And if they suck, hey, you can blame Brett!

I never said i didnt know diamond geezer, i just said that i was not diamond geezer.

:twisted: As i have said in an earlier reply i do not have a problem with brookesides achievements or what he has done for British wrestling but i simply do not like his in ring personna.:twisted: In your reply you make it seem that brookeside is the only good wrestler on the british circuit and that is simply not true; there are many who given the chance could easly make it into a major federation.
In your reply you also list who brookeside has beat and how they were large superstars, but what you need to remember is people like williams have also beaten superstars for example williams beat wwe superstar eddie guerrero at revival 2002 at crystal palace. :twisted:

Whom he beats doesn't make him good. Also, why do you insist on making three posts back to back in the same topic when you could just do it in one?

Something Brett, Lee and Julian all neglected to mention:

Relatively early in his career, Robbie wrestled a bout which has gone on to become almost legendary on the tape-trading circuit - not just amongst us Brits but amongst many US connosieurs. Its reputation has grown with each passing year, as more and more fans score themselves a copy of it. Indeed, by way of example, I understand it happens to be one of Low Ki's favourite bouts of all time, no less.

That bout is his match against Johnny Saint from April 1987 at an ITV taping in Catford.

Technical masterpiece, with some of the most interesting and thought-provoking scientific mat-work of the past 20 years or so.
And that was something he managed to do while still just a young kid. (I may be wrong but I've a feeling he was still in his teens at the time, or at least just barely 20-ish)

Mr Big, try pulling that one apart.
If you've got the guts.
If you've ever even SEEN that bout!

And while I'm about it ...

:twisted: Yes, but wrestling involves both heels and faces one cannot excist without the other.

For the record, Johnny Saint vs Robbie Brookside was a face vs face Clean Match.

And its a damn sight better than most face vs heel bouts anywhere in the world because the wrestlers didn't have to waste time with the whole crowd-working rigmarole, they simply got on with what they were good at - they wrestled.

To change the subject a bit:

It appears to be a kid going through puberty who thinks it's big and clever to support the heels and boo the babyfaces, failing to realise that a truly smart fan would not sabotage a wrestler's work in that way.


Oh great, John. Like anyone with any self-respect is going to sit there and root for Big Daddy against Kendo Nagasaki when watching their bout from December '75? Give over.

In fact, quite honestly, (and - WARNING - I'm gonna go on a good old lengthy meandering rant right now!) screw the whole damn "Smart" philosophy and the scabby American manic-capitalist cynical horse it rode in on.

It's funny how most "smart" fans tend to also be "anti-corporate"alternative music fans of one sort or another, yet when it comes to wrestling they will happily sign up to a philosophy which basically revolves around subordination to The Man, being as much of a company whore as possible, (with the bigger the company the better) and concentrating on the profit motive to the utter detriment of one's artistic (or more relevant to this point athletic) integrity. Put it frankly, if "smart" fans applied "smart" philosophy to music, they'd all be big fans of Phil Collins and Westlife.

If you want to know the bottom line on smart philosophy, then according to its strict edicts, Bert Assirati would by smart standards be an absolutely terrible destructive worker who frequently shot on and brutalized his fellow workers, would hospitalise anyone who couldn't put up a decent show against him, refused to job to anyone on the grounds of 'if they don't like it, they can try shooting on me', particularly refused to job away his British Heavyweight _title_ and was consequently sacked as champion from both the two biggest promotions in the space of two years, attempted to disrupt the main event of a massive supershow by challenging a major American World Champion (whom promoters had worked long and bloody hard to bring over to the UK) to a shooting match for his championship and finished up by spitefully terrorising and ultimately finished his days spitefully chasing out of the business for several years the second promotion's biggest attraction (the man who later saved the first promotion's bacon). THERE!!! That's smart philosophy for you, John. And it doesn't sound too good, does it?

Of course we all know that the above interpretation of the Assirati story is bullshit. Bert was not just the finest hooker/ripper this country has ever produced (and thus, according to the prevalent philosophy, the man most deserving of the _title_), but also a veritable Robin Hood figure who refused point blank to let his bosses tell him what to do in the ring. Assirati, quite simply, was in real life everything that Steve Austin was claimed to be during his programme with Vince McMahon in '98.

Bert fought long and hard for the moral right of shooters to not have to job to opponents of inferior shoot ability, especially not to crude commercial tankers like Shirley Crabtree! (So much so that in later years "What Assirati would have done with him!" {i.e. Big Daddy} became almost a mantra of faith amongst the older generation of wrestlers and fans, many of whom would have dearly loved to see old Bert turn up and sabotage a Big Daddy TV tag match!)

The vast majority of his fellow wrestlers not only sympathised with his attitude, but actually shared it and applied it to their own careers, admiring him for having the bottle to stand up for himself. Those who could keep up with him, found his stiff shoot-_style_ (and often just plain shoot) bouts to be a refreshing pleasure to partake of, being able to go out and do in the ring the very thing they had learned to do in shoot-gyms and amateur wrestling clubs and frankly would rather do - actually wrestle rather than perform.

His sackings as champion did incredible damage to the credibility of both the official and BWF British Heavyweight _title_s. As for his turning up ringside for Lou Thesz's Royal Albert Hall NWA World Heavyweight _title_ defence, Thesz was someone who would have been a worthy opponent for Assirati, he welcomed the challenge (although the NWA would have shat bricks at the prospect of Bert as champ) and in fact Thesz vs. Assirati was probably the last truly great possible Shooting Match matchup left in the world at Heavyweight level.

But try explaining that little lot not just to a bunch of internet smarks, but even to a great deal of modern US professionals! They just don't get the point. The Assirati story and his philosophy is entirely alien to the whole
smart philosophy, yet he is the greatest legend in British wrestling history.
In fact, come to that, what the HELL is to be done with idiots who regard the legendary, nay sacred, Wigan Snakepit as an evil and cruel place where those who survived were taught how to main and cripple their co-workers?

Or how about the sort who slag off Lou Thesz for refusing to job his NWA _title_ to non-shooters, especially not Buddy Rogers (the 50s US equivalent of Alex Shane)? Or who have the flaming cheek to question Karl Gotch's legendary status on the grounds that (after a lengthy campaign of provocation of Rogers' part, mostly consisiting of being derogatory, _base_d on a Smart perspective, about Gotch's formidable hooking skills) Karl eventually broke Rogers' arm in 1962 when the original Nature Boy was champion, thereby helping precipitate top draw Rogers' retirement a year later?

That's "Smart" for you. Repeat after me: SMARTNESS SUCKS!!!