WWE Hell in a Cell 2022 Review - Triple Threat POV | Smark Out Moment

WWE Hell in a Cell 2022 Review - Triple Threat POV

Posted by Dallas Allsopp Sunday, June 12, 2022

Welcome to another edition of Triple Threat from Smark Out Moment, where three of us get together to discuss three questions based on one big topic going down in the week of professional wrestling.

This week, Dallas Allsopp, Greg Coleman and Robert DeFelice review WWE Hell in a Cell 2022.

Sunday marked the return of Hell in a Cell, but did it shape up as a hell of a show, or was it just simply a tortorous event?

Question 1: What was your favourite match of the night? Which was the most disappointing?

ALLSOPP: The WWE Raw Women’s Championship match was booked perfectly, allowing Bianca Belair to highlight just how talented she is. Asuka showed she hasn’t missed a beat since her return from injury, whilst Becky Lynch actually impressed me with her work rate. Overall, it was easily the in ring highlight of the show.

Unfortunately, most of the card was piss poor. The most egregious mistake for me was Baron Corbin vs Madcap Moss, which had all the life of a rotting corpse! It was just terrible to watch.

COLEMAN: My favorite match of the night was the WWE Raw Women’s Title Triple Threat Match. All 3 women did great and obviously have great chemistry with each other. The right woman won, and a great story was told as Bianca Belair learned from Becky Lynch to be opportunistic and turned the tables on her by stealing her victory. Best match on the card.

I don’t know if this match was the most disappointing as I didn’t have any moderate or high expectations for it, but Madcap Moss vs Happy Corbin should’ve been a SmackDown match and not a match on a Premium Live Event. I’ll add Theory and Mustafa Ali in here as disappointing because I was really hoping Ali won!

DeFELICE: Cody Rhodes' unbelievable display of intestinal fortitude was definitely my favorite moment of the night. It was the modern equivalent of Mick Foley risking life and limb in Pittsburgh in 1998. I don't know if I will ever see another Hell in a Cell match with such great stakes ever again. On the other hand, with the benefit of hindsight, I can now say that the most disappointing match was the mixed six-person tag team match. Judgment Day got the win and seemed as though they were poised for a great run but now, Rhea Ripley and Damian Priest have pushed Edge to the side for Finn Balor, the same guy that was pinned in the match on Saturday. I will never understand this logic.

Question 2: Did Cody Rhodes make the right decision in competing against Seth Rollins with a torn pectoral?

COLEMAN: I don’t think the question of right decision or wrong decision should apply to Cody Rhodes in this situation. If you listen to most athletes, if given the choice to play, 99/100 times the player will choose to play regardless of how they’re feeling. Rhodes suffered a completely torn pectoral which means that the pectoral was torn completely off the bone. The injury is severe, but nothing that was going to happen on Sunday would make it worse or change the treatment plan for him going forward. I can understand why Rhodes would do it because it moved him into rare air in pro wrestling and sports entertainment lore. It also ensured that the book of Rhodes vs Seth Rollins was closed, and that there would be no reason why he couldn’t move on to other feuds upon his return from surgery. Rhodes clearly made the decision that he could manage the pain enough to get through the match and he did so in great fashion.

Now should WWE have allowed Rhodes to compete with a completely torn pectoral? ABSOLUTELY NOT! It was a terrible look and set a terrible precedent. Now does WWE have a list of injuries you can work with and a list of injuries that you can’t? What and who decides what goes on each list? In the past, we’ve seen champions have to relinquish titles due to injuries that were probably not as severe as his torn pectoral, but Vince McMahon allowed Rhodes to wrestle in a Hell in a Cell match with 35% of his torso bruised and swollen. Terrible, terrible look, and WWE should be ashamed.

DeFELICE: Absolutely he did, but also no, that was terrible. This is a loaded question. It was tough to watch as a fan, but as I mentioned above, it felt like an old school performance. It was rich with heart and importance. We are much more educated than we were in 1998, and it's clear that an audible should have been called, but all things considered, Cody Rhodes has undergone successful surgery and it appears as though he is on the mend. So, did he make the right decision? I think so. Whether or not WWE made the right decision, it's hard to say. In this case, I'm going to say that it was the right call all the way around because, in all honesty, if they weren't able to deliver this match, then they would have dropped the ball on the only thing people were looking forward to.

ALLSOPP: I’m not a Doctor, therefore I can only answer this as a fan in the most simple manner - Cody Rhodes is an absolute legend, and I give him the biggest of compliments for competing whilst in such clear pain. Many wouldn’t, but I do have to respect his decision to entertain fans.

Question 3: Was this show the final nail in the coffin for Hell in a Cell as a concept pay-per-view?

DeFELICE: Absolutely not. There have been much worse Hell in a Cell pay-per-view events and much worse Hell in a Cell matches on those Hell in a Cell events. In no way, shape, or form, do I enjoy these events, and I'd much rather the matches feel organic when they are booked, but it's clear that WWE is more concerned about the marketing rather than giving you a reason to watch the Hell in a Cell match. So, no. I don't think this event is going anywhere. In fact, I don't even think that this one was that bad.

ALLSOPP: Hell in a Cell as a concept has been dead for years, but Vince McMahon insists on dredging it up each and every year to absolutely no fanfare. Cell matches should only be used as a feud ender, not as the titular match for a show that has no right focusing on such a demonic and destructive stipulation. I have no doubt that even though it should be put to rest, McMahon will once again showcase this event with no regard to the ongoing storylines of the time.

COLEMAN: I hope so. This is the worst of the themed pay-per-views or Premium Live Events because it took one of the best match concepts in WWE history and completely removed everything from it that made it great. Hell in a Cell is no longer the ultimate way to end a feud. Instead, it’s just a concept for a June network exclusive on Peacock. Get rid of Hell in a Cell and bring back No Mercy, The Great American Bash, or Unforgiven.

Those are our thoughts on the issue, but where do you stand?

Let us know your answers to these questions in the comments below!

WWE Triple Threat Review logo segment

Subscribe to Smark Out Moment on YouTube, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Spotify, and more!

AUTHOR OF THIS POST: DALLAS ALLSOPP

Dallas Allsopp is a writer with two main interests, Pokemon and wrestling. He has been writing for a few years for his own personal blogs and is now taking his passion for wrestling and putting it into his writing. You can follow him on Facebook.

0 comments:

Current EVENTS

Watch Clash at the Castle 2022 PPV Live Results

WWE Clash at the Castle PPV Predictions and Results

WANT TO WRITE FOR US?

If you would like to join the Smark Out Moment writing team, please send an email via the contact form.

SITE SEGMENTS

LIST OF SPECIAL EVENTS

BRANDS AND SHOWS

TYPES OF POSTS

SUPPORT SMARK OUT MOMENT

FOLLOW AMT ON SOCIAL MEDIA

JOIN THE TEAM

SMARK MY WORDS