I was left with the same impression after reading about the results of the four-way match. I was under the impression that it was an elimination match. It seems that a lot of odd booking decisions are made in TNA. An elimination match would not have made much sense, though, because if some if the stipulations. I thought that the only way it would work would be for Foley to pin Jarrett and take complete control of TNA, Foley to pin Angle and also control MEM, and then for Sting to pin Foley and get the title.

did Foley get pinned no, so why would he lose anything, that was the point of the match u gets pinned loses and who wins get what the guy lost.

Now haveing sting win over Angle i was not huge on only because Main Event Mafia should had a blow out at the end off ppv Nash and booker going at and sting and angle well Scott trying to be the peace maker

RESPONSE FROM KE: IN all triple threat and fatal fourways the champ can lose without getting pinned.

Kevin - thanks for taking the time to blog about another TNA PPV ( even if you didn't see it ) . I don't know how regularly you'll do so , but I for one appreciate it .
I'm not a Samoa Joe fan but as you said maybe Nash and TNA did the right thing .
As far as the new faces , I for one am glad to see the return of Shane Douglas and Raven , but then again I'm an old WCW fan . I'm not really sure though if its such a good thing for the company to continue to bring back aged talent .
On the other hand , I'm all for bringing on Victoria .... that goes without saying :)
To you and your family Kevin, have a nice holiday !

Loved the opening match, but maybe I wasn't paying attention, but why was EY ticked off at the finish? And the Daniels/Suicide match was awful. Just sloppy and you could see all the hesitation before the hits like they weren't sure what to do with each other.

Booking and logic - two of TNA's biggest weaknesses. ..

They are their own worst enemy...

Thanks for the review. I did not watch the PPV. I am a big fan of TNA, watch every weekly episode and was under the same impression. I thought that if someone won the the title match that they would get the title (regardless of whether they pinned the champion). Not sure that I see the point of having a 4 way title match and the winner does not get the title. Very disappointing.

On a more pleasant note, I was pleased to hear that Victoria would be in TNA. She is my favorite woman's wrestler of all time. The big hole left by Gail Kim's departure has now been filled and then some. She will instantly return the credibility back to the woman's division which used to be the most exciting part of TNA. They can even pair her somehow with Dr. Stevie and have another interesting reunion (although she is great on her own).

As for Douglas, I always thought that he was given more credit than he deserved. Raven has long been a never was that never excited me.

Kev, you need to watch TNA more often. Even if the stories don't always make a lot of sense, the ring action is much better than what the WWE offers. I wondered about the stipulation on the heavyweight title as well. If Sting had pinned Jarrett, would he now be the owner?

Thank you, Kevin, for pointing out the ending to the 4-way Sacrifice match! While watching the match, I was talking with buddies and we were all confused at the ending! Someone even pointed out that the referee didn't know what to do and had to ask Jarrett! So my final question to everyone is, what was the point of the match?! For example: Sting was willing to quit professional wresting for the opportunity to own TNA? And not only that, if the title was THAT important to all the men in the ring, why didn't everyone attack Foley? Most of the match seemed to be focused on beating the snot out of Jeff Jarrett. I'm so confused at this one...

Can Douglas still wrestle?

TNA could have had more interest in PPV buys if they had better explained the stipulations of the match with Foley/Sting/Angle/Jarrett. I guess the question is now whether the MEM turns on Sting or Angle?

I'm surprised you haven't spoken out against the main event in the first place. Sting, Foley, Angle, and Jarrett fighting for the title? The only guys who should be in the title hunt out of those four are Angle and Sting, and I think Sting is even a stretch. I didn't watch WCW towards the end, but I've read enough about it to know that having Foley as the TNA World Champion is almost on the same level as a fifty year old Flair or a fifty year old Hogan holding the WCW World Championship. The only difference is that Flair and Hogan were bit more in shape at the end of the 90's than Foley is now. The young guys in TNA need the shot at the title. Sting and Foley don't need it anymore. Neither does Jarrett. When TNA starts pushing Styles, Joe, Shelley, Sabin, Roode, and/or Storm in the direction of the world title, MAYBE I'll start watching TNA on a regular basis. Then again, it's hard to watch TNA when Don West is on, no matter how good the angles are.

