldn't have jumped ship with the belt, but for us that thinks he might have, you say there is no logic behind that?

In case you didn't know, Attitude Era started months before HBK/Austin. HBK refusing to drop the title had no effect on AE happening or not and I might be crazy, but I thought HBK/Austin were friends. And I've heard Undertaker had to threaten HBK to get him to job but with the way his back was, why would he refuse to job? So, it's a problem for HBK refusing to job because "he would have ruined Austin's push" but it's okay for Bret refusing to job because HBK "hypothetically" said he wouldn't return the favor. Even if HBK said he wouldn't return the favor, what difference would it have made? Bret was leaving, it's not like HBK was scheduled to drop the belt back to him the next month, the feud was likely done at that point. IMO, Bret and Shawn were acting like a bunch of fucking babies. However, 2 wrongs don't make a right. Sometimes, you have to be the bigger man. We all know Shawn was immature but when Bret went from willing to drop it to not willing because HBK said wouldn't do it for him, Bret officially dropped to his level. If I'm Vince, I wouldn't cater to a guy who could potentially jump ship with my title, a guy who doesn't want to do whats right for business, despite being so outspoken against another guy who he classifies as a guy who doesn't want to do whats right for business and, lastly, a guy who basically made the whole situation financially related. Bret left because WCW was willing to pay him more than WWE could. I understand he has a family but what makes you think that if Bischoff offered him a significantly large amount of money, he wouldn't have showed up on Nitro with Vince's title?
Elipses Corter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 11:43 AM   #43 (permalink)
Lacing SCOTT STEINER's boots
 
Razor King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: With Her...
Posts: 4,308
Razor King 5001 - 5500Razor King 5001 - 5500Razor King 5001 - 5500Razor King 5001 - 5500Razor King 5001 - 5500Razor King 5001 - 5500Razor King 5001 - 5500Razor King 5001 - 5500Razor King 5001 - 5500Razor King 5001 - 5500Razor King 5001 - 5500
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Everybody benefited from it, so at the end, it didn't really matter. Yes, even Bret. It immortalized him.
__________________
http://i58.tinypic.com/m9pq3d.jpg
Razor King is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 01:42 PM   #44 (permalink)
Humbled
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 49
kayfabecop 50 - 100
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

A lot of people dont seem to know the very basic details of the situation or the elements in Bret's contract.
kayfabecop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 01:55 PM   #45 (permalink)
Best In The World
 
dazzy666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Posts: 4,210
dazzy666 501 - 1000dazzy666 501 - 1000dazzy666 501 - 1000dazzy666 501 - 1000dazzy666 501 - 1000dazzy666 501 - 1000
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

bret. he should of just jobbed
__________________
To The GOAT
dazzy666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 02:43 PM   #46 (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 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble Trouble View Post
The problem I have with your post is the fact that Vince already pulled a "screwjob" 8 years prior, based on Wendi Richter deciding not to resign with WWE. Go back to 1991, when Vince paid Ric Flair to show up on WWF TV with the WCW Title. Go back to 1995, where Luger had jumped ship the day after competing for WWE, without letting Vince know ahead of time. Madusa, in a similar situation, signed with WCW while holding a WWE belt, showed up on Nitro and threw it in the trash. Now, my opinion is that Vince did the right thing, as history shows that trust was thrown out the window years ago, when it comes down to money.

None of us can say whether or not Bret would have shown up on Nitro with the WWE Title. But at the same time, is it wrong for Vince to prevent the possibility of that happening? And answer this: What was the reason Bret left WWE for?

Again with trust. Did Flair give WCW a reason not trust him? Did Wendi Richter, Lex Luger or Madusa give Vince reasons not to trust them? And look what happened. All of them either screwed over their boss or got screwed over for not wanting to do business and lose their titles, eventhough they weren't under contract or signed with the competition. And I know HBK has done tons of fucked up shit, so he's automatically the scapegoat. Look at the relationship Hogan and Vince had. Hogan, giving Vince the impression he was retiring, sat out the remainder of his contract. And 6 months later, he signs with the competition. History has shown there is no such thing as loyalty or trust from the wrestlers to the promoters, what makes Vince/Bret so different? How can you say that Bret wouldn't have jumped ship with the belt, but for us that thinks he might have, you say there is no logic behind that?
Wendi Richter was an employee for 2 years. Lex Luger was an employee for 2 years. Alundra Blayze was an employee for 2 years. Bret Hart was an employee for approximately 15. There is a massive difference between the employer trusting someone who has been with the company for 2 years and trusting someone who has been there a decade and a half.

