This one is particularly stupid when you consider the way that it is mentioned within the guidelines. The guidelines state that the WWE doesnt have belts or straps, but instead has Championships and Titles. However, the next line then goes on to say that the belt represents something. What belt is this? I thought WWE didnt have belts. You just said this two sentences ago. Make your mind up, please! Okay, Im perhaps being a bit pedantic here, but given the level of nit-picking going on in the guidelines themselves, I think Im allowed to be. You can sort of see the point theyre getting at in the guidelines, though. Using the word Championship or Title does possibly sound a bit more impressive than using the word belt. However given that that there many combat sports around the world in which the competitors compete for belts then surely talking about someone winning a belt is just as meaningful as talking about someone winning a championship/title? Its disrespectful to competitors within these other sports who hold their respective belts in such high esteem to suggest that the word belt isnt a grand enough term to use. Banning the word also shows how little regard the WWE has for its own fans that they assume that well not understand the significance of the belt unless the announcers specifically refer to it as a championship/title.
Sports betting enthusiast whose main interests are rugby, football and MMA. Also a huge WWE fan and a self diagnosed TV & movies addict, with a particular love of anything Marvel or Dan Harmon related.
