I must say that the WWE is not much worth watching without the dead-man ;-) the kind of intensity that the dead-man brings to rivalries (regardless of whether they are title-rivalries or not), as he has been doing right since the 1990s (remember the priceless feuds with Mankind, Kane, Shawn Michaels, the Hell in a Cell introduction, the inferno matches, etc) and continues to do now (recent rivalries against Batista and Edge) - is something that no other superstar has or will ever be able to do - in my estimation, not even HHH.

I know he is healing injuries, and why wouldn't he be if he is given such a taxing schedule with matches left right and center all over the place against every kind of superstar and in every kind of stipulation (hell in a cell, casket, steel cage, elimination chamber, etc). And he would have to do them, because he still does better story-telling and puts better matches than anyone else does. Every match at Wrestlemania 25 was worth laughing at, except the Undertaker-Shawn Michaels match, which ought to teach every kid-fan a lesson as to what real wrestling is about. John Cena cannot ever equal Stone Cold Steve Austin and Randy Orton, as good as he is, can still not equal the Rock. And when the real back-bones (who have been the back-bones of this company for longer than anyone else) - the Undertaker, Shawn Michaels and HHH - retire, then what would happen? Who will save the WWE?

Anyway, so since the dead-man is still away, I will make my speculations about his return and plans for the next 1 year. He has not been in any personally intense rivalry after he got done with Big SLow (which was also not an intense rivalry as the ones with Batista and Edge), so I don't see him fighting in this year's Hell in a Cell (thank God, give the old man some rest and let the kids show what they have got - though it is not as much as the dead-man has got). I think this year's Hell in a Cell would be HHH vs Randy Orton as that seems to be the hottest rivalry of the year. I would love to see Randy come out on top in that one - he really needs the boost and is doing a good job for the business as champion. I think he deserved all the investment that the company has put into making him the top-star of this year - I had predicted his Rumble victory and his title victory at Backlash in my earlier blogs too, and I can estimate why it was done.

As for the dead-man, I think his next feud will be Chris Jericho. I remember Jericho mentioning a year back that he wanted to feud with Undertaker, and now that he is in Smackdown (which is effectively the Undertaker's brand), he has all the chance. Jericho is drawing a lot of heat as a heel (bad guy) right now and he is a good wrestler too, so he can put good matches with the dead-man, who can stand in the ring with superstars of any type and create good matches with them - be it the slow ones like Khali or the quicker ones like Shawn Michaels. Jericho had good confrontrations with Ricky Steamboat recently (man, can Steamboat wrestle!) and I think that he will soon start making claims as to how he has killed every legend in the WWE ever. How? Jericho will win the WHC championship belt soon and one fine day, he will be bragging in the ring about how he is the best ever and how he has put all legends to rest, starting with Ric Flair.... until the infamous church-bell tolls and enters the greatest legend of them all - the Phenom, the Undertaker! Jericho's look will sell it all. Undertaker will claim that he never lost the title which was stolen from him last year, and that should be enough to start this top-class rivalry.

I see them in a few non-title matches first which Undertaker will win, and in a few title-matches which Jericho will win (perhaps at Survivor series or Armageddon) through some kind of cheating or cheap-shots. Then the Undertaker will win the Royal Rumble next year once more (I can't think of anyone else who will win it as Batista/ Cena/ Orton - they all have won it recently and made the most of it - Undertaker was the only one who won it but couldn't make the most out of it because after winning the belt from Batista in 2007, he got injured and had to drop the title to Edge). Since the Undertaker was in a title match at last year's Wrestlemania also (with Edge), you would imagine that the WWE wants to give their best man a long title reign before he calls it quits. Nobody has earned it more (because he was very often not in title-feuds but still the most top-class feuds like the ones with Mankind and Kane), and after the Wrestlemania 25 match, I say make Undertaker and Shawn as the WHC and WWE champions for the next 1 year and show the kiddie Cenas and Kingstons and Mysterios how the title is held in style. Anyway, so coming back to my prediction, Undertaker wins next year's Rumble and then challenges Jericho to a spectacular match at Wrestlemania 26 - they will put up an awesome show which will end with a tombstone piledriver on Y2J (hopefully Undertaker's annual suicide-dive over-the-top-rope connects well this time and Jericho stands there instead of pulling a stupid cameraman who doesn't know where to stand to face the impact). And then starteth the reign of the dead-man.... for once, bring back the dark ages!

