Did Cheryl not say that she wanted the other two to go and then she would vote for deadlock. She wasn't given the chance to do this. So the results are invalid!
But she doesn't get to decide when and where she votes....she got her chance and decided not to. It was her right to vote which became invalid.
I'm not going to complain, but I understand why people are. Yes it's only a singing contest but when people pay real money to vote, it's a whole different ball game. What is the point in voting when ultimately, they don't count? The judges and producers CLEARLY will do as they please and break their necks to keep who they want. Willy nilly rule changes and fishy behaviour is definitely a valid reason to complain.
What about the people that voted for TreyC, then? How is this fair to them?
She didn't have enough votes, it was always a risk. It was a vote to save. If it was a vote to remove then yes, they would have a right to be angry. But it wasn't, they lost nothing.
What if Treyc has the lowest votes when the numbers are revealed?
But lets be honest here, if Katie had gone to this there wouldn't be half the uproar there is now. Anyone can see that.
Perhaps, but I for one would be whinging just the same. I had no favourite amongst the two, I just got angry when the judges started their utter farce.
I think a lot of people here have missed the point here and I think in fact that this probably should be investigated by OFCOM. The issue is that when you take money from viewers as part of a decision-making process, you have to carry out the protocol of that process to the letter. As I understand it, and I may be wrong, the protocol requires all four judges to vote and does not permit abstentions; tonight the decision was made by three judges voting. I would also highlight what Cheryl said: 'ask these two, then I'll take it to deadlock' which clearly implies that she was intending Dermot to return to her after asking the other two and, if necessary, she would vote to take it to deadlock. Instead, her vote was rendered void and the decision was made by the other three. I do not think that that is the correct procedure. They may well end up having to refund people's money.
A great post Mr Gimpy. That's what I thought Cheryl said, however, some DS posts say by refusing to vote Biffa actually lost her vote .
The producers could not take the chance to take Cheryl's vote to deadlock and risk loosing Katie... Well this is her third time lucky, I do hope she won't have a fourth.
Perhaps, but I for one would be whinging just the same. I had no favourite amongst the two, I just got angry when the judges started their utter farce.
Fair enough, but i wasn't targeting you in any way. However, there would be less of a problem among a lot of posters on this forum if Katie had gone in this way.
Actually, they are all rubbish this year, with certainly no X Factor performances, Hyped up Mediocrity Factor, more like. I really wasn't serious about complaining to Ofcom. They wouldn't do anything anyway. But I am angry about having to sit through this mess of a show. I don't blame people that do complain though, People wasting money on telephone votes when unpopular contestants are saved by the so called judges, week after week. Maybe Jason Kay was right about that Cole woman? :cool:
Surely thats exactly what happens when you refuse to vote?
Exactly, Cheryl only wanted to vote if it was 2-1, So they just disallowed her vote because she refused in the first place. She is paid to judge and refused, Simple as.
She didn't have enough votes, it was always a risk. It was a vote to save. If it was a vote to remove then yes, they would have a right to be angry. But it wasn't, they lost nothing.
You are quite wrong. They lost the right to have the decision which their votes contributed to decided by the proper procedure. Also, some people have suggested that the judges' votes and the viewers' votes ought to be viewed as two separate decisions. This is not the case: both decisions are a part of the same process which is used to decide who leaves the show each week. That decision was arguably not made properly and that is why, having taken money from the public, this is an OFCOM issue.
I can't believe these SIMPLE rules are confusing so many people.
If a judge does not vote, they lose their vote. End of - its been the case since Series 4. Dermot warned Cheryl "it will go to a majority vote then" - he knew the rules straight away, because thats what happens when a judge refuses to vote - see Sharon Osbourne - Series 4, Week 1.
You are quite wrong. They lost the right to have the decision which their votes contributed to decided by the proper procedure. Also, some people have suggested that the judges' votes and the viewers' votes ought to be viewed as two separate decisions. This is not the case: both decisions are a part of the same process which is used to decide who leaves the show each week. That decision was arguably not made properly and that is why, having taken money from the public, this is an OFCOM issue.
She didn't have enough votes, it was always a risk. It was a vote to save. If it was a vote to remove then yes, they would have a right to be angry. But it wasn't, they lost nothing.
