10 Moments Which Should Have Changed WWE’s Plans (But Didn’t)

It's pretty much common knowledge at this point that WWE have a fairly strict 'three strikes and you're out' rule when it comes to under contract stars testing positive for a banned substance.

First strike: 30 day suspension without pay.

Second strike: 60 day suspension without pay.

Third strike: Immediate termination.

Simple as that.

Well, not exactly.

After former WWE Champion Brock Lesnar tested positive for a banned substance after his UFC 200 fight against Mark Hunt, he was quickly suspended from active MMA competition for a year. However, WWE allowed the star to continue performing for them in the wake of the incident.

This was because Lesnar fell into a certain loophole in WWE's Wellness Policy. The rules simply doesn't apply to part-timers, so 'The Beast' was free to compete when Vinny Mac needed him.

However, just a couple of months later the company's poster boy Roman Reigns was flagged up for a violation and immediately suspended for 30 days.

In allowing Lesnar to get off scot free, it set an awful precedent for the company going forward. Their top attraction could do whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted, but those who worked their ass off all year would lose a months pay (or worse) for a similar breach of company policy.

Instead of finding a way to punish the former UFC Champion, WWE gave him a nice feud against a returning Bill Goldberg before crowning him their new Universal Champion at 'Mania 33.

Don't do drugs, kids?