All I see you doing is borrowing trouble. IF Bret did this. IF Bret did that. WHAT IF Bret had done blah blah blah. The fact of the matter is that you automatically assume the worst of a man who was very willing to do business and said that he'd not only job to Shawn, but actually HAD done so in the past.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble Trouble View Post
In case you didn't know, Attitude Era started months before HBK/Austin. HBK refusing to drop the title had no effect on AE happening or not and I might be crazy, but I thought HBK/Austin were friends. And I've heard Undertaker had to threaten HBK to get him to job but with the way his back was, why would he refuse to job? So, it's a problem for HBK refusing to job because "he would have ruined Austin's push" but it's okay for Bret refusing to job because HBK "hypothetically" said he wouldn't return the favor. Even if HBK said he wouldn't return the favor, what difference would it have made? Bret was leaving, it's not like HBK was scheduled to drop the belt back to him the next month, the feud was likely done at that point. IMO, Bret and Shawn were acting like a bunch of fucking babies. However, 2 wrongs don't make a right. Sometimes, you have to be the bigger man. We all know Shawn was immature but when Bret went from willing to drop it to not willing because HBK said wouldn't do it for him, Bret officially dropped to his level. If I'm Vince, I wouldn't cater to a guy who could potentially jump ship with my title, a guy who doesn't want to do whats right for business, despite being so outspoken against another guy who he classifies as a guy who doesn't want to do whats right for business and, lastly, a guy who basically made the whole situation financially related. Bret left because WCW was willing to pay him more than WWE could. I understand he has a family but what makes you think that if Bischoff offered him a significantly large amount of money, he wouldn't have showed up on Nitro with Vince's title?
Sigh...

While smarks know the AE started earlier in 1997, its officially recognized by the WWE and majority of casual wrestling fans as being WM14 when Austin won.

Watch the Bret/Shawn DVD. In it Shawn even ADMITS he said he wouldn't return the favor to Bret, so its not hypothetical.

Undertaker has admitted in interviews before about how he had to lay down the law with Shawn, and I'd take his word over just about anyone else in the locker room.

Shawn refused to job to Austin at WM14 because despite the fact that his back was a complete mess, Shawn did not want to lose the title, which is no different from how he didn't want to lose titles any OTHER time in his career. He was a massive egomaniac and was sickened with the thought that he might lose the spotlight by losing, even though he could barely walk.

If HBK, who had guaranteed creative control in his contract from amassing all his political power backstage, didn't job to Austin, then no Austin win at WM14, now start of Austin 3:16 as the champion, no feud with Mr. McMahon, etc. So yes, Shawn very realistically could have ruined the push. The first Raw that beat Nitro in almost 2 years was in April, 1998. It featured Austin vs. Vince as the main event. If Austin hadn't won at WM14, you would have had no time to build this match up, because no Austin winning means no Austin vs Vince. That win at WM14 was what set the feud in motion. If Austin didn't get it, one can only guess how things might have turned out later. How long was HBK planning on keeping the belt? Until he was paralyzed at Summerslam? Hell, WCW could have won the war in that time.

All I see you doing is vilifying Bret, yet giving no concrete reasons as to why, except that you have some sort of problem with the guy. His opponent was being unprofessional, so Bret says he does not want to work with him. I think that's a pretty reasonable expectation. Instead, you call BRET unprofessional. You say BRET was the one who was in the wrong for not being the bigger man. Its like you clearly ignore everything that was Shawn's doing. When Vince approached Shawn with the idea of having Bret go over that night, Michaels refused. Where was Shawn being the bigger man? Where was his professionalism? No, you lay it squarely on Bret, despite the fact that Bret was fully willing to do business with this guy up until Shawn's immaturity and unprofessional conduct kicked into high gear and Bret understandably didn't want to work with him. He and Shawn hated each other, how was he supposed to know Shawn wouldn't 'drop' him on his head or something to that effect? This goes back to the trust the guys have with each other in the ring. And you're a liar if you say that if you were in Bret's situation you'd have gone in there and just lost with a smile on your face, so don't try to.

Bret, with confirmation, has also said that the plan was for him to lose it the next night or 8 days later on Raw, since they wouldn't be in Montreal any longer. So its very obvious Bret wasn't going to just show up with the title in WCW, in fact I think his contract ended later in November, so he was technically still employed by the WWF, still having time to drop it.

Vince has the right to take certain measures to prevent what happened with Madusa from happening again. However, this was most DEFINITELY not the right way to fix the situation. And yet despite all of this shit you keep talking, you had also not given any proof as to why Bret actually deserved what happened to him? Let's say Bret was in the wrong, that he should have just lost and was being stubborn. That STILL does not excuse the humiliation and betrayal he received in front of the tens of thousands at the arena, everyone watching on PPV, and in front of the entire locker room. They could EASILY have just fabricated an injury where someone won via DQ (not a clean win, so there is obvious pride retained), and then have Bret be hurt kayfabe afterwards, then be forced to vacate, with Shawn winning a tournament to crown the new champion. See? Easy and behind the scenes, the personal shit stays personal. But no, Vince decided it was much better to go the route he did and it was absolutely the wrong thing to do, there were 100 other ways it could have been handled better. The fact that he handled it so poorly means that he's mainly at fault. If we're going at it from a professionalism angle, then its Shawn. Such a horrible, unjust outcome for something so fucking stupid and petty. No one deserves what Bret had happen to him. So even in a fictitious situation where Bret WAS acting badly, even then he STILL did not act the worst, and that's the point of this thread. Vince didn't just betray Bret, he betrayed the entire roster with that little public display.
__________________


