This fourth and final video from CSR this weekend is a debate on if it matters that WWE doesn’t drug test Brock Lesnar and other performers who are not regular in-ring performers. Here’s some highlights of the conversation:
Justin LaBar:
I have a problem with this. I’m still willing to believe that Brock Lesnar didn’t maliciously know what he did wrong because Brock Lesnar isn’t stupid enough to risk guaranteed money. He had guaranteed money win or loss. I believe if he’s guilty at all it was unknowing. WWE not testing part-timers and don’t have a number of matches or appearance, the only wording in the policy is “regular in-ring” appearances. The problem I have is you can make a case John Cena who is one of the hardest damn workers ever, in the last year and half we’ve seen months where he’s not around much in the ring doing Today show, movies, TV, nursing injuries…what’s stopping WWE per how the policy is written from them saying John Cena is part-time now? I’m not saying or accusing John Cena of anything or they would do that to protect John Cena, but you can see all the critics that put WWE under fire that having this loose language is a problem.
Josh Isenberg:
I don’t have a problem with the wording because I go back to, how do we know who gets tested? If WWE wants to or not want to test someone, then that’s what they will do. They aren’t the NFL or the UFC where they have to test everybody continuously. Vince is smart, there is fine print that will say maybe this guys is not subject to testing. This covers Vince from anything going wrong. This isn’t sports, it isn’t real.
For the full debate and other comparisons being made, watch the video below:
