That's what I'm hoping to get at with the Barthes Unknown stuff on legitshook. To me, wrestling criticism as it stands is nine times out of ten only one step away from someone fantasy booking - there's no sense of focus on the technical side of what makes a match legible/decipherable, or any real analysis in a proper critical sense. It's easier for those guys to write 'OK TV match' as a review of three matches in a row than hone in on one point and talk about it at length.
To make a judgement on whether a match is good or bad is difficult because wrestling isn't typically discrete like a film is, you could make an argument that a narrative is a storyline, or a match, or a show, or a character. I think the first step is breaking it down to bits and using those bits to figure out what is good or bad.