What if Treyc has the lowest votes when the numbers are revealed?
What if she has? That still won't make how it happened fair considering the voting was off kilter.
I respectfully disagree about them not having a right to be angry sorry. See lannyboy and Mr Gimpy's posts for my reasoning.
You are quite wrong. They lost the right to have the decision which their votes contributed to decided by the proper procedure. Also, some people have suggested that the judges' votes and the viewers' votes ought to be viewed as two separate decisions. This is not the case: both decisions are a part of the same process which is used to decide who leaves the show each week. That decision was arguably not made properly and that is why, having taken money from the public, this is an OFCOM issue.
I can't believe these SIMPLE rules are confusing so many people.
If a judge does not vote, they lose their vote. End of - its been the case since Series 4. Dermot warned Cheryl "it will go to a majority vote then" - he knew the rules straight away, because thats what happens when a judge refuses to vote - see Sharon Osbourne - Series 4, Week 1.
Cheryl didn't refuse to vote, she said she wanted to be asked alst and would take it to deadlock if she could. However when this happened she wasn't given her vote, and it was obvious cos had it gone to deadlock KAtie would have been out.
I normally laugh at the "call OFCOM" threads but in this case I think it's justified. This is obviously so set up to ensure TreyC was out.
Comments
But she doesn't get to decide when and where she votes....she got her chance and decided not to. It was her right to vote which became invalid.
Fine, people who voted for Trayc and Katie should be refunded:p
But lets be honest here, if Katie had gone to this there wouldn't be half the uproar there is now. Anyone can see that.
What about the people that voted for TreyC, then? How is this fair to them?
Exactly......I wanted TreyC to stay...but the voting placed her in the bottom 2 unfortunately.
She didn't have enough votes, it was always a risk. It was a vote to save. If it was a vote to remove then yes, they would have a right to be angry. But it wasn't, they lost nothing.
What if Treyc has the lowest votes when the numbers are revealed?
Perhaps, but I for one would be whinging just the same. I had no favourite amongst the two, I just got angry when the judges started their utter farce.
A great post Mr Gimpy. That's what I thought Cheryl said, however, some DS posts say by refusing to vote Biffa actually lost her vote
The producers could not take the chance to take Cheryl's vote to deadlock and risk loosing Katie... Well this is her third time lucky, I do hope she won't have a fourth.
Fair enough, but i wasn't targeting you in any way. However, there would be less of a problem among a lot of posters on this forum if Katie had gone in this way.
Actually, they are all rubbish this year, with certainly no X Factor performances, Hyped up Mediocrity Factor, more like. I really wasn't serious about complaining to Ofcom. They wouldn't do anything anyway. But I am angry about having to sit through this mess of a show. I don't blame people that do complain though, People wasting money on telephone votes when unpopular contestants are saved by the so called judges, week after week. Maybe Jason Kay was right about that Cole woman? :cool:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_131376490251483
She could have voted and sent Trey C home
She could have voted to take it to deadlock and she still might have went.
Maybe Gamu can man the phonelines
Exactly, Cheryl only wanted to vote if it was 2-1, So they just disallowed her vote because she refused in the first place. She is paid to judge and refused, Simple as.
No she is too busy with her Panorama programme "Racist Britain and why I was papped out the X factor."
Of course, this is a complete lie.
You are quite wrong. They lost the right to have the decision which their votes contributed to decided by the proper procedure. Also, some people have suggested that the judges' votes and the viewers' votes ought to be viewed as two separate decisions. This is not the case: both decisions are a part of the same process which is used to decide who leaves the show each week. That decision was arguably not made properly and that is why, having taken money from the public, this is an OFCOM issue.
No that is wrong, it did not happen with Sharon
I'll wait for their ruling on that then.
What if she has? That still won't make how it happened fair considering the voting was off kilter.
I respectfully disagree about them not having a right to be angry sorry. See lannyboy and Mr Gimpy's posts for my reasoning.
Underlining something doesn't make it correct.
Cheryl didn't refuse to vote, she said she wanted to be asked alst and would take it to deadlock if she could. However when this happened she wasn't given her vote, and it was obvious cos had it gone to deadlock KAtie would have been out.
I normally laugh at the "call OFCOM" threads but in this case I think it's justified. This is obviously so set up to ensure TreyC was out.