Royal Rumble How did he get ellimated

  • Welcome to "The New" Wrestling Smarks Forum!

    I see that you are not currently registered on our forum. It only takes a second, and you can even login with your Facebook! If you would like to register now, pease click here: Register

    Once registered please introduce yourself in our introduction thread which can be found here: Introduction Board


Shon

Jobber
Joined
Jan 24, 2016
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
46
How did Brock Lesnar get eliminated from the 2016 Royal Rumble?

I am confused of how Brock Lesnar was eliminated from the 2016 Rumble as he was thrown out of the ring by the Rowan, Braun and Luke as they were all already eliminated from the Rumble. They can't throw anyone out after they are eliminated!

Also there were other stars eliminated from the Rumble by the League of Nations who were not even part of the Rumble but interfered in the Rumble matches!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mr. Roman Empire

The Game
Main Eventer
Joined
Oct 5, 2015
Messages
11,635
Reaction score
2,227
Points
0
Age
32
Location
HELL
It doesn't matter if you are already eliminated. You can be eliminated by someone whose not even in the match. As long as you go over the top rope you are out.
 

Shon

Jobber
Joined
Jan 24, 2016
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
46
It doesn't matter if you are already eliminated. You can be eliminated by someone whose not even in the match. As long as you go over the top rope you are out.

Thanks for clarifying that. I am 37 and I watched my first Royal Rumble pay per view and first wwe pay per view all together. I was not aware of the rules except for getting eliminated over the top rope!
 

InSaNe

I lost it. I'm InSaNe!
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Messages
3,093
Reaction score
677
Points
113
Favorite Wrestler
stonecold
Favorite Wrestler
stonecold2
Favorite Wrestler
bullyray
Favorite Wrestler
cmpunk
Favorite Wrestler
oAYiXZo
Favorite Wrestler
nwo
Favorite Sports Team
6yloAaa
It doesn't matter if you are already eliminated. You can be eliminated by someone whose not even in the match. As long as you go over the top rope you are out.
Well, that's a bullshit rule. Another elimination was stupid, too, but I forgot who it was.
Thanks for clarifying that. I am 37 and I watched my first Royal Rumble pay per view and first wwe pay per view all together. I was not aware of the rules except for getting eliminated over the top rope!
I knew the rules for Royal Rumble, I've been watching for years about how RR is "run." Problem is, 90% of the time, superstars are eliminated mostly by stars that aren't eliminated. There was a lot of bending rules in this particular Rumble.
 

Mr. Roman Empire

The Game
Main Eventer
Joined
Oct 5, 2015
Messages
11,635
Reaction score
2,227
Points
0
Age
32
Location
HELL
Well, that's a bullshit rule. Another elimination was stupid, too, but I forgot who it was.

I agree I was frustrated with how Lesnar went out. I thought they could of just at least had Bray Wyatt eliminate him by himself while Lesnar back was turned or something
 

InSaNe

I lost it. I'm InSaNe!
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Messages
3,093
Reaction score
677
Points
113
Favorite Wrestler
stonecold
Favorite Wrestler
stonecold2
Favorite Wrestler
bullyray
Favorite Wrestler
cmpunk
Favorite Wrestler
oAYiXZo
Favorite Wrestler
nwo
Favorite Sports Team
6yloAaa
I agree I was frustrated with how Lesnar went out. I thought they could of just at least had Bray Wyatt eliminate him by himself while Lesnar back was turned or something
I would have been just fine by that. Or at least have Brock go back in, and eliminate at least one of the Wyatts just to be fair. I basically said "Get your ass back in there and get your revenge!" Or something of those lines.
 

Roadster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2014
Messages
44,470
Reaction score
4,214
Points
118
Favorite Wrestler
uUsHwHt
Favorite Wrestler
CVWSrPC
Favorite Wrestler
samoajoe
Favorite Wrestler
ajstyles2
Favorite Wrestler
undertaker
Favorite Wrestler
L1l4tIp
A lot of run ins and shitty eliminations this year.
 

Jacob Fox

Quiet You
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
62,024
Reaction score
13,805
Points
118
I knew the rules for Royal Rumble, I've been watching for years about how RR is "run." Problem is, 90% of the time, superstars are eliminated mostly by stars that aren't eliminated. There was a lot of bending rules in this particular Rumble.

