WrestleMania Dirty win for Taker?

[Senhor Perfect]

Considering Paul Bearer and Kane have kind of been inserted into to Punk/Taker feud, do you think there's any chance Kane interferes and costs Punk the match? The two reasons I think this could happen is:

1. Sets up an automatic rematch for WM XXX where Taker can beat Punk clean and retire. This makes it easy for creative so they don't have to come up with another challenger.

2. Gives Kane and Punk a personal feud to go into after WM with Punk going over strong, regaining his momentum.

 

[BaraaKhalaf92]

Well TBH I say no, I don't think Taker ever won a WM match dirty, all his wins were clean, so why do it now?
Plus, I'm totally against the idea of a rematch between the 2 at WMXXX, Taker's last match shouldn't be a rematch against Punk, just let him beat Cena and retire at WMXXX, since he is the only one that currently seems to be a threat for the streak.

 

[seabs]

I'm not keen on it being anything but clean with the streak now, I'm odd I know but I want it to be definite either way

 

[BaraaKhalaf92]

I'm not keen on it being anything but clean with the streak now, I'm odd I know but I want it to be definite either way

The only way I would accept the streak to be broken dirty, is by Cena turning heel and winning dirty, Taker should NEVER lose clean at WM to anyone .

 

[Lockard 23]

I actually think the only way to ever have Undertaker lose the streak is to have it end clean. If you're gonna end something this big, don't half ass it with interference or whatever.

Anyway, I don't like this idea at all. Cena/Undertaker should happen at Wrestlemania 30. The idea of him defeating Punk by interference (is it because Punk has Taker beat? Because it's terrible for Taker to need help...) and then Taker wanting to fight Punk again just to say he beat him cleanly doesn't sit well with me at all. I don't see why anyone would want any Taker match at WMXXX other than against Cena, honestly.

 

[Mustafar Reginald]

I actually think the only way to ever have Undertaker lose the streak is to have it end clean. If you're gonna end something this big, don't half ass it with interference or whatever.

Anyway, I don't like this idea at all. Cena/Undertaker should happen at Wrestlemania 30. The idea of him defeating Punk by interference (is it because Punk has Taker beat? Because it's terrible for Taker to need help...) and then Taker wanting to fight Punk again just to say he beat him cleanly doesn't sit well with me at all. I don't see why anyone would want any Taker match at WMXXX other than against Cena, honestly.

This.

 

[BaraaKhalaf92]

He didn't win that match dirty lol, it was Gonzales who cheated and the referee disqualified him.
It may have been a DQ win for Taker but never a dirt one.

 

[BaraaKhalaf92]

This.

LOL You can't just edit the post like that, it makes my previous post look stupid and unrelated to anything. :upset:

 

[Mustafar Reginald]

He didn't win that match dirty lol, it was Gonzales who cheated and the referee disqualified him.
It may have been a DQ win for Taker but never a dirt one.

Yeah I know, thus why I deleted it the second after I posted it. I misread what you posted at first, it happens.

*Edit*

LOL You can't just edit the post like that, it makes my previous post look stupid and unrelated to anything. :upset:

I didn't just edit my post like that. You made the post in response to mine six minutes ago. My last edit to that post was nine minutes ago (the same amount of time from when I did post it - like I said, I edited the second I realized I misread your post).

 

[Leo C]

Don't want to see that, Punk/Taker doesn't need to happen twice as Taker/Cena will go down at 30, and Taker winning with interference is unnecessary.

 

[Crayo]

Nope. Taker matches are something that just can't be touched by interference anymore. Punk can lose clean and keep all momentum by simply being the closest to ever kill the streak. After he loses he should go on a hiatus from WWE for a few months to heal up and return as a tweener.