I am not watching Backlash because the Undertaker is not in a match.

Jack Swagger vs Christian: I couldn't care less about this one - I hope Christian wins this time.

Jeff Hardy vs Matt Hardy: I've heard that Jeff is quitting WWE, which made me really happy as I hate him a lot. His recent look is like a joker (he probably tried to imitate the legendary joker from the Batman but did a pathetic job of it), and I detest the push he received despite violating the WWE Wellness Policy and taking drugs. I was so happy when he lost at Wrestlemania, though I had "expected" him to win due to the fan-following he has with the kids and girls (the ones who know nothing about wrestling). I hope he loses again but I think that the kids would want to see him win this time, so perhaps Jeff will win. But he might lose another match again which will be his last, before he leaves the WWE (please do!)

Santina on Khali kiss cam: Santina will probably be exposed as Santino because his/ her hair will fall off. That would mean that Khali will get enraged and give a chop to Santino. Beth Phoenix will also be enraged with the fact that it was Santino who was pretending to be Santina. Eventually the crowd would want to see Khali and Beth kiss, and that is probably what will happen. The strongest male wrestler and the strongest female on the roster will kiss. Am not sure whether there is a face turn for Beth or a heel turn for Khali here but I just hope that it happens this way. Whether Beth breaks off with Santino later and starts a relationship with Khali or not remains to be seen.

Chris Jericho vs Ricky Steamboat: I am so impressed with the fact that Steamboat can still wrestle as he used to decades back. He has not lost touch at all despite not being in the ring since so many years, as he proved at Wrestlemania. He was the best performer at the show, keeping the Undertaker and Shawn Michaels aside. I actually thought that he would win the match but it didn't happen that way because the segment was all about Mickey Rourke, who disappointed me a lot. I hope this come-back for Steamboat only means one thing - he will win this time.

CM Punk vs Kane: Considering the losing streak Kane has had ever since he turned "heel" (bad-character), I don't see him winning this. He lost to Punk on a weekly show but then beat him in a tag-team match at Superstars, which probably gives the WWE another excuse to make him lose this time. It would hurt Punk's momentum as holder of the money-in-the-bank (MITB) if he loses, so I think Punk will win it. However, I hate this.... I wish so much that Kane would win! Kane was the most dominant and destructive force in the late 1990s much like Undertaker was in the early and mid 1990s, and he struck terror in the hearts of everyone including Stone Cold, Rock, Hulk Hogan, DX. He kicked a** all alone in the ring and cleaned house, and now he loses to guys like Rey Mysterio, Kofi Kingston and CM Punk? This rated PG-13 era sucks and I hate it that the WWE mould the results for the kids. Kane was a perfect choice to win the MITB because he can be made to defeat anyone and make it look real, and because his tweener-character allows him to feud with anyone. I hope they made this match about the MITB and made Kane win it from Punk. Hey, it might happen in the future if both of them stay on Smackdown!

John Cena vs Edge: I hope Cena loses, because it will allow Edge to bring the title back to Smackdown. Another option is that Cena will win the match but then Punk will cash in his MITB to win the belt and bring it back to Smackdown. But that might not happen because Punk is still a "face" (good-character), and he might cash it later in his home-town of Chicago (if there is a PPV happening there). I'm going with Edge winning this and then getting into a rivalry with Punk later who will win the belt.

HHH, Batista and Shane McMahon vs Randy Orton and 2 idiots: Randy Orton should have won at Wrestlemania itself. Its bad for the business if the Royal Rumble winner does not win the belt at Wrestlemania (that is what happened the last 2 times) because the fans will lose interest in the Rumble. It will not be able to retain its significance. Randy has to win the match this time. Who isn't sick of seeing HHH win the belt 16751239871384765327654214987 times? The only non-wrestler there is Shane, so perhaps Randy will RKO Shane for the win. It is possible that Shane/ Batista turn on each other because they have knocked eath other out or argued a few times in the last few weeks. I don't know if anyone will turn heel or not - I would be happy if HHH turned on them after losing the match and became heel. It will refresh his character a bit. Later on, he can reunite with Shawn Michaels to form DX and turn face again. I am hoping to see a Randy Orton vs Batista rivalry for the title after this.

