Victator Posted October 4, 2012 Report Share Posted October 4, 2012 Of course the wrestlers never considered that Monsoon was bringing it up, to get over the idea of hooking the leg. That he was getting the show over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted October 4, 2012 Report Share Posted October 4, 2012 He wasn't getting the show over, though. I guess he was getting hooking the leg over. I suppose that's true. But he was getting it over at the expense of the wrestlers by pointing out how dumb they were for not hooking the leg. When you're putting the show over, probably more important to put the wrestlers over than to put hooking the leg over. To be fair, I think the real guys to blame here are whoever in WWF upper management decided that only hooking the leg at the finish should be part of the house style. That seems like a really bad decision in hindsight, and it must have been a hard one to navigate around on commentary. That said, Gorilla probably would've been better off not bringing it up at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victator Posted October 4, 2012 Report Share Posted October 4, 2012 With most of the the WWF undercard, Gorilla was trying to fill time as best he could. I think anybody that would hurt, was not amounting to much anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NintendoLogic Posted October 4, 2012 Report Share Posted October 4, 2012 I think it did get the show over. I'd say that an announcer who comes across as smarter than everyone else has more credibility than one who always acts shocked when someone doesn't get a pin off a dropkick. When the same guy who tears wrestlers apart for not hooking the leg says that Hulk Hogan is the greatest professional athlete in the world today, you're more likely to buy it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dooley Posted October 4, 2012 Report Share Posted October 4, 2012 I also fail to see how Gorilla Monsoon talking about how a guy not hooking the leg is a bad thing. Again, it's a sport and you criticize guys who aren't executing properly. It was part of the house style at the time to only hook the leg on the pin that ended the match. Gorilla was criticizing guys for making a mistake that he knew they weren't allowed to correct. It only served to make him look good at the wrestlers' expense. I'm pretty sure I've brought this up earlier in the thread but I don't see how that's any different than sports announcers saying the QB should have passed to receiver X instead of Y or whatever other parallel you want to draw to any other sport in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 I also fail to see how Gorilla Monsoon talking about how a guy not hooking the leg is a bad thing. Again, it's a sport and you criticize guys who aren't executing properly. It was part of the house style at the time to only hook the leg on the pin that ended the match. Gorilla was criticizing guys for making a mistake that he knew they weren't allowed to correct. It only served to make him look good at the wrestlers' expense. I wasn't aware that it was the style. It's never been a huge tell to me because he usually did it on pinfalls that were clearly not going to end the match. Personally, I find that far less offensive than the guys like Vince, Cole, etc that scream about how the match is over, what an upset, new champion, etc, while the pinfall is at a 1 count. That seems worse than Gorilla saying "that guy didn't hook the leg and didn't execute properly." That seems like a logical thing to say during the course of a match. I've never sat through a WWF show from the 80s and thought Gorilla was trying to put himself over. Again, Gorilla isn't my favorite announcer but the hooking the leg thing seems super nitpicky when other announcers do far worse things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 With most of the the WWF undercard, Gorilla was trying to fill time as best he could. I think anybody that would hurt, was not amounting to much anyway. That's true. I shouldn't harp on this too much, because I don't think it was something that caused any meaningful damage to anyone. I just don't see it as a positive. I think it did get the show over. I'd say that an announcer who comes across as smarter than everyone else has more credibility than one who always acts shocked when someone doesn't get a pin off a dropkick. When the same guy who tears wrestlers apart for not hooking the leg says that Hulk Hogan is the greatest professional athlete in the world today, you're more likely to buy it. Why did Gorilla need to deliberately bury guys to establish that kind of gravitas when Lance Russell didn't? I'm pretty sure I've brought this up earlier in the thread but I don't see how that's any different than sports announcers saying the QB should have passed to receiver X instead of Y or whatever other parallel you want to draw to any other sport in the world. Was the QB told by his coach that he absolutely, positively must always pass to receiver Y even if receiver X is clearly the better option? If so, does the announcer know this is the case? If so, does the announcer continue to criticize the QB anyway instead of directing blame at the coach who actually made the stupid rule in the first place? No? Then it's not a parallel example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victator Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 I think there was a very good chance Gorilla was told to harp on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NintendoLogic Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 Why did Gorilla need to deliberately bury guys to establish that kind of gravitas when Lance Russell didn't? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Gorilla was ideal. But the claim made by Dave and others was that he was actively injurious to the product, a below replacement-level announcer in sabermetric terms. I don't think that was the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dooley Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 I'm pretty sure I've brought this up earlier in the thread but I don't see how that's any different than sports announcers saying the QB should have passed to receiver X instead of Y or whatever other parallel you want to draw to any other sport in the world. Was the QB told by his coach that he absolutely, positively must always pass to receiver Y even if receiver X is clearly the better option? If so, does the announcer know this is the case? If so, does the announcer continue to criticize the QB anyway instead of directing blame at the coach who actually made the stupid rule in the first place? No? Then it's not a parallel example. But if you're reacting to wrestling in a sport sense or kayfabe, that doesn't apply. Like in any other sport, you call a flaw in the execution as the play is happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 Actually, it happens often in football if a receiver only makes 5 yards on a play where he needed 6 for a first down. The announcer will point out he wasn't in a position to gain the required yardage and question his football sense. Sometimes they'll criticize the coaches for their play