That doesn't seem fair. Yet again the BBC gets away with it.

Sorry Buddy - I generalised.

Yet again I'm apologising and the series hasn't even started.

Yet again the BBC badly handles replacing a key person.

Nicole only discovered she was not dancing last year when she found out the other pros had received their contracts.

This year the BBC would not return Arlene's phone calls asking what was going on after the article in The Sun and when they finally did, Arlene was told Alesha was just having screen tests without mentioning she could potentially be her replacement.

That is appalling, deceitful and disrespectful and made a bad situation much worse (again).


I'm only teasing - no problem - me too! I've had more PMs over this than in the rest of my time on DS!

This is the essence of the predicament into which the BBC management have placed Alesha and Strictly.

We have seen Alesha dance, and heard Alesha speak and laugh on ITT. We are going to get the second without the first. If or when Alesha sits in Arlene's chair a bumper audience will tune in.

She has been announced as a judge with full status not a guest judge, apparently paid higher than the other three judges and all the celebs and professional dancers. Alesha is a megastar in the Strictly firmament and this is a sensational appointment likely to attract the full glare of John Sergeant level of media attention.

As announced to date by the Beeb management this would not be Day One for a newcomer on probation with possible offer of a permanent job, with an option of graceful exit if otherwise. Some of Alesha's fans loyal beyond question have tempered their warmest wishes with consideration for how it may or may not work out for Alesha, and for a feelgood programme.

I think this is spot on.

Most of these sort of 'jobs' on tv, as in theatre, ballet, etc work on a short-term contract, which may or may not be renewed for no given reason. It might not sound fair, but that's how it works.

And perhaps that's our own fault. Or at least the fault of the highly vocal anti-judges' brigade that surfaced last year.

If the BBC want to avoid the 'us vs. them' mentality that surfaced last year, it makes sense for them to hire someone they think will be popular and who can bridge the gap between the two sides.

I think you make a very valid point.

Mind you, does suggest the bbc takes notice of viewers comments, and I'm not so sure it does!

I too think you're spot on there. The public complained, so the Beeb did something about it. Whether it was right or wrong can ONLY be decided when we see the new format "in action".

Whether or not Alesha knew she was going in to replace Arlene I don't know, but I do know via a reliable source that she ummed and arred over the decision for a long time, mainly with respect to her tour dates. But then it was worked out that she would have a gap in her schedule between October and December anyway, and she decided it would be fun to go back. She knew going in that she would be judging on the entertainment/performance and "I know what you're going through" angle alone, NOT the technical aspect - after all there's 3 other judges for that.

As I see it, there would have been nothing in her mind to make her think that it was a bad idea. Why would she? After all, she knows she's popular, she loves the show, she was asked to do it and she could fit it in, so what exactly WOULD have made her think it was a bad idea? I bet she's all really rather bemused and upset by the backlash aimed at her now. Therefore if there's an issue, it should be taken up with the producers and NOT Alesha herself.

If the BBC want to avoid the 'us vs. them' mentality that surfaced last year, all they have to do is prevent the judges from disposing of the public's favourites week after week and artificially overscoring their own favourites to make sure they reach the final.

Alesha's presence only negates that from happening again if the judges are disempowered and the public given the upper hand again.

It's impossible to anticipate what Alesha will be like and what she will be expected to base her opinion on - I, for one, am happy to wait and see.

Do we actually know she is being paid more than the other judges? Where has this come from? Newspaper reports? It is probably worth bearing in mind that certain newspapers - and Strictly fans should know which ones from last year - are on a mission to destroy the BBC, and rubbishing its programmes with lies is the best way to do that. Until I see the facts in black and white, I wouldn't waste my time speculating on people's salaries.

Yes, BBC management is rubbish (I know - I've worked there) ... but that isn't Alesha's fault. Is it?

As you quoted my post I am interested to know what you understood from it
You say ," aleshas fans , loyal beyond question " were you counting me in that group ?
I likes Alesha on SCD , I loved her contribution to it on a dark winters evening , I likes her on a documentary I saw about the effect magazines have on young girls .
But blinded loyalty I dont have, I havent blindly followed or adored anyone since a short lived obseession with
The Bay City Rollers !!!!
So not all Aleshas fans as you call them are blinded .
I would be willing to give anyone else a chance too

I am condemning the BBC for inserting someone without the expertise to do this job. But I am also disappointed in Aleshafor having accepted a job she for which she is not qualified.

But if she has been employed to judge the performance aspect of the dance, she is completely qualified to do that...

But a lot that is subjective. If the public favourite also happens to be the worst dancer, the judges shouldn't be prevented from having an opinion nor voting them out if that person happens to be in the dance off. Otherwise you'd have a competition entirely based upon popularity and nothing to do with dancing

Overscoring their favourites - I'm sort of 50/50 on this. Sometimes I think they believe that a person is genuinely very talented and mark accordingly (which is fair enough). Sometimes I think they, like us, are more than capable of working out who is popular with the public from previous week's results and overmark those they think might be in danger otherwise. Not because of favourtism as such, more because they believe (rightly or wrongly) that that person deserves it based upon their dancing.

In that case Alesha might actually temper the marking - the low scorers who are fun but a bit rubbish will get a decent-ish mark and a nice comment from her for their performance/effort (so the public maybe won't feel the need to go against the big nasty judges). At the opposite end, someone who is technically good but perhaps lack that something could get less from a performance based judge...

