<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="mad5226" data-cite="mad5226" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>My only real complaint, other than Brock going over (but we all knew that was going to happen), was the amount of time the women spent outside the ring during the rumble. Don't get me wrong I know the men do it too, but it fell REALLY excessive. There were multiple points in the match where only 2 women were in the ring even though at least 5 were still in the match. Even though it would've had the same effect, I much rather they lay low in the corner.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p>
That bothered me too. I think Sasha Banks spent more time outside the ring than in it. Half the time I had no idea who was actually still in the match.</p><p> </p><p>
I'm not a big fan of lying in the corner either. I watched the first two Royal Rumble's ('88 and '89) over the weekend prior to the live event on Sunday and one thing that really jumped out at me about the old matches was how much more active the participants were in the periphery. For the most part, it seemed like guys were always doing "something", even if that something was just strolling around the ring throwing a few punches.</p><p> </p><p>
Modern rumbles have devolved into everyone lying down in the corners while a few focused participants have their planned action in the middle of the ring. There is a disconnect between a wrestler who can go for 15 minutes in a singles match before being pinned, but taking one shot in the Royal Rumble puts him down and out for 5 minutes.</p><p> </p><p>
I don't know what the answer is, and maybe it is better for TV to clear the ring and focus the action, but I would much rather see everyone actively working.</p>