There are only 2 Hell in a Cell matches which would qualify as something special - the very first one between the Undertaker and Shawn Michaels at Badd Blood 1997, and the infamous Undertaker vs Mankind match at King Of The Ring 1998. Anyone who feels that some other Hell in a Cell match was better has something wrong with his/ her estimation of brutality, wrestling skill and story-telling.

The Undertaker vs Mankind Hell in a Cell match is widely considered to be the greatest of all time because of the memorable moments which it had, that are imprinted in the minds of wrestling fans. Nobody can forget the moment when Undertaker threw Mankind from the top of the cell to the Spanish announce desk 25 feet below (which is the most TV-played moment in pro-wrestling history), and the fact that Mankind was still able to come back and climb to the top of the cage again. They call Stone Cold Steve Austin the toughest S.O.B. but that's such a big joke - in reality, there was nobody tougher than Mankind. Then the choke-slam to Mankind on the top of the cell which resulted in the cell's roof getting broken due to the impact with Mankind falling 20 feet below on the ring with a chair knocking his teeth, rendering him unconscious for a few minutes. I don't think there has been any other moment when a wrestler has actually been knocked unconscious during a match and the doctor has rushed to the ring before the match got over. To add to it, the fact that Mankind was body-slammed and again choke-slammed on a mat full of thousands of board-pins (thumb-tacks) really made this match the most memorable match ever. Anybody who had seen this match would never forget it and it would stand out in their memory (that goes double for those who attended it in person), because they will never get to see a match like that again.

You have to give credit to the Undertaker for his presence of mind in the match. Despite being very good friends with Mankind in reality, his professionalism didn't allow him to break his on-screen death-oriented character although he was concerned about Mankind's situation. During the first fall, he thought that he has ended Mankind's career and during the second fall, he thought that he has killed him. However, in both the cases, Undertaker just kept looking down at Mankind without showing any emotion (neither joy nor sorrow) though he was very concerned about Mankind's situation. He was competing in the match with a legitimately broken leg and yet he made a jump from the top of the cell to the mat below when Mankind accidentally broke the roof during that choke-slam. You could tell that it wasn't planned for the roof to break (though some people say it was) because they wouldn't have planned for Undertaker to jump from the roof to the ring below with a broken leg. The Undertaker then spent time beating Terry Funk inside the ring, looking at Mankind all the time, giving him time to get up - that is how the Undertaker can handle situations on-the-fly in the ring while maintaining his character, when things go wrong. He then also allowed Mankind to give him a beating and rammed his own head against the steel of the cell, making the match look double-sided. Although, you knew when he kicked out of the Mandible Claw, that the Undertaker will win.

All in all, this was a very perfectly executed match with the most brutality you'd ever get to see and the best presence of mind from the Undertaker in handling the accidents, yet not breaking his kayfabe gimmick. Some call it the match of the year, some call it the best cell match of all time, some call it the greatest match of all time. It was a perfect culmination of a very long and personal on-screen rivalry, whose seeds had been laid when Undertaker's long-time friend Paul Bearer had betrayed him for Mankind. In my estimation, the Undertaker vs Mankind rivalry gave us the best and the most brutal matches, and they showed us something that we had never seen before and something that we will never see again - that is why it will remain the greatest rivalry of all time for me.

Now let's discuss the Undertaker vs Shawn Michaels - the very first Hell in a Cell match. As far as I remember, this was the first time that these 2 were in the ring in a singles' match, and they performed at such a stupendous level that it happens to be the only Hell in a Cell match which received a 5-star rating from Wrestling Observer Newsletter's editor Dave Meltzer. After that, Dave has never given a 5-star rating to any WWE match, which tells you how great this match was.