"The taller the chefs hat the greater the chef.... FOOLS .... Who said I was a chef?!"
KO Bossy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 04:44 PM   #47 (permalink)
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
westie420uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dirty Leeds, England
Posts: 798
westie420uk is not that liked
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

IMO going off what i can remember (its been a while since i watched Wrestling With Shadows & other vids/docs on the subject) it was all down to Bret.
He was told to drop the title & it was plain to see (in Vince's eyes) he was planning not to. You do what your boss tells you.
It makes no difference that HBK said he wouldn't drop the title to Bret or Austin, the fact is Vince had to do what was best for the WWE. Yes, he may not of done it the right way but his options were limited. He couldn't afford to have a repeat of previous events of watching WWE titles been thrown in the bin on a rival show.
I do feel sorry for Bret as his career went down hill after he left the WWE, but money talks.
I think i will watch the above mentioned docs & have a new opinion on the matter, if i do i will be sure to re-post.
__________________
The WWE European November 2013 tour in Leeds was amazing!
westie420uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 05:50 PM   #48 (permalink)
Acknowledged by SCOTT STEINER
 
jaw2929's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Save me from this space....
Posts: 1,336
jaw2929 101 - 250jaw2929 101 - 250jaw2929 101 - 250
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble Trouble View Post
I voted Bret, for refusing to drop the title in Canada. I know HBK said he wouldn't do the job for Bret but 2 wrongs don't make a right. Bret should have been the bigger man and done what was best for business.
This. I love Bret, but he was WAY wrong here. He should know that NO ONE wrestler is above the business. Ever.
jaw2929 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 06:24 PM   #49 (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 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000KO Bossy 10501 - 11000
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by westie420uk View Post
IMO going off what i can remember (its been a while since i watched Wrestling With Shadows & other vids/docs on the subject) it was all down to Bret.
He was told to drop the title & it was plain to see (in Vince's eyes) he was planning not to. You do what your boss tells you.
It makes no difference that HBK said he wouldn't drop the title to Bret or Austin, the fact is Vince had to do what was best for the WWE. Yes, he may not of done it the right way but his options were limited. He couldn't afford to have a repeat of previous events of watching WWE titles been thrown in the bin on a rival show.
I do feel sorry for Bret as his career went down hill after he left the WWE, but money talks.
I think i will watch the above mentioned docs & have a new opinion on the matter, if i do i will be sure to re-post.
As I have stated, there are a hundred other ways he could have handled it and chose by far the worst one. And this is a business with fake wrestling matches, fake stories and is full of characters that would not normally exist in everyday life. The fact that Vince chose to deal with it with REAL humiliation, REAL embarrassment and REAL betrayal makes it inexcusable.
__________________


"The taller the chefs hat the greater the chef.... FOOLS .... Who said I was a chef?!"
KO Bossy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2012, 06:34 PM   #50 (permalink)
Winning World titles, Custom Made Clothes
 
just1988's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bolton, England
Posts: 15,451
just1988 8501 - 9000just1988 8501 - 9000just1988 8501 - 9000just1988 8501 - 9000just1988 8501 - 9000just1988 8501 - 9000just1988 8501 - 9000just1988 8501 - 9000just1988 8501 - 9000just1988 8501 - 9000just1988 8501 - 9000
Default Re: The Montreal Screwjob.. Who acted worse?

It seems a lot of people in this thread are forgetting the fact that Bret had creative control for the last 30 days of his contract, so legally he could do whatever he wanted. If he said he didn't want to drop the title to Shawn in Canada then that was well within his rights.

The creative control stipulation in his contract was something that Vince McMahon had himself agreed to. It was a dirty move for him to do what he did and the only reason anybody ever took Vince's side was because they wanted a job with the WWE/to keep their jobs or had it in for Bret.
__________________

COME ON IN, ADD, FOLLOW AND SUBSCRIBE


Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/anwar.thinks
Twitter: http://twitter.com/anwar_thinks



WWF Mayhem in Manchester
WWE Raw 13/11/06,
WWE Raw 08/11/10
WWE WrestleMania 30
WWE Raw 07/04/14


TNA House Show 20/01/09,
TNA House Show 29/01/10
TNA House Show 27/01/12


PCW Festive Fury 2
PCW Supershow 2 Night 2
PCW Too Good To Be Two
PCW Final Fight
PCW Fright Night
PCW Supershow 3 Night 2
PCW Festive Fury 3
PCW Road to Glory 2014 Night 1 & 2
PCW Who Dares Wins

just1988 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