JaymeFuture Posted February 28, 2015 Report Share Posted February 28, 2015 For this weeks Squared Circle Gazette, we embark upon the third of our shows with the Court Case format - The Trial Of Kevin Nash! The Prosecution attempts to charge Nash of gross malpractice for his runs as WWF Champion and WCW Booker, with the Defense strongly disagreeing with a detail-heavy debate. Talking drugs, title challengers, 1995 WWF, Starrcade 98, the Fingerpoke of Doom, Crazy Flair, Eric Bischoff, Hulk Hogan, ratings, buyrates and Vanilla Midgets, this one was a lot of fun - check it out and find out if Big Sexy is declared guilty~! http://squaredcirclegazette.podbean.com/mf/play/ixstzq/SCGRadio30-TheTrialOfKevinNash.mp3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoo Enthusiast Posted February 28, 2015 Report Share Posted February 28, 2015 Guilty of being Too Sweeeeeeet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodear Posted March 1, 2015 Report Share Posted March 1, 2015 I enjoyed listening to this today and felt the points were well argued and delivered. I'm not familiar enough with the cast to know who is who at the moment, but the voices are different enough to tell apart and I'm interested to learn more. I think framing the conversation in terms of actual laws might be a mistake to be honest. I think focusing more on a 'bad for business' or 'good/bad worker' might be more interesting than trying to prove negligence when you can't really prove that sort of thing? Maybe more 'Guilty of the murder of WCW' would work better? Content wise the only real thing that jumped to mind was when you were talking about drug use making him a bad worker and thinking about all the materials going through Ric Flair and how much it didn't effect his work. I guess The Judge for the show made that point himself at the end, but not with that specific angle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaymeFuture Posted March 1, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2015 I was on the defense, and didn't see the drug argument coming up beforehand. One thing that got edited off was the judge asking about Shawn Michaels, since he was noted as being a part of a lot of Nash's soma-fests and it not making too much of a difference. I actually thought the drug argument hindered their cause in some ways - they did a great job pointing out isolated moments of negligence, but I think they lacked a strong narrative to tie it together, as if it was already spoken just because it's Kevin Nash. 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.