This was the first Hell in a Cell match, so it scores higher in "innovation" than the Hell in a Cell with Mankind. The rivalry between the Undertaker and Shawn Michaels had reached such a bitter stage (due to Shawn hitting Undertaker multiple times with a steel chair and even costing him his title-loss to Bret Hart), that a steel cage or a casket match were not enough to seal it. So the Undertaker wanted Michaels in a cell from which he could not escape. The match started with Shawn entering the cell and looking scared, and Undertaker making his fabulous entrance intimidating not only Shawn but everyone in the arena and those watching on TV (and I mean it). You didn't know what to expect, because the Undertaker had until then been the most dominant and destructive superstar in the WWE ever, and if you make him angry it is sure going to be hell for you. Shawn took a beating like I have never seen before, but still managed to fight back. In fact, during the time when he gave a reverse piledriver to the Undertaker on the steel steps, I actually thought that Undertaker might lose the match cleanly. If they could make the match look so double-sided, what else do you want? The moments when they brawled at the top of the ring, when they brawled outside the ring and Undertaker rammed Michaels' head into the steel, and when he threw Michaels from the middle of the cell's wall to the announce-desk were acts of violence that we had never seen before in wrestling before. They gave you an idea of what was going to come in the Undertaker vs Mankind match.

Finally, when the Undertaker gave Michaels a thunderous choke-slam from the turn-buckle and signalled for the tombstone. This is when Kane entered with Paul Bearer and the Undertaker just looked on with a surprise. He did not want to fight his own flesh and blood, therefore he just took a tombstone piledriver from Kane on himself. Then Kane put Michaels' hand on the Undertaker, and Michaels won!? Effectively, when the Undertaker signalled for the tombstone by slashing the cut-throat sign, he was signalling that for himself and not for Michaels. That is impeccable story-telling. My God, that was one of the biggest shockers and heart-breakers for me ever. I had got so sick of Undertaker getting screwed again and again in his matches (and that happens even now) that I couldn't bear it. The fans were cheering for the Undertaker with their chants of "Rest in Peace" throughout the match, and everybody was so happy and certain that Undertaker will win when he delivered that Earth-shattering choke-slam. And Kane's interference got him and Michaels the biggest boos ever. But think of the rivalry it created after that between Undertaker and Kane - one of the most memorable of all time. Think of the matches it created like the Inferno match and their first Wrestlemania match. Think of the destructive career that Kane had after that, and what a star-rise he got after it. Finally Glen Jacobs (after playing the roles of Isaac Yankem DDS and the fake Diesel) had received recognition as a character which was the Undertaker's half-brother (so it had to get noticed) and he debuted with such a huge impact that he has since then never looked back at re-creating his gimmick. That was genius!

The fact that despite being the better man and giving Michaels a beating of a life-time, the Undertaker still lost, showed us what the possibilities are in a Hell in a Cell and that you can never be sure of the outcome. The story-telling in this match with the debut of Kane was phenomenal. This match was not about just 2 or 3 BIG bumps where you thought that you already knew the outcome of the match, but it was a more gradual progression from one opponent towards beating the hell out of the other (as bad as had never been seen before) and still losing. The Undertaker himself says that this is his favourite match of all time though he lost it, and "that" coming from the words of the most experienced and respected wrestler in the WWE ring means something. He has stood in the squared-circle against everyone, superstars of all sizes and skill. If he calls a match his best, it damn right has to be. From a story-telling, innovation and wrestling-skill-display perspective (as well as figuring out the result), this match has got to be better.

If I have to recommend a match to somebody for watching, I would still recommend Undertaker vs Mankind before I recommend Undertaker vs Shawn Michaels. I personally liked Undertaker vs Mankind more, and it might be my favourite match but I think that the Undertaker vs Shawn Michaels Hell in a Cell was, overall, the better match.

The Montreal Screwjob will probably go down in history as the most controversial event in the history of pro-wrestling as well as one of the most influential in the business because it was one of the pioneers of the WWE's Attitude era which helped them become bigger than WCW and eventually buy them.

People have mixed opinions about the Montreal Screwjob. I'm sure there are facts out there which we fans don't know of, even if we've heard all the
interviews that Bret Hart or Vince McMahon or Shawn Michaels gave about it and even if we read its Wikipedia page along with all the references. Some facts would be embedded within the minds of the people involved in it, and others who were present in the roster at that time (e.g., Undertaker). Bret Hart has stated in a few interviews that Undertaker would be able to back him for every word that he stated, but I have never heard Undertaker mention anything about the Montreal Screwjob in any of his back-stage out-of-character interviews. I'm sure he knows all about it, though (being a good friend of Bret, the locker-room leader for Vince, and the longest lasting wrestler in the WWE along with Shawn Michaels).