Are you not subsidised by your employer to get the PPV's? Seeing as it is your job...

Anyway I think TNA is a ridiculous as Mick Foley being a 'World Champion' so I won't comment on it.

Those are two inexcusably bad match endings for marquee matches. The booking may be dull or bad at times in WWE (ie: Batista vs. Orton ending last week), but this is atrocious. Leader of the Main Event Mafia? Who the heck cares? If it wasn't for the title, they should have made it more clear because I'm sure the majority of the 30 or so people who ordered the event thought they were seeing a main event championship match.

Also, Victoria was a solid in-ring woman wrestler, but did anyone really want to watch her wrestle? I don't think so. She never really stood out in my mind like Gail Kim, Mickie James, Kelly Kelly, and others have.

RESPONSE FROM KE: I can only speak for myself, but I enjoyed watching Victoria wrestle.

Mike C - " Seeing as it is your job ."
Actually Kev has pointed out in the past "Ring Posts" is not his job . It is what he calls a "labor of love" . All along he has had other responsibilities at the Sun and with recent lay-offs , many there have taken on added responsibilities . Everyone needs to chill when it comes to what Kev can cover , and when it gets posted . But I'm sure Kevin doesn't need me to defend him .

RESPONSE FROM KE: I don't, but I appreciate your understanding.

i dont know what lex is talking about it is great that Victoria has signed with TNA if you ask me the greatest diva's match in wrestlemania history was Victoria vs Molly holly she was by far the best Diva they had from a wrestling stand point for the last 5 years but just waste her to inhance the models. i am also glad that Shane & raven are back as you know that Raven will cut some great promo's and be thown in the mix. i am also glad that Joe finnaly destroyed nash the other 2 Main events make no sense at all i thought you had to physically say i quit for the match to be over and i thought everyone had to sacrifice something to get a chance at the world title.

With Sting pinning Angle to become the Godfather of MEM, this is bringing back memories of the NWO Wolfpack and NWO Hollywood...too confusing to me. Who will side with who and then again who cares...not a good story line at all.

The Styles-Booker finish sounds awfully similar to the Bret Hart-Bob Backlund match for the title in '94. It didn't work then...and it doesn't work now

RESPONSE FROM KE: The big difference is that the Backlund-Hart match could only end by throwing in the towel (a play off of Backlund's manager Arnold Skaaland throwing in the towel in 1983, which caused Backlund to lose the WWF title to the Iron Sheik).

I don't think the purpoe to te ending to the Booker T/AJ Styles match was to further a feud between Morasca and Sharmell. I think TNA used the "I Quit" stipulation to add buys, but they didn't want to hurt Booker or AJ by making either one of them a "quitter". This may seem like a "slap in the face" to you, but come on, stuff like this has been done NUMEROUS times in wrestling.The WWE did it with the Bret Hart/Bob Backlund WWE title match at the Survivor Series in '94; Owen Hart threw in the towel for Bret. At WrestleMania 13, they did it in the Bret Hart/Steve Austin match with Steve "passing out from the pain" rather than submitting in what was advertised as a SUBMISSION match. And let's not forget some of the recent garbage they have done with the Big Show beating the Undertaker b/c he couldn't continue after the "knockout punch" rather than having Show pin or submit Taker for the victory. I know these were not all "I Quit" matches, but "submission" matches that end without submissions are just as bad. The point is, wrestling companies have been copping out like this for years so please don't act like TNA is the first or only company to do this. I know you have a WWE-bias but please, call it boths ways.

