The new "Ask the Specialists" Roundtable is the latest spin-off from the "Ask the Torch" feature. CSI led to CSI: New York and CSI: Miami, which is where you'll find the Specialists tackling a daily topic submitted by PWTorch readers to askpwtorch@gmail.com.

Ask the Specialists Roundtable #11

- Question from VIP member Hollywood4ever: I cringed during the three tombstones Bryan took on last Monday's Raw. Several wrestlers have been injured by that or similar moves (e.g. Steve Austin). It isn't a necessary move with a lot of risk. Do you think it should be banned?

- "Hits & Misses" Jon Mezzera responds: Yeah, I cringed, too. Of course, that's part of the reaction that they wanted. I know that when done correctly, the wrestler getting Tombstoned doesn't feel a thing. Of course, if it is executed incorrectly, it can be very dangerous. I remember reading something from Edge when he was blogging on WWE's website during his long recovery from neck surgery that he would allow Undertaker to tombstone him that day since he had so much trust in him. WWE has pretty much banned regular piledrivers. The tombstone variety seems safer to me and they obviously trust Undertaker and Kane to do them, but they are still only done every once in a while which is probably best.

Should it be banned entirely? I don't know. It is sort of strange to me to say that a move is so dangerous that it should only be saved for occasional special moments. What if that occasion is the one time something goes wrong? If it is so dangerous that it should only be done like once a year, then it probably shouldn't be done at all. However, I'm honestly not enough of an expert on the dangers of individual moves to render a strong opinion on the Tombstone. I am actually more concerned with certain moves like the Razor's Edge which Sheamus had been doing as the Celtic Cross for quite some time before shifting to the Brogue Kick. That move to me looks much more dangerous for potential neck injuries.

- "Common Fan" Jimmy Eaton (@TheCommonFan) responds: I think in this case, Kane can probably be trusted with the best of them when doing that move. As opposed to Jerry Lawler's version of the piledriver, which gives much less control as it's caused injuries in the past. Not to say the Tombstone is the safest move around, I just don't think it has a reason to be banned as it's not used all that often and really is only used by Kane.

I think there is risk in nearly any move when it's done carelessly hence the risk of being a wrestler to begin with. I would personally ban Alberto Del Rio's kick to the head long before the tombstone. The kick looks great but has injured probably more than the tombstone but that's another debate for another day. Thanks for the question!

- "Instant Reaction" Ben Tucker (@BTuckerTorch) responds: I definitely understand your concern, but there are a few things to consider: (1) Kane and The Undertaker have used this move for the last 17-20+ years and have hardly had an issue, so I would have some faith in them.

(2) Correct me if I'm wrong, but their Tombstone does seem to be about the safest version of the piledriver out there. Owen Hart's piledriver that broke Steve Austin's neck came after an intricate spinning maneuver, and opposite-facing piledrivers don't have the opponent's legs touching the wrestler to give them an indication of where they are. I could be completely wrong here considering I'm not a wrestler, but it does appear to be safer than most.

- "Mr. TV" Justin James (@Justin_M_James) responds: WWE has banned the piledriver for that exact reason, but has made an exception for Undertaker, and more rarely, Kane, due to their experience in doing the move. If you watch carefully, they leave a lot of light on the move. A few others will tease the move but never land it (I remember C.M. Punk doing so in the last year or two).

I can recall twice in the last few years that Kane did the piledriver, including last Monday. I think very few viewers see it as anything other than one of 'Taker's signature moves, and with the risk of real injury I don't think there is any legitimate value in the move at all. I, too, would like to see it 100 percent banned.

- "Showstopper" Shawn Valentino responds: Thank you for your question, Ben. I agree that some moves should be banned, starting with Bryan's stupid Diving Headbutt, which should be grounds for firing. The Tombstone should be only utilized in certain situations, and it should only be applied as safely as possible. We should never see the spike piledriver or any variation of the move that requires a jump instead of just hitting the ground knees-first.

If the Tombstone is delivered how it is normally hit, then I think it is fine, again as long as it is only saved for meaningful moments. I believe three was overkill because one should be enough. This is a function of too many people kicking out of finishers and diminishing their value. I believe any major move should be treated with respect, but they should only be banned if there is no safe way of administering the maneuver.

- "Mr. Europe" Brian Leahy (@CobyHectic responds: While I appreciate your concern, the reality of the situation is that the Tombstones executed by Kane on Raw were pretty safe in the grand scheme of things. Kane (and The Undertaker) have executed the move hundreds of times over the last 17 (20) years, and neither have inflicted a notable neck injury on anyone. The Kane/Taker version of the Tombstone results in little to no compression of the spine as (1) the majority of the drop impact/noise you hear is the wrestlers's knees hitting the mat and not their opponents head and (2) the receiving wrestlers weight is supported by the wrestler carrying out the move. Also with the kneeling version of the move, as long as both wrestlers are staring at one another's crotches (or thereabouts) the head will be well clear of the mat and the position and motion of the manuever is such that their head can roll under, preventing major compression of the spine.

The version Austin took from Hart is notably less safe as the butt of the executing wrestler becomes the low point, and where to place the head is far harder to judge from an initial standing position. Some wrestlers have gotten away with versions of this due to clever positioning/unique build (check out the Rikishi Driver on YouTube), but it only makes a dangerous version of the move marginally safer. On the flip side, though, the sit-out version still looks safer than a Steiner Screwdriver, which is really saying something.

(As as aside, Austin actually performed the same sit-out version of the Tombstone that broke his neck on Masahiro Chono in 1992 and, yup you guessed it; broke Chono's neck in the process. You can see why Austin wasn't thrilled with the prospect of taking the move considering his intimate knowledge of the risks.)

***

[ FYI: The specialists consist of a mix of current PWTorch contributors providing their opinion on today's wrestling scene and modern wrestling history questions, including Shawn Valentino, Michael Moore, Ben Tucker, Jon Mezzera, Justin James, Brian Leahy, Jimmy Eaton, Nathan Kyght, Tony Donofrio, and Mike Roe. ]

[Torch art credit Grant Gould (c) PWTorch.com]

We suggest these recent related articles...

PODCAST ALERT: Now Available - Wade Keller on Jim Ross's podcast, plus Three Big Questions for Ross

RADICAN'S LIVE BLOG: Matt Sydal (Evan Bourne) "YouShoot Live" - WWE exit, ROH return?, stories from all over, more

PHOTO GALLERY: Smackdown TV Tuesday night in N.C.