My personal take on it is that championships, victories and matches are scripted. Bret Hart did not own the championship title. He was given the belt because he was a good wrestler and one of the fan-favourites, but he should not have felt that he was bigger than the business and larger than the company. If he was going to WCW, he should have had no problems in dropping the title to Shawn Michaels as Vince asked him to do on Survivor series. He can't be willing to goto WCW on one side and also hold the WWF championship belt on the other side. Bret said that he did not want to lose the title in his country in front of his country-men and he was all-right with losing the title to Shawn the next night on Raw, but how would that have made a difference? He was still going to lose it in front of his country-men and in his own country. His character was that of a Canadian national hero and he also said that he was treated that way in Canada, but once again - it was only an on-screen character. It was not a real character. I'm sure that his fans in Canada knew that wrestling is scripted, and so are the results of matches or championships. His character or his fan-following cannot be more important than the company which created it in the first place, and gave it the platform to grow. I'm sure his contract-price would not have gotten altered whether he would've retained the title or dropped it that night, so I don't understand how it mattered to him. A lot of champions have otherwise dropped their titles in their home-towns or countries, so I don't see why Bret couldn't.

This leads me to believe that whatever Vince did was correct, because Bret left him with no other option, as he was adamant about retaining the title that night. You have to do what the boss says because he created the industry and made you (and many others) popular. Don't get me wrong here - I have immense respect for Bret Hart, and I think that he is one of the greatest wrestlers ever. Very few could match him in technical skill. I stood up, clapped for him during his Hall of Fame induction and bowed down to him in salute. I was very happy that Vince decided to induct him, and he showed up. It was one of my happiest moments in the wrestling industry. But hey, there are lot of wrestlers out there like Undertaker and Shawn Michaels who have survived in the industry for much longer than Bret Hart and who have never been title-hungry. Look at the number of championships they have, as against the high number of championships and long title-reigns which HHH or Edge or John Cena have had. But there is no doubt that Undertaker and Shawn are bigger legends than them. Championship titles don't matter that much, because they are scripted at the end of the day. Bret had passion for the job he did and the skill he had, but he got too emotional with it (in my estimation) instead of treating it as 'business'. That makes me feel that what Vince said ("Bret Hart screwed Bret Hart") was true. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter as to how many championships you held, and why do you want to hang on to it when you are leaving the company?

I don't expect everyone to agree with me, and if you post a reply to this, please bear in mind that I have not offended Bret Hart. I have backed my points with reasoning and I expect the same from you when you state your opinions. No offensive comments from die-hard Bret Hart fans, please - I have also been one of you.

A lot of people have been discussing this matter and so I feel it is time that I voiced my thoughts on the same. Some of these are not opinions but facts.

Many times when I told people about the Undertaker being the locker-room leader and about the respect which he has back-stage, some people have responded back by saying that he betrayed his wife Sara for Michelle McCool and that he is unethical in having an affair with somebody so young to him. I have read so many articles on the Net discussing this and a lot of fans posting opinions on forums which were so preposterous that some of them said Edge is having an affair with Sara and that is what resulted in his rivalry with Undertaker. Get a life, people!

Now, on what basis can they say that Undertaker betrayed Sara? Did Sara tell them? It is also possible that Sara betrayed Undertaker instead, but you didn't hear the news that way because she is not as popular a public figure as he is (so you heard the news stated in a way that it was revolving around him instead of her). It is also possible that nobody betrayed anyone but they both came to a mutual conclusion that they cannot extend their family-life any further together, so they came to a divorce. How can you make a conclusion without knowing what happened between them? This is the important point - they have legally divorced, and so you don't have any right to question as to what happened in their personal lives, just the way you would not want anyone to peek into your personal lives.

As far as Michelle McCool goes, so what if she is very young compared to Undertaker? Since Undertaker has divorced Sara, he is free to date whom he wants. They are both adults, and it is none of your business as to what 2 consenting adults do!

The bottom-line is - don't meddle with others' "personal" lives (matters and things that don't concern you), let them have their personal space, don't believe in rumours and more importantly don't spread rumours - you know them as wrestlers so be concerned only about their wrestling performance, and mind your own business! For those who think that I am not minding mine by writing about this, such people should mind their's and not even read this. If the others had not started such rumours, I wouldn't have posted this - solve the root of the problem instead of the after-effect.