'%20x='0'%20y='0'%20height='100%25'%20width='100%25'%20%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20xlink%3Ahref=''%3E%3C/image%3E%3C/svg%3E)
The worked nature of professional wrestling means that, in many ways, the industry is a collaborative effort between those involved. However, that is not to say that there are not sometimes disagreements as to how things should be done. WWE, like any other business, has its fair share of internal politics.
The difference between winning and losing a match is not just reflected in WWE's televised storylines. A Superstar's pay is often linked to their spot on the card, both in terms of overall salary as well as merchandise sales.
Performers who win titles and frequently main event pay-per-view events for WWE are naturally seen as being more valuable to the company than those who are lower down the pecking order - and so they are paid accordingly.
Beyond the financial element, WWE also has to work to accommodate the expectations (and even egos) of certain Superstars. Some talents who are working their way up the card may not want to take a loss that might hinder their progress, while Superstars who are already established in the main event might be keen to avoid losing in order to protect their headline status.
Adding to WWE's headache in this respect is the fact that some top tier Superstars have had creative control agreements in place, meaning that they have the right to object to the company's plans. Here are 5 WWE Superstars that refused to lose a match - and the circumstances behind their decision.
#5 The Shield (to John Cena)
The handling of The Shield following their debut at Survivor Series 2012 was some of WWE's finest booking. The trio of Seth Rollins, Roman Reigns, and Dean Ambrose were brought up from NXT and immediately presented as threats to everyone in the promotion - including John Cena.
Some four months later, however, WWE decided that it was time for The Shield to lose their first high profile match at Elimination Chamber 2013, with Cena slated to pick up the victory as part of a six-man tag team match.
The newcomers strongly believed that the time was not right for them to lose, arguing that they felt they were too early in their run for them to be bested by Cena.
Speaking on Chris Jericho's podcast in 2014, Ambrose revealed that himself and his stablemates immediately protested the proposed outcome once they learned of it.
"We’ve gone in, the three of us, and protested everything. If we don’t like something, we’re like terrors to them – it’d be like, ‘ah God, The Shield’s not going to like this!’ Two seconds later we’re in the office – ‘er, yeah, we don’t like this.'"
While no member of The Shield had outright creative control, the group did have strength in numbers and used this to have the decision changed.
“Not that we’re jerks. They wanted us to… I think it was our second or third pay-per-view, it was right before our first WrestleMania, a six-man on a pay-per-view and the finish was Cena over with the schmutz. We were like: ‘But as soon as we go down to John, we’re just like everybody else, because that’s what he does to everybody else. There’ll be a time where we do that all day and that’s fine… but it is not today. Otherwise, why are we even here?’”
The Shield were ultimately victorious that night, although the now-Jon Moxley continued to have regular issues with creative up until his WWE departure in 2019. Following his exit, Moxley was very open about the fact that creative frustrations were a big factor in his choice to exit the promotion.
#4 Bret Hart (to Shawn Michaels)
Bret Hart's refusal to lose the WWE Championship to Shawn Michaels in his home country of Canada at Survivor Series 1997 led to one of the most infamous incidents in professional wrestling history.
"The Hitman" was set to leave WWE shortly after Survivor Series to join rival promotion WCW. Before exiting the company, though, reigning champion Hart still needed to lose his title to another Superstar - and WWE Chairman Vince McMahon wanted Hart to drop the belt to Shawn Michaels at the pay-per-view.
However, the Canadian icon was very unhappy at the prospect of losing to Michaels in Montreal, as the pair genuinely did not get along on a personal level. Hart had previously negotiated a creative control clause in his contract, which allowed him to veto the plan that McMahon originally had in mind.
Backed into a corner legally, McMahon agreed to change the finish of the Hart Vs. Michaels Survivor Series match to a double disqualification. It was then scheduled that Hart would lose the WWE Championship to a different opponent shortly after Survivor Series.
McMahon, though, had a very different plan in mind. He did not want to risk Hart taking the WWE Championship to WCW and so came up with a scenario which would see Michaels win the belt at Survivor Series - without Hart's co-operation.
The night before the bout, McMahon told Michaels of the new finish. Michaels was to lock Hart in his own signature submission move, the Sharpshooter, with the idea being that Hart would believe that he was supposed to reverse the maneuver.
However, on the night, match referee Earl Hebner was instructed to ring the bell - before Hart could reverse the submission. This meant that Michaels was announced as the new WWE Champion, despite the fact that Hart had never tapped out. McMahon was at ringside to oversee the double-cross, which has since become known as the "Montreal Screwjob".
Hart was furious at the outcome and immediately spat at McMahon when he spotted him in the arena, before later knocking him out backstage.