RESPONSE FROM KE: OK, then call it a submission match. I Quit matches are supposed to end by someone saying "I quit." That's why they have a microphone in the ring. It's a pretty simple concept. You say that TNA did it to increase buys. Fine, but when you do that and you don't deliver on the stipulation, that's called a bait and switch. And it makes your paying customers feel like chumps who may not want to spend their money on your next PPV. As Vincent Kennedy McMahon would say: "That's not good business." And you're right, TNA is not the only company to do it (I never said they were). WCW used to do it a lot. Where are they now?

Kevin, is it not true that Vince Russo had a job with WWE Magazine when the Hart-Backlund towel match took place? Maybe I am adding 2 + 2 and coming up with 5, but considering how Russo likes to recreate old occurences....

Wasn't the Love-Kong match supposed to be a stretcher match? I thought that was the whole point to having Velvet, Kip, et al being taken out on stretchers on Impact in the weeks leading up to Sacrifice. As much as a LOVE Angelina (and Velvet), I was incredibly disappointed to see that she won with just a perfume spray to the face... it made Kong seem less scary and monster-ish in my opinion.

Of course, no one ever accused TNA booking of making much sense.....

the artist formerly known as jack in hebron:

I wasn't aware of that, maybe I'm not as head over heels for Kev as you are. Head over heels I am though so let's not fight for his love and just get along huh?

;-)

I'm pretty sure the stipulation was that the individual who lost the main event match at Sacrifice was the one who lost what it was that he was putting up. Thus, Foley only lost the belt if he was pinned. Did they explain this rule clearly? No they clearly didn't.

The only purpose of the rule was to put Foley in a title match and help him to retain the belt since TNA is committed to the idea that Foley as champ equals ratings although their ratings have been going down recently (no offense Foley).

It is kind of silly that anyone would want to pin Angle since the others in the MEM could simply stage a mutiny and kick out any new leader...
___

I was half expecting a return of Raven when Dr. Stevie mentioned that he could relate to Abyss being controlled by others in one of their therapy sessions. After all, Raven and Stevie had a volatile relationship for years in ECW and WCW. It is amazing that they will probably be working together again in TNA, and I'm for it since I've liked the two since the first time I ever saw ECW.

Shane Douglas is cool, but I'm wondering what he will be doing exactly.

(No, I didn't see the PPV either. Despite my screen name, I don't buy/watch PPVs. I'll consider buying a DVD only if an event delivers.)

RESPONSE FROM KE: The way I understood the TNA four-way is that the winner won the title regardless of who was pinned (like WWE's triple threats and fourways). The lure of winning the title is what motivated the other three to be willing to sacrifice something.
In other words, if Angle beat Jarrett, Angle became the champ and Jarrett had to give up his TNA shares; if Jarrett beat Sting, he became champ and Sting ahd to retire, etc. That makes a heck of a lot more sense to me than what it ended up being.

mike c.- i get along with everyone ... though some don't always get along with me ! :)

Hey Kev what can you tell us about the movie that Angleina Love is going to be in ?

RESPONSE FROM KE: I probably know as much as you know, which is that she has a supporting role and its an independent film.

I googled Angelina Love's new movie role, and Kev I think it warrants a interview on here .....where else do you get the chance to interview a hot blonde and ask her bout her "artistic work as a dancer " ...maybe schmooze her a little by saying that the hype is her acting perfomance is being talked bout as being better than Marisa Tomei's performance in the Wrestler.....I'm sure talking bout it ..the people want to know Kev so please interview Angelina Love..I'm sure she wouldn't mind promoting her new movie

Wasn't the name of the TNA PPV called "Sacrifice"? In the main event, each person sacrificed something of value: a career (Sting); a title (Mick "Arquette" Foley); leadership (Kurt "what about me" Angle) and control of TNA (Jeff "am I a babyface or heel" Jarrett). The ending was bad - Foley is better on the mic, not in the ring. Hope that Victoria will be put to better use in TNA - she's has talent & looks.

I thought the opening contest between Bashir/The MCMG and Eric Young/Lethal Consequencs was the best match on the card. TNA has such an edge over WWE when it comes to fast-paced, high tempo action.

Why didn't everyone try to pin Foley? That match made no sense what so ever.