WWE: Undertaker, Triple H and the Tap on the Back That Said It All Part 2
On January 30th, the Undertaker came back and issued his challenge to Triple H. His silent return, his glare to the WrestleMania sign and the slicing of the throat told the story of how he wanted Triple H at Mania one more time.
Triple H gave Taker a simple pat on the back as if to pity him and walked out. I did a full article on this on February 1st (WWE: The Undertaker, Triple H and the Tap on the Back That Said It All).
Flash forward to Monday Night Raw on February 20th, another confrontation between the Deadman and The Game. Taker tells Triple H he doesn't accept his pathetic excuses, he doesn't believe that Hunter doesn't want this and that he demands his presence in the ring one more time.
He goes for the Marty McFly, calls Hunter a coward in hopes to get him riled up enough to accept his challenge. Just when you think HHH is there and ready to say yes, he composes himself and reminds Taker again, its bad for business for the two of them to fight.
Triple H states he's moved on, it's his time to run the business, not be the business, and it's time for Taker to pass the torch on to younger talent and lead them into the future by teaching them.
Triple H plays the businessman and walks out, keeping with his stance of non-confrontation. Undertaker then plays the HBK card (Shawn couldn't get it done and neither could you), because he knows HHH will never be as good as Shawn Michaels.
This causes the jacket to fall to the floor, the tie is ripped off and Triple H makes his way back to the ring. He gets in Taker's face, and he does a 180 and says yes to the match. It was a little too quickly for my taste—I would have liked to see Taker pull out some your mama jokes to keep getting under Hunter's skin.
As Hunter goes off and declares that this will be it, that there's no holding back, you could see the words hanging over his head like a thought balloon in a comic book, Hell in a Cell.
Then, as if to finally fire back that returning shot of pity and arrogance, The Undertaker smirks, now giving Triple H the pat on the back, and walks out.
BOOM. The returning salvo of there you go, there it is, I gotcha.
Allow me to do the subtitles, as I did in my last article.
Triple H says Hell in a Cell.
Subtitle: Your done, I'm throwing you off the top of that damn cage.
Undertaker smirks and gives the pat on the back
Now who's making demands? You think you're calling the shots—ha, thank you, you just gave me exactly what I wanted.
Triple H turns to watch Taker leave, still with a scowl on his face.
This is it, it's over, we are the end of an era, and after this, we are both done.
WWE.com has updated the WrestleMania portion of their site and has now listed Triple H vs. The Undertaker for April 1st as a Hell in a Cell match. Triple H's demands have been met.
A lot of people thought this might be a career vs. the streak match, but essentially it's just a career-ending match for both men. They've both said it time and time again—they are the last two, the end of an era.
Triple H will move on and become the new Vince McMahon, the leader of the company only getting involved in the occasional gimmick match. Expect him to pack away the tights, box up the boots and put the sledge hammer in a display case somewhere.
It probably won't be his last match ever, but he will most likely no longer be an active duty roster superstar.
With Taker, this is it. Win or lose, we wont see him again for probably more than a year this time, if ever again.
The druids will come out, take the Deadman away, back off to Death Valley, win or lose. It can be said that there is one big name he's yet to take on at Mania—John Cena—but that's something that can be saved for a long time to come.
There will be no passing of the torch like Triple H said, the Undertaker's torch will be his forever. It will rest outside the tomb of The Deadman until maybe one day, there might be one more time.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?