Home/WWE
0
  Debate

Debate

Did WWE cross the line by breaking promises during such a sensitive time for Jinder Mahal?

It’s been a while since the Indian-origin wrestling stalwart Jinder Mahal has been a part of the Stamford-based company. Mahal was let go from WWE along with the rest of the Indus Sher members after their significant work on the blue brand and the developmental brand. While firing can never be pleasant, Mahal experienced immense fan support from all across the world to cope with the sudden setback. Also, the ending opened a whole big avenue in the independent wrestling world for him that ultimately culminated in him being one of the most sought-after free agents in the market.

That said, there are still some disheartening statistics surrounding his WWE memory book that are tough to relinquish. Jinder Mahal, 37, exposed a bitter reality behind the outside allure of World Wrestling Entertainment in a recent bombshell confession.

Jinder Mahal laid out open WWE’s double-faced behavior 

ADVERTISEMENT

Article continues below this ad

Mahal faced an abrupt status change in the roster after being entrusted with a WWE Champion title in the middle of 2017  for a reign that lasted 170 days. The company’s strategic plan to grasp its fanbase in India did wonders for the modern-day Maharaja. But at the same time, he couldn’t thoroughly enjoy every bit of the stint. An experimental prison cage match went massively wrong for the Canadian-born and he still felt disgust over how it panned out.

That said, amidst all the bittersweet moments he had with the company, the one that screwed him the most was the company resisting one of the fighters from attending their father’s death anniversary in India. Detailing inhuman treatment of the higher-ups during a recent episode of the Insight podcast, Mahal noted, ”So actually during WrestleMania week, myself and Indus Sher, we talked to TR. They were wanting to go back to India a few months prior. If you had a religious event that he holds, it was a one-year anniversary of his father’s death. He got told that, no, we were needed for raw.”

“You can’t go back home. Sanga is also from India. He wants to go back home. And we were told no, they were told no, we were needed on raw. And sure enough, that week we weren’t booked. We were just sitting at home. So they were quite frustrated,” he added.

What’s your perspective on:

Did WWE cross the line by breaking promises during such a sensitive time for Jinder Mahal?

Have an interesting take?

The one thing, however, that made him a class athlete, most specifically a high-value human being, is holding no grudges against the company, regardless.

ADVERTISEMENT

Article continues below this ad

Jinder Mahal keeps no hostility against the WWE 

Mahal faced two WWE releases in his career, with the first being temporary and the second being for good. ‘The Maharaja’ was one of the seven superstars released by WWE in April this year. Immediately after being released, Mahal paid his heartfelt gratitude to each of his fans and the entire global wrestling community for showing unwavering support. Although as a heel, Mahal used to get a lot of heat from his fans, they worked as a rock when the wrestler needed them the most.

Now, months after that shell-shocking event, the self-made superstar opened up about how it felt to be permanently let go of the promotion he used to be an indispensable part of. In the same podcast interview, the veteran noted he felt quite satisfied about everything he got to do during his second stint in the company. He said he got the chance to explore a lot of areas as a performer and drew a lot of money as well.

ADVERTISEMENT

Article continues below this ad

In 2014, Mahal was released by the company and returned around July 2016, changing the trajectory of his momentum. It will be interesting to see how the WWE mogul does in his free-agent era.

What’s your take on Jinder Mahal opening up about his rightful grievance against WWE? Let us know in the comments.

Have something to say?

Let the world know your perspective.