CM Punk still got the alphabet wrong on the second attempt

Discussion in 'RAW' started by BrockLesnarFanForLife, Apr 24, 2012.

  1. CM Punk still got the alphabet wrong on the second attempt when he was walking up and down that line striaght. He said S, T when it should of been T, S. Lol so really Jericho should be champion I cant believe that got covered up. But I am a CM Punk fan and I want him to beat Jericho at Extreme Rules and still be WWE champion as CM Punk is awesome
  2. Don't know the alphabet? :shock:
  3. I don't think getting one letter wrong when saying the alphabet backwards would result in the championship getting removed anyway, as he clearly done it whilst walking straight on the line, lol.
  4. Wouldn't say no to him losing the title for a while though whilst I love Punk think it would an extra dimension to this feud.
  5. All that last night made me realize was I can't recite the alphabet backwards at any time.
  6. Lols I know mate and it's a drunk test. I hit V an then have to say it forwards to work it out LOLS
  7. "Who in the history of the alphabet has ever said it backwards" :laugh::laugh:
  8. Dude, he was drunk. Get over it!
  9. Yeah but I can't say it backwards sober it proves nothing.
  10. Oh.. :okay:
  11. Can you?

    It gets so confusing I usually hit a point an then go forwards again haha!
  12. I can say it forwards. But he had the time to practice it, or write it on his armbands.
  13. I can say it forwards just not backwards!

    LOL at ur armbands comment!
  14. Sorry about this, but it's bugged me since last night. And it will sound awfully mark-ish. Prior to the following, I know it's all just a show and I'm perfectly willing to suspend disbelief up to a certain point, but two things really bugged me about the whole thing:

    1) No. Saying one letter pair the wrong way around was not a disqualification for sobriety. I say "was" because many police forces have dropped this test for a couple of reasons: a) it's difficult even for a sober person to remember the alphabet backwards; b) typically an intoxicated suspect will have just as much trouble saying the alphabet forward as they would backward, so it's unnecessarily difficult for the sober to prove their sobriety when there's an easier way to prove intoxication.

    2) Even failing a field sobriety test does not conclusively prove intoxication. A person failing such a test would be requested to provide a urine, breath, or blood sample, with blood being the preferred medium for testing, with a breath test being the least desired as it is the most inconclusive. Even at that, a person could not be required to provide such a test without a warrant (note: this is law in the United States; I'm not nearly so knowledgeable on law outside of the borders of the U.S.). If such a provision existed in WWE policy (no idea if it does or not, mind), the use of alcohol would have to be conclusively proven, therefore requiring a blood, urine, or breath test that showed what I'm guessing to be merely the barest trace of alcohol. Even then, it would be difficult to prove that said alcohol was imbibed in the preceding 24 hours. (Oh, and just put the memory that Stone Cold Steve Austin used to down between 6 and 12 "Steveweisers" on live television during WWE events during his career out of your mind.) The main idea here is that it is almost impossible to prove that a person took in alcohol "in the 24 hours prior to a WWE show" as the provision that Eve brought up mentioned. Had the title been stripped (and if it were all real, of course, which we're supposed to suppose), CM Punk would have had an extremely actionable claim against John Laurinaitis (as his supervisor in both his roles of GM and Executive Vice President of Talent Relations), Hunter Hearst Helmsley (as COO), Vincent K. McMahon (as Chairman of the Board of Directors of WWE, Inc.), Linda McMahon (I believe she's still CEO, but I could be wrong about that and thence her liability), the members of the WWE Board of Directors (both individually and collectively), and the WWE (as a corporate entity; interesting thing about U.S. law is that corporations are treated as "people" in both legislation and legal liability). Not only could such a suit have been filed due to his being made to surrender the title, he would have also won and been entitled to a large financial reward, or at least settled the case out of court to, again, great personal enrichment.

    And for those who want to discuss the "witnessing of Punk's drinking", neither witness apparently actually saw what Punk put in the red plastic cup prior to drinking from it. We did not see what Alex Riley (is he turning heel again? About time.) saw, but all Jericho saw was Punk drinking from said red plastic cup, which he took to be alcohol due to Riley's report to him. By the way, Jericho becomes an easily-impeachable witness given the fact that he had been ordered to receive the title after Punk's surrender of said title.

    So, in short, this is probably why Otunga did not appear in the segment. If a Harvard attorney didn't realize the above realities of the case (especially when a simple, old University of Texas-graduated government teacher does), they would take his Harvard degree and slap him across the face with it, work or shoot.

  15. Ladies and gentleman... "Kayfabe" is alive and well!!!

  16. Someone deserves the grammar nazi award.
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Jeez, guys. I said it might come off as "mark-ish".


    Oh, and @[Crayo] - Awesome!!! :baws:

  18. Apart from getting the T, S wrong way around he did the rest really well
  19. I didn't think he was drunk. Now that I heard that I think he's a little stupid and lost 0.02% respect for him, but funny in the end.
Draft saved Draft deleted