United Forum
Go Back   United Forum > Everything else > Wrestling
Closed Thread
 
Old 05-11-2015, 06:20 PM
ashtonred
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginners
you saying his kids are thick?
Well I must have been when I was a kid. It hardly mattered though. Mick McManuss v Jackie Pallow at Belle Vue was the best thing I ever saw in a ring.
Packed to capacity that night - McManuss won then the inevitable happened. A rematch was announced - same venue. They used to coin it in.
 
Old 05-11-2015, 07:19 PM
ryanMUFC
 
Default

Top reds go to raw.
 
Old 05-11-2015, 07:27 PM
puressence
 
Default

My 3 lads wanna go Stoney we can have a north south rumble
 
Old 05-11-2015, 07:35 PM
taff
 
Default

The virtue of all-in wrestling is that it is the spectacle of excess. Here we find a grandiloquence which must have been that of ancient theaters. And in fact wrestling is an open-air spectacle, for what makes the circus or the arena what they are is not the sky (a romantic value suited rather to fashionable occasions), it is the drenching and vertical quality of the flood of light. Even hidden in the most squalid Parisian halls, wrestling partakes of the nature of the great solar spectacles, Greek drama and bullfights: in both, a light without shadow generates an emotion without reserve.

There are people who think that wrestling is an ignoble sport. Wrestling is not a sport, it is a spectacle, and it is no more ignoble to attend a wrestled performance of Suffering than a performance of the sorrows of Arnolphe or Andromaque. Of course, there exists a false wrestling, in which the participants unnecessarily go to great lengths to make a show of a fair fight; this is of no interest. True wrestling, wrongly called amateur wrestling, is performed in second-rate halls, where the public spontaneously attunes itself to the spectacular nature of the contest, like the audience at a suburban cinema. Then these same people wax indignant because wrestling is a stage-managed sport (which ought, by the way, to mitigate its ignominy). The public is completely uninterested in knowing whether the contest is rigged or not, and rightly so; it abandons itself to the primary virtue of the spectacle, which is to abolish all motives and all consequences: what matters is not what it thinks but what it sees.
 
Old 05-11-2015, 07:37 PM
Drexl
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taff
The virtue of all-in wrestling is that it is the spectacle of excess. Here we find a grandiloquence which must have been that of ancient theaters. And in fact wrestling is an open-air spectacle, for what makes the circus or the arena what they are is not the sky (a romantic value suited rather to fashionable occasions), it is the drenching and vertical quality of the flood of light. Even hidden in the most squalid Parisian halls, wrestling partakes of the nature of the great solar spectacles, Greek drama and bullfights: in both, a light without shadow generates an emotion without reserve.

There are people who think that wrestling is an ignoble sport. Wrestling is not a sport, it is a spectacle, and it is no more ignoble to attend a wrestled performance of Suffering than a performance of the sorrows of Arnolphe or Andromaque. Of course, there exists a false wrestling, in which the participants unnecessarily go to great lengths to make a show of a fair fight; this is of no interest. True wrestling, wrongly called amateur wrestling, is performed in second-rate halls, where the public spontaneously attunes itself to the spectacular nature of the contest, like the audience at a suburban cinema. Then these same people wax indignant because wrestling is a stage-managed sport (which ought, by the way, to mitigate its ignominy). The public is completely uninterested in knowing whether the contest is rigged or not, and rightly so; it abandons itself to the primary virtue of the spectacle, which is to abolish all motives and all consequences: what matters is not what it thinks but what it sees.
What tune?
 
Old 05-11-2015, 08:06 PM
ashtonred
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taff
The virtue of all-in wrestling is that it is the spectacle of excess. Here we find a grandiloquence which must have been that of ancient theaters. And in fact wrestling is an open-air spectacle, for what makes the circus or the arena what they are is not the sky (a romantic value suited rather to fashionable occasions), it is the drenching and vertical quality of the flood of light. Even hidden in the most squalid Parisian halls, wrestling partakes of the nature of the great solar spectacles, Greek drama and bullfights: in both, a light without shadow generates an emotion without reserve.

There are people who think that wrestling is an ignoble sport. Wrestling is not a sport, it is a spectacle, and it is no more ignoble to attend a wrestled performance of Suffering than a performance of the sorrows of Arnolphe or Andromaque. Of course, there exists a false wrestling, in which the participants unnecessarily go to great lengths to make a show of a fair fight; this is of no interest. True wrestling, wrongly called amateur wrestling, is performed in second-rate halls, where the public spontaneously attunes itself to the spectacular nature of the contest, like the audience at a suburban cinema. Then these same people wax indignant because wrestling is a stage-managed sport (which ought, by the way, to mitigate its ignominy). The public is completely uninterested in knowing whether the contest is rigged or not, and rightly so; it abandons itself to the primary virtue of the spectacle, which is to abolish all motives and all consequences: what matters is not what it thinks but what it sees.
Exactly, there isn't a Father Christmas. Shhhh. Don't tell the kids.
 
Old 09-11-2015, 01:40 PM
Jethro
 
Default

 
Old 09-11-2015, 01:48 PM
elephantstone
 
Default

 
Old 09-11-2015, 01:53 PM
jaffo
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by no fun
Is this true ?

I'm going to fucking slaughter him next time I'm in that london
It is true, Baroo and Throw went to a talk given by a well-known wrestler. I'm sure you've heard that story before
 
Old 09-11-2015, 02:12 PM
no fun
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaffo
It is true, Baroo and Throw went to a talk given by a well-known wrestler. I'm sure you've heard that story before
bloody hell

oh, Im going to enjoy this
Closed Thread
Thread Tools
Similar Threads for: Quick question on wrestling
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Quick question jaffo Off Topic 8 16-01-2011 08:36 PM
Quick X-box question jaffo Gaming 16 24-08-2010 08:33 PM
Quick question... Sullingtons Football 24 17-06-2010 07:42 PM
Quick PC question... Ed Sullivan Gaming 5 31-08-2007 08:42 PM
Quick question ivan9188 Off Topic 7 13-07-2007 05:47 PM
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:55 AM.

Copyright 2006 - 2018 utdforum.com. This site is in no way affiliated to Manchester United Football Club.