calling, a lot of times it depends on the relative star power of the people involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 As someone who grew up listening to Monsoon, none of my pals and I ever noticed or cared about his "shoulda hooked the leg" stuff. We'd just laugh at him saying guys were literally on the shelf for a few months or fans were literally hanging from the rafters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted October 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 Well, that's just one example. Gotta love when a wrestler applies a submission and Monsoon immediately starts undercutting the hold, saying no one would ever submit to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khawk20 Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 Well, that's just one example. Gotta love when a wrestler applies a submission and Monsoon immediately starts undercutting the hold, saying no one would ever submit to it. i.e. Any time someone applied the Abdominal Stretch without interhooking their own leg around the leg of the guy he was applying it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 Mansoon was tolerable with Jesse because Jesse wouldn't let him bully him and with Heenan because they had a comedy duo dynamic, but let's be honest, Mansoon as a purely wrestling announcer was annoying as fuck and was acting like a bully babyface who would get himself over first and foremost (and let's not mention *getting a few shots on Vader*...). I enjoy Jesse/Mansoon and Heenan/Mansoon, but strictly because he had a chemistry with both. Why wouldn't Lance Russel do it ? Probably because he was a great wrestling announcer (I'm getting a few entire years of Memphis TV soon, and I'm pretty excited about hearing tons of Lance Russel one of these days). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dooley Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 Well, that's just one example. Gotta love when a wrestler applies a submission and Monsoon immediately starts undercutting the hold, saying no one would ever submit to it. i.e. Any time someone applied the Abdominal Stretch without interhooking their own leg around the leg of the guy he was applying it too. Kind of like when Joe Rogan points out that someone's applying a choke incorrectly in a UFC fight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khawk20 Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 I watch a little UFC, but I don't follow the announcing closely when I do, so I don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NintendoLogic Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 Well, that's just one example. Gotta love when a wrestler applies a submission and Monsoon immediately starts undercutting the hold, saying no one would ever submit to it. This isn't a big deal to me either. Anyone over the age of five knows that no one's going to submit to an abdominal stretch. It wasn't like he was burying legitimate submissions. And Kent Walton talked all the time about how guys were unlikely to get submissions with the holds they were applying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 A lot of this stems from Dave hating the WWF product in the 80s to a hilarious degree once it was obvious Vince was kicking the NWA's ass. Gorilla was the voice of that era, so it seemed that Dave went out of his way to go after him. I'm not saying Monsoon was Lance Russell by any means, but some of the stuff Dave nails him for comes off as petty at times. Yeah he said "literally" all the time and wouldn't put over obvious restholds as possible match enders, I can think of several announcers of the time worse than him that actually negatively effected the show they were calling. I can't imagine anyone who didn't grow up in Calgary thinking Ed Whalen was any kind of positive. Not only was he annoying on commentary, he actually would prevent heels from doing anything heelish. Few things looked more ridiculous than Ed in his Cliff Huxtable sweaters trying to pull the mic away from heels because they were saying heel type things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Jackson Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 The Hart's were in a somewhat delicate situation with Ed, as they relied on his influence with Channel 7 in order to have a show on the air, so they often had to bend over backwards to appease the guy. His presence on the show also legitimized Stampede wrestling for many fans and non-fans, as Ed was an icon in the Calgary community for several decades. Did he hurt the product at times? Probably. Was he a good announcer? Compared to the all-time greats, no. Did he wear Cliff Huxtable sweaters? I always picture Ed as a suit and tie guy, but I haven't really watched much Stampede in the YouTube era, so he probably did near the end of the run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 During the same time frame Rod Trongard was much much worse than Gorilla. Gorilla might have had some obvious flaws but Trongard could not grasp the simplest forms of wrestling psychology. He was inept in every way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 I find it more annoying when Gorilla criticises a guy like Tito for having the wrong temperament or when he brings up one of his talking points like having a second ref on the outside, but I kind of doubt that people paid much attention to Gorilla's commentary at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dooley Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 I watch a little UFC, but I don't follow the announcing closely when I do, so I don't know. My point was that it's hardly new that a combat sports announcer points out when an athlete is applying a hold incorrectly. Outside of UFC, you also see it in the Olympics for judo and wrestling etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted October 6, 2012 Report Share Posted October 6, 2012 One positive thing for Gorilla. He really sold the technical skills of certain guys well. He reserved "excellence of execution" for Bob Orton, Bret Hart and one or two other guys. I think it really put them over big time because he said that about so few guys. He also was great with Greg Valentine matches and talking about how it took Valentine 10-15 minutes to get warmed up and really going in the ring. That added a very realistic element to the commentary at times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted October 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2012 Well, that's just one example. Gotta love when a wrestler applies a submission and Monsoon immediately starts undercutting the hold, saying no one would ever submit to it. This isn't a big deal to me either. Anyone over the age of five knows that no one's going to submit to an abdominal stretch. It wasn't like he was burying legitimate submissions. And Kent Walton talked all the time about how guys were unlikely to get submissions with the holds they were applying. The announcer's job is not to point out things cynical people in the viewing audience point out. Anyone over the age of five knows wrestling is fake. Should he point that out too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.