What's the difference between Lawler's tie choke and Daniel Bryan's?
 

So perhaps you guys can help me here.

Almost one year ago, Daniel Bryan got fired for taking a tie from a Spanish commentator and choking him with it. The WWE got negative feedback from their children's companies for the visual of Bryan assaulting someone in a way that could somehow be perceived to look like Chris Benoit.

Flash forward to last night, and Jerry Lawler is taking the tie of Michael Cole, bashing him up against a plexiglass window which was followed by him choking his adversary by pinning his face against the glass.

The WWE director focused on a shot of Cole up against that glass which produced I admit a very comical image that someone on here already put up as a .gif.

What I want to know is how are these any different?! They both produced a weird (almost comical in my opinion) image of a man being strangled one way or another with a tie. Daniel Bryan got fired hours after he did this. Why and how did the WWE script writers not find it a problem to write a storyline where Lawler did something very similar?

It wasn't choking him.

Well, that was an easy explanation. Anymore question?

If you think that what Lawler did and Bryan did (not that I agreed that he should have gotten fired for it) are the same thing, then there's really nothing we can do for you.

To further clarify... Bryan looked like he was actually killing somebody. If I were to actually murder somebody with a tie or a rope, that is how I would do it. He looked like he was literally choking the life out of him. Lawler was using Cole's tie to gently bop his head against plastic glass.

Not the same thing.

The simple answer: It's Cole. No one would care.

Daniel wrapped it around his neck:

http://cdn.springboard.gorillanation...ges/daniel.jpg

Lawler just yanked on Cole's tie and pulled him against the wall of the enclosure.

http://i53.tinypic.com/29xsoza.gif

yeah i was thinking the same thing while watching it, guess they are not pg anymore.

that looked more clownish or like rough gay sex, the lawler one was more of a choke.

What's the big deal? I thought everyone hated the PG rating?

i guess some people just cant be told. stubborn much?

Lol I knew somebody would bitch

The reason Bryan was fired the first time, was because he spit on Cena, not because of the tie choke.

Cause Lawler's the fuckin' shit

At what part did Lawler "choke" Cole?

justin roberts is a spanish annnouncer?

:lol: oh ya

what a derp

So to recap those two pictures...

Here's the "choke":

http://i53.tinypic.com/29xsoza.gif

And here's the "clownish" one:

http://cdn.springboard.gorillanation...ges/daniel.jpg

Got it.

If we're gonna consider those the same thing, why not take it a step further.

Kane and Big Show choked Mason Ryan with their bare hands at the same time last night... WHY ARE THEY NOT FIRED!?!?!?

they should both be fired for different reasons anyway

Technically not a choke, you can see the tie is knotted in a way that doesn't constrict Cole's larynx and probably wouldn't even close the arteries to make him black out. It was obviously just a hilarious awesome moment of Cole getting his head bashed in.

Bryan was never fired. It was a work. Huge SummerSlam ratings.

But don't tell anyone. Big secret.

You know, when you're PULLING a person towards you by a tie, you're not really choking him!

Came in here to say this. Pressure at the back of your neck, in Coles case, would not choke you. Pressure at the front, in Bryans case, WOULD constrict his larynx and would be considered choking.

Glad thats over with.

No one is currently running for Senator.

This, plus Cole made a goofy crossed eyed/ scrunched nose face against the plexyglass that could be viewed as a comedy.

1) Still think we should qualify Bryan getting "fired" with quotes. I think it was just a PR move and the job was still his with a wink and a handshake provided he didn't go all batshit crazy on the internet.

2) By half of the arguments here, you'd think Bryan would've "kept his job" if Justin Roberts sold the choke less (look at that screen cap... it's gold! Better than some of the guys on the roster would have). If he would have choked Cena with the tie and spit on Justin, everything would have been fine, since we all know Cena would have no-sold the tie choke.

3) Bryan wasn't a WWE established guy and therefore expendable enough to fall under the sword. Compare this to when HBK busted out with the Crippler Crossface not long after all that business with Benoit came to light. Someone NOT HBK would have been off of TV before the next commercial break.

4) Timing. You bet if this took place during the senate race, not only would King be "fired" (wink) for this, but no way in hell would they have gotten so lax with the language (and their stance on what PG means). That means it alters the way The Rock cuts any of his promos. It means no way Truth turns heel, smokes cigs, and drops "fence jumper" on ADR. Conversely, if the first night of the Nexus invasion happened last night on RAW as it happened then, this would be a non-issue, and they likely would have played up Roberts being injured as part of the angle.

"Fired" (wink). There's a difference.

And you're overanalyzing semantics of choking in the world of <s>wrestling</s> entertainment. Something around the throat being pulled = choke, no matter if it's truly physically applicable or not.

You're also ignoring the fact that Bryan's choke was likely done spur of the moment with his objective being to simply go out and participate in a chaotic massacre.

Whereas the Lawler thing was obviously planned specifically for him to grab Cole's tie and pull his head against the cole mine. As in, it wasn't spur of the moment... As in Vince knew exactly what was gonna happen... So no, Lawler wouldn't have been fired because it wouldn't have happened without Vince okaying it in the first place.