WWE may have subtly teased that Cody Rhodes vs. Gunther isn’t over yet – Here is how!

”
], { type: “text/html” }
);
const iframe = document.createElement(“iframe”);
iframe.src = URL.createObjectURL(blob);
iframe.style.cssText = “width:100%;height:100%;border:0;”;
container.appendChild(iframe);
attachIframeMessageListener(iframe);
}
const observer = new IntersectionObserver((entries, obs) => {
const entry = entries[0];
if (entry.isIntersecting) {
obs.unobserve(entry.target);
requestIdleCallback(() => {
initWidget(entry.target);
}, {
timeout: 200
});
}
}, {
root: null,
rootMargin: “300px 0px”,
threshold: 0.01
});
requestIdleCallback(() => {
$all(“.nl-inline-form-container”).forEach((c) => {
observer.observe(c);
});
});
})();

For those unfamiliar with the rule, if any part of a wrestler’s body is touching or underneath the bottom rope during a pinfall attempt, the referee is supposed to stop the count and call for a rope break. The ropes are considered a boundary of protection. Hence, making any pinfall in that situation invalid.

However, that was not the case at Clash in Italy. Instead, the referee counted to three, allowing Rhodes to retain the championship despite Gunther’s protests after the match.

What’s particularly interesting is that WWE didn’t appear to hide the error. In many controversial finishes, production crews avoid showing angles that expose officiating mistakes. However, at Clash in Italy, the camera replay clearly highlighted Gunther’s leg position under the rope.

Hence, fans watching at home could immediately see the issue. It even fueled a buzz on social media. That decision alone could be viewed as a subtle hint that WWE wants fans talking about the finish rather than simply accepting Rhodes’ victory as definitive. A move the company has used so many times in the past.

Also, Gunther’s post-match reaction added another layer to the situation. The former World Heavyweight Champion argued that his foot was under the rope immediately after the bell rang. His frustration was emphasized instead of ignored. Hence, creating the impression that he had a legitimate grievance rather than simply being a sore loser.

Another major clue that WWE has teased the feud between the two isn’t over came after the event. During the post-show, Cody Rhodes acknowledged the controversial finish. He even expressed willingness to give Gunther another opportunity. That is not the type of statement WWE typically pushes if a rivalry is finished. Instead, it keeps the door wide open for a rematch while reinforcing the idea that the champion understands the circumstances surrounding his victory.

The finish accomplishes several goals at once. Rhodes retains the championship and continues his reign without suffering a loss. Meanwhile, Gunther remains protected because he was never decisively beaten. In fact, one could argue that the controversial call gives him a stronger claim to another title match than if he had simply been pinned clean in the middle of the ring.

Hence, a rematch could easily be promoted around the controversy. Gunther could demand justice. Meanwhile, Rhodes would attempt to prove that he can defeat The Ring General without any lingering questions afterward.

When WWE intentionally shines a spotlight on a questionable finish instead of hiding it, there’s usually a reason. Given this, the company may have quietly planted the seeds for another blockbuster showdown. Perhaps at Night of Champions.

While this angle is speculative, only time will tell if it comes to fruition.

Gunther could dethrone Cody Rhodes at WWE Night of Champions

If the above scenario materializes, there is a possibility that Gunther would be booked to dethrone Cody and win the Undisputed WWE Championship.

This is because The Ring General losing to The American Nightmare for a second time in a row could diminish his momentum. The Career Killer has been portrayed as a dominant competitor over the past few months. To keep his momentum, Triple H and Co. could have him dethrone Cody in a rematch at Night of Champions.

However, this angle is also speculative.