Your Call: Was Bret Hart Justified Ten Years Ago?
Kevin Kelly presented this topic in his section of the WZ Forums. The response has been tremendous with over 30 replies in less than an hour. The following are some of the posts submitted by forum members.
To Join The Debate: CLICK HERE!
“Yes he was justified. He had creative control for the final 30 days of his contract. HBK had backed out of putting him over by faking a knee injury to get out of WM13. Bret was willing to drop the belt to HBK the following night on Raw.
Obviously most of the wrestlers behind the scenes agree with that perspective too, because a lot of them walked out and refused to appear on Raw the next night. Rick Rude quit over it and went to WCW. Bulldog and Neidhart quit and went to WCW. Owen wanted to quit but Vince wouldn’t let him. Taker was furious. Foley walked out. Vince would have lost half his roster if he didn’t threaten to sue each of them for breach of contract. The only two wrestlers who thought it was a good idea were HBK and HHH…surprise surprise, the two remaining members of the Klique, who wanted to control wrestling and who had tried and failed to recruit Bret Hart behind the scenes to join them. This was a dream come true for them because now they truly controlled the WWF.”
“I do not think Bret Hart was justified, he needed to drop the belt before he left. Bret claims to be a man of the business and yes he had never lied to Vince before but this is a matter of the top belt in WWF at the time and by not doing so Bret Just looks as selfish as Shawn Michaels and Vince McMahon. It doesn’t matter where the event was held it was Hart’s responsibility to drop the belt before leaving for another company and Vince did what he thought was best for the business.”
“In shawn’s book it says something about Hart not wanting to drop the belt to him on the sunday, but willing to drop it to anyone on monday nite raw. VKM/Michaels/Hunter etc. were worried as they felt Hart might take belt to WCW and do a spot (something similar had happened over the women’s belt). Essentially, I feel that it barrels down to Hart/michaels disliking each other so much, that there was little communication between either party. As much as I love Michaels, I feel that the Screwjob was the wrong, but overall it may have been the better decision. the lesser of two evils.”
“Bret Hart would never have taken the WWF title to the WCW, he has a lot of class, we are not talking about someone like Ric Flair here, who did take a rival organisations title to the competition.
Bret Hart was sticking to his guns and sticking up for respect in wrestling, an arrogant HBK at the time told Hart month in advance he would never lay down for him, in that situation I would refuse to lose to Michaels as well. Time has passed and the fact the WWE up until a couple of years ago was still trying to man*p
“Bret was not justified for his actions.He talked about respect and how everyone screwed him.When ur leaving a wrestling company you should show the same kind of respect that they have shown you for all the years you have worked for them.Bret must have forgotten alot of those wrestlers showed him respect him and helped him make the wrestler that he is.So in my opion Bret didn’t give Vince the respect or the other wrestlers they deserve.”
“I think Bret Hart was justified, but what I don’t understand is why Bret didn’t take the issue to court, as it was written into his contract that he had creative control for the last 30 days of his contract, and by Vince screwing him like that, it violated the contract, If the rolls were reversed, Vince would’ve sued Bret for all he could.”
To Join The Debate: CLICK HERE!