The BBC have stated that Alesha is there to judge the performances as someone who has been there and won the competition, someone who can empathise with the celebrity dancers, so she is clearly qualified to be there, and this is a valid point, the show is about the celebrity dancers not the professionals, the pros are there to teach and mentor the celebrities and to partner them, very rarely do the judges critique the pros dancing ability, it's about the celebs, and as such then why should the celebs be judged to competition standards, when they are clearly not qualified to compete in professional competition.

As for being disappointed in her accepting the job, are you crazy, most of this board seem to think they are better qualified and i'm sure most of them would also have accepted the job had they ACTUALLY been offered.

If it wasn't Alesha it would have been someone else.

Get over it! everyone else has.

Well done and the very best of wishes for success in all you do. Ignore the knockers, they don't pay your mortgage sweetheart.

Thanks, Abbasolutely good point taken that a vote in favour is no sign of blind loyalty to one individual, it could be a general appetite for change and tryout.

Just the two usual considerations about change: the benefit if it works, the cost if it does not.

Absolutely agree I loved Alesha on SCD even though my favourite was Gethin and was chuffed when she won. I think her music is good and like her as a person, this does not make me an avid fan and am not blinded by a dedication to her.
Alesha seems to be getting a lot of flack for something which imo isnt her fault, all she did was accept a role which the BBC offered her. Surely they are to blame? As I have said before I don't think Alesha was the best choice to replace Arlene and it would have been better for someone who had ballroom/latin experience to take her place. Saying that I will watch in september and make my opinion whether it was the right decision or not.
Im only 19 and don't think changing the judges will bring in more younger viewers as if you love the show you'll watch anyway. Alesha is not a horrible person and doesn't deserve to be ridiculed even when we have no idea how it's all going to pan out in two months.

I wouldn't credit the public with quite so little intelligence as to automatically vote for the worst dancer every week. It happened last year because the judges overstepped the mark with their bitchy putdowns, JS retaliated then the JS bandwagon rolled way out of control. I would wager that the producers will be under strict orders to ensure it never happens again. Quite aside from anything else, it was a PR disaster.

You appear very generous with your assessment of the overscoring. I would agree with you were it not for the very obvious attempts to ensure Lisa Snowdon reached the final with performances which would have earned other performers far, far less. You may say that is subjective; I would counter you are sticking your head in the sand if you say otherwise ... (Or you are a Lisa and Brendan fan! )

And, whether you - or anyone else - likes it or not, Strictly is not just a dance competition. People vote for contestants whose personality they like, as well as whose dancing they like. Short of denying the public any vote at all, there is no way round that.

Yes, Alesha may well temper the judges' excesses of last year. But until the scoring system is changed, the potential still exists for the judges to abuse their power.

Oh, I didn't mean that. There is a tendency to support the underdog and feel sorry for them however. With a 'nice' judge that may be less prevalant.


Let's call me optimistic


Not a fan of theirs in the slightest! Although I couldn't fault their dancing that much, it just did nothing for me. I think a lot of the time the judges are so desperate for what they perceive as the best dancers to do well that it screws their judgement. I don't see it as personal favouritism (mostly!) more professional favouritism - if you can have such a thing.


Of course. Perhaps its just a vain hope that we'll avoid all of the b*llocks from last year. A healthy balance between the dancing and popularity needs to be returned too. Last year went completely OTT in the popularity direction.

I thought I'd read that there were going to be some changes to the scoring system. I don't think we've got details yet.

And you never know, seeing Arlene being sacked may make the others behave!

Professional favouritism vs personal favouritism - interesting! Unfortunately, Bruno's execrable "My girls" makes it rather too personal ... Ditto Arlene lying about Rachel Stevens' dance history on BBC Breakfast. It's the producers' job to manage the judges - instead, last year, they kowtowed to them and it all went horribly wrong.

The public versus the judges last year spiralled out of the judges' behaviour, not just with JS but with others. It deprived the public of the final they wanted and instead we got a final the judges tried to rig. I agree last year was b*llocks and I would hope the promised changes to the voting system nix the chances of it happening again.

And yes, I suspect too that Arlene's dismissal is intended to send a signal to the others. We shall see ...

Tbh I don't know what Alesha should do...The whole thing has been a shambles from the start, from the first leaked story to the present round of mud slinging

If I have to 'blame' anybody it's got to be the bods at the beeb for their abysmal handling of the whole situation, which for me was exacerbated by Jay Hunt's incredibly crass and dismissive words on the subject


I'd say if Alesha still wants to take the job, she should...but she should also be aware she's working for a bunch of idiots, and fickle ones at that I personally think it's the wrong role for her and can't for the life of me fathom why she wasn't offered something more in the presenting line...ie Tess' job!

If this was the case why has she rescheduled her dates in Lincoln, Southampton and Brighton from October 24th, 31st and November 7th (Saturdays) to November 16th, 17th and 19th (Monday, Tuesday and Thursday). So some fans who bought tickets for a weekend date will probably miss the gig because of work or other weekday commitments.

This is what Alesha herself had to say about it.

http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSvd1...les-tour-dates

Without knowing any other part of the background to this issue, this is the only black mark I would put against Alesha's decision.

I've spent 10mins trying to think of something positive to say after reading that, Ignazio...I'll have to come back later if or when it occurs to me.