The one and only rule for the royal rumble is that you are eliminated when you are thrown over the top rope and both feet hit the floor. This isn't the first rumble where a participant was eliminated by someone who had already been eliminated.

Now there was one year, 1996, where Vader eliminated several guys after he had been thrown out already. Those guys were allowed to go back in though. This has generally been the exception and not the rule. No actual rules of the rumble were bent or broken in this match.

The only rule that could be broken would be if someone was eliminated and allowed back in. That didn't happen.
 

InSaNe

I lost it. I'm InSaNe!
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Messages
3,093
Reaction score
677
Points
113
Favorite Wrestler
stonecold
Favorite Wrestler
stonecold2
Favorite Wrestler
bullyray
Favorite Wrestler
cmpunk
Favorite Wrestler
oAYiXZo
Favorite Wrestler
nwo
Favorite Sports Team
6yloAaa

Roadster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2014
Messages
44,470
Reaction score
4,214
Points
118
Favorite Wrestler
uUsHwHt
Favorite Wrestler
CVWSrPC
Favorite Wrestler
samoajoe
Favorite Wrestler
ajstyles2
Favorite Wrestler
undertaker
Favorite Wrestler
L1l4tIp
WWE's ever revolving door of rules, is pretty insulting to a lot of fans.

1994 - Dual elimination makes for dual winners.
1995 - Being eliminated was only achievable by having both feet hit the floor.
1996 - Eliminated competitors can't eliminate non-eliminated competitors.
2005 - Dual elimination makes for restart
2014 - Eliminated competitors can eliminate non-eliminated competitors.

I understand WWE doesn't really cater to a "real-deal" audience. But at least having some rules to regulate the retardation would be nice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thunderlips

Jacob Fox

Quiet You
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
62,024
Reaction score
13,805
Points
118
WWE's ever revolving door of rules, is pretty insulting to a lot of fans.

1994 - Dual elimination makes for dual winners.
1995 - Being eliminated was only achievable by having both feet hit the floor.
1996 - Eliminated competitors can't eliminate non-eliminated competitors.
2005 - Dual elimination makes for restart
2014 - Eliminated competitors can eliminate non-eliminated competitors.

I understand WWE doesn't really cater to a "real-deal" audience. But at least having some rules to regulate the retardation would be nice.

I agree for the most part but the 1995 rumble wasn't the first one where the both feet touching the floor was mentioned... it was mentioned in the 1990 or 91 Rumble... I can't remember which, but it it was swiftly forgotten afterward until 1995

I do remember 1995 though, talking with my friends when they put so much focus on the two foot rule... they pretty much gave away the ending to the match. But at least they have been consistent with the rule afterward.
 

edge4ever

The Game
Technician
Joined
Jan 15, 2014
Messages
6,222
Reaction score
2,273
Points
0
Age
34
Location
Chicago
I agree I was frustrated with how Lesnar went out. I thought they could of just at least had Bray Wyatt eliminate him by himself while Lesnar back was turned or something
Yeah it should've been done in like a surprise way. Like he was blindsided. Not he gets beat down then thrown over like trash. Bs.
 

Stopspot

Now I’m a big, fat dynamo!
Joined
Apr 1, 2012
Messages
42,192
Reaction score
8,467
Points
0
Age
34
Location
Sweden
Yeah it should've been done in like a surprise way. Like he was blindsided. Not he gets beat down then thrown over like trash. Bs.
What?
Brock looked nothing like trash. He looked like a beast that it took 5 300+ pound men to eliminate, by fighting dirty no less. You can't get more protected in a rumble than that.

Had he been surprise eliminated he would have looked like a geek on the other hand
 

Dolph'sZiggler

Biggest self-mark since Bret Hart
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
47,754
Reaction score
14,050
Points
0
Age
33
The Rumble got lame once Brock was gone. To me, the Rumble match should build to the final 4-5 guys who all have a shot to win in the crowd's eyes. The crowd was bored by the end of the Rumble once Brock was gone, and they were only rooting against Reigns.

HHH/Reigns/Brock/Styles in the finals would have been fire. Instead we get super anticlimactic Ambrose vs HHH lol. boring af