Liv Morgan lost the WWE Women’s World Championship to Stephanie Vaquer in Chile, but WWE didn’t exactly send her out looking weak. Dave Meltzer believes the company went out of its way to make sure Morgan had a built-in excuse for losing the title, with Becky Lynch becoming the reason she walked out without the championship.
Vaquer defeated Morgan to win the WWE Women’s World Championship at WWE’s September 12 live event in Santiago, Chile, with Lynch serving as special guest referee. Morgan actually appeared to have the match won after connecting with Oblivion, but Lynch stopped her count at two instead of giving Liv the three-count.
While discussing the finish on Wrestling Observer Radio, Meltzer said he liked WWE changing the championship in Chile, but he wasn’t nearly as impressed with how hard the company worked to protect Morgan in defeat. His point was that Liv effectively had Vaquer beaten before Becky decided she wasn’t going to count three.
“Yeah, yeah, well that I, I didn’t like the way they did the finish because it was. What happened was Liv hit the oblivion and Becky goes one, two, like that, you know, I mean so it’s, it’s essentially they didn’t need especially since was in her hometown. I mean of course the crowd’s going to pop no matter what but I thought they went way out of their way to protect Liv because essentially, you know, Liv beat her but Becky wouldn’t count to three.”
There was a reason for Lynch refusing to finish the count. Morgan had shoved Becky earlier, and Meltzer viewed Becky getting payback as the next piece in the Liv and Lynch story rather than simply a way to put the championship on Vaquer.
“So it sets up Liv and, and Becky obviously down the line which we all knew they were going to anyway but so that was what they, you know, they did a deal where Liv pushed Becky. So that’s why Becky wouldn’t count the three. You know, when Liv hit the oblivion and then Stephanie came back to win.”
That tension didn’t come out of nowhere either. Before the title change, Vaquer had already turned down Lynch’s offer to help her deal with Morgan, telling Becky she respected her but didn’t want assistance. Morgan also entered Chile with some bragging rights after successfully defending the championship against Vaquer on the September 7 episode of RAW.
Once Morgan shoved the referee in Chile, however, Becky had her opening. Lynch stopped at two after Oblivion and gave Morgan the middle finger, allowing Vaquer to recover and put Liv away. Becky then made it very clear there was nothing accidental about what happened when she bragged about costing Morgan the championship afterward.
Meltzer still thought putting the title on Vaquer in front of the Chilean crowd was the right call, especially with the reaction WWE got. He also raised another question, though — whether Vaquer is actually in for a lengthy second reign when Morgan and Lynch are both wrapped up in the championship story.
“But yeah, you know, I mean, it was, you know, big, big, big, big crowd pop. I don’t think anyone really expected it, even though they put—I think they put on last though, in the main event spot. But I mean, it was a good thing to do. It’s a women’s championship. There’s no reason not. There’s no reason not to do it. So I don’t know if it’ll be a long reign. I mean, they’re gonna—obviously they’re doing a three way program with the three of them.”
So Vaquer got her huge championship moment in Chile, but Liv didn’t just get pinned and sent to the back. WWE gave Morgan a very obvious complaint, gave Becky another reason to have Liv coming after her, and dropped Vaquer directly into the middle of the mess with the title around her waist. That’s a lot of unfinished business for three women fighting over one championship.
Do you think WWE protected Liv Morgan too much in her loss to Stephanie Vaquer, or was Becky Lynch refusing to count three the right way to move all three women forward? Let us know what you think in the comments.
This transcript was produced exclusively for Ringside News from the original recording. Republishing the transcription in full is prohibited. When using excerpts, provide prominent credit and a link to this article.
