PRO WRESTLING / A LIVING REFERENCETake the library offline
← Match study

Match studyAll levels

Bayley vs. Sasha Banks

An underdog’s comeback built around a visible obstacle.

Also called: NXT TakeOver: Brooklyn · Sasha Banks · Mercedes Moné

CRITIC’S RATING★ 4.25Alex Podgorski
EVENTNXT TakeOver: Brooklyn22 August 2015
Read the rating source ↗

Match synopsis

Spoilers follow. Champion Sasha Banks targets Bayley’s injured hand. Bayley survives the control period, reverses the pressure, and wins the NXT Women’s Championship in front of an invested Brooklyn crowd.

The reviewer’s perspective

Podgorski gives his own rating of 4.25 stars. He highlights the story and submission struggle, while questioning the balance of the one-sided opening. This is his rating, distinct from the other critics he discusses.

The rating is a named critic’s judgment. It is not a consensus score, and the study notes do not claim to be a new review based on a complete viewing.

Watch with a question

These prompts are editorial. Watch once for the complete story, then use a second viewing to investigate:

  • What reminds you of the hand injury after it is established?
  • Where does Bayley’s resistance become a sustained comeback?
  • Does your reaction to the opening agree with the reviewer’s criticism? Explain why.

A useful takeaway

Do not lose the injury story as the pace increases. Study how a limitation remains visible through a comeback.

Access notes

The link opens WWE’s official full-match page. Availability depends on region and the publisher’s current distribution arrangements. The article and these questions remain available in the offline edition; the video does not.

WATCH THE REFERENCE

Official WWE full-match page · regional access may vary

If playback is unavailable in your region, open the original source ↗.

THE PAPER TRAIL

Sources & context

Named critic’s review

Bayley vs. Sasha Banks — NXT TakeOver: Brooklyn review ↗

Alex Podgorski · TJR Wrestling

The 4.25-star rating is Alex Podgorski’s own assessment. Synopsis and critical perspective are short paraphrases; study questions are our editorial prompts.