The events of the evening would lead to the birth of McMahon's heel television character, which went on to become one of the most successful of all time. Without Bret Hart's refusal to lose to Shawn Michaels, WWE's history might look very different indeed.
#3 Hulk Hogan (to Randy Orton)
It is an open secret that Hulk Hogan is not exactly a fan of tasting defeat in professional wrestling matches. In the past, the WWE Hall of Famer has reportedly refused to lose to a number of opponents in high profile matches, including Bret Hart, Ric Flair, and Shawn Michaels to name but a few.
However, with his career winding down, Hogan faced Randy Orton in what would prove to be his last official WWE match at SummerSlam 2006. Orton, just 26-years-old at the time, had built quite a reputation for himself as the "Legend Killer" in the years leading up to the match.
Orton had gotten the better of the likes of Mick Foley, Ric Flair, and Dusty Rhodes (as well as many other legends) during his early career. A victory over one of WWE's greatest ever Superstars in Hulk Hogan on a big pay-per-view event made a lot of sense.
A lot of sense, that is, to everyone except Hogan himself. "The Hulkster" allegedly refused to give Orton the biggest win of career, reasoning that he wanted to keep his brand strong for a potential dream match with "Stone Cold" Steve Austin at the following year's WrestleMania.
That match with Austin, of course, never materialized, meaning that the then-53-year-old Hogan cleanly pinned one of WWE's top prospects with no upside for the company. A criminally wasted opportunity caused by Hogan's refusal to lose.
#2 "Stone Cold" Steve Austin (to Brock Lesnar)
The year 2002 was one of transition for WWE. While many future stars made their official main roster debuts, other more established stars drifted away from the company.
John Cena, Randy Orton, and Batista all debuted on SmackDown in 2002. Over on RAW, meanwhile, "The Next Big Thing" Brock Lesnar was certainly making an impression on Monday nights.
Aware that The Rock would be spending an ever-increasing amount of time in Hollywood and that "Stone Cold" Steve Austin was battling a laundry list of injuries, Vince McMahon knew he needed to build for the future - and saw the monstrous Lesnar as WWE's next sure-fire Superstar.
McMahon was not alone, either. Almost everybody recognized Lesnar's potential, including Steve Austin. However, when Austin was asked to lose to Lesnar in an unadvertised King of the Ring qualifying match on the June 10 edition of RAW, relations between Austin and the WWE went sour quickly.
"The Texas Rattlesnake", who had already expressed his creative frustrations with WWE earlier in the year, did not believe that a match between himself and Lesnar should be given away for free with no build-up. So disillusioned, in fact, was Austin with WWE that he walked out of the company altogether as a result of the request.
Speaking on the Pardon My Take podcast in 2019, Austin explained the reason behind his refusal to lose to Lesnar:
They wanted me to fly down to Atlanta for Monday Night RAW and put over Brock Lesnar...I didn’t show up because it wasn’t time for me to do the favors yet for Brock in an unadvertised match in a tournament style TV match...Hey man, I love Brock Lesnar, I’d lose to him any day of the week, but build it up so we can all make money off of it and it’s going to mean something.”
Austin would eventually work out his issues with WWE, returning in February 2003 to wrestle the last few matches of his career. Austin's final match took place at WrestleMania 19 against The Rock - a far more fitting ending to his WWE career than simply no-showing a RAW taping!
#1 Goldberg (to "The Fiend" Bray Wyatt)
For a considerable period of time, it seemed likely that "The Fiend" Bray Wyatt would defend his WWE Universal Championship against Roman Reigns at Wrestlemania 36. Reigns had yet to win a championship since beating leukemia and had yet to square off against Wyatt in his newest incarnation.
Enter Goldberg. The 53-year-old WWE Hall of Famer was booked to challenge Wyatt for his title at this past February's Super ShowDown event in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. WWE is well-known for bringing in big-name Superstars for its Saudi Arabia shows and Goldberg - a multiple-time World Champion - definitely fits that bill.
It was rumored that the original plan for the Goldberg Vs. Wyatt match was for "The Fiend" to take the victory, setting him up for his WrestleMania clash with Reigns. However, Goldberg was reportedly not on board with this plan and insisted that he wanted to beat Wyatt.
The WCW icon has a considerable amount of creative control over the appearances that he makes with WWE and seemingly refused to lose to Wyatt's dark and ominous character because he believed it would damage his standing with kids who view him as "a superhero".
Goldberg allegedly pushed the issue and was given the win and the WWE Universal Championship, forcing the WWE to make the first of what would turn out to be many changes to their WrestleMania 36 plans. Goldberg eventually lost the title to Braun Strowman in quick fashion at the show.
