I've stated again and again that I don't think that Arlene should have been replaced with Alesha who just doesn't have the gravitas to be taken seriously IMO. The other judges and the pro dancers may draw attention to her lack of knowledge and experience without any malicious intent! I have a feeling that Alesha may be completely out of her depth. I hope not. Until this occurance I always liked her (if not her laugh) and genuinely hope that she does well

No matter what any of us say the decision has been made and I can't see it changing. I for one am looking forward to the start of the programme and am VERY interested in how they've changed the scoring on the programme. What have they done? Time will tell I suppose but it better be good!!


Oh and by the way GaryDawson: I have made comments that I think are relevant. I have questioned Alesha's motivation in accepting this job, I'm quite entitled to do so and in no way consider myself vile!! I must be one of the 0.1%

What a backlash! I think it will be good to get an ex-contestant's perspective, Alesha does have a right to comment, having put in all that hard work herself and then won the bloody thing! She's not a complete layman. And as for not being taken seriously, what about Arelene? She seemed to care more about what she was going to say abut the dancing, than the dancing itself.

I've said similar to you reclinewithme, on another thread. If Arlene WERE being replaced with someone with similar qualifications/experience then I could actually understand the furore more! As it is someone has come onto the panel to judge from the perspective of a former contestant/winner (and probably the most popular one at that).

She'll smile prettily, speak a bit about the dancing. Surface stuff and without any technical content and her scores will be in line with most of the panel. After all she will hear what the other judges (I mean the REAL judges) say. Will there any point in having her there, hearing her 'thoughts' and listening to platitudes? Absolutely not.

You people who are saying that Alesha is qualified due to having been on the show herself have fundamentally misunderstood what and how long it takes to be really knowledgable about dancing.

I think that they should have kept Arlene and made Alesha the fifth judge, that would have added something to the show instead of detracting from it.

Maybe some have fundamentally misunderstood Alesha's role.

With three experienced judges on the panel, maybe they are looking for a "lay persons" point of view.

But that wouldn't be valid I hear you say? Of course, as none of our opinions are valid on a Saturday. And if you agree with that then we have no right to dispute any scores or results.

HOWEVER, we don't know what role Alesha (or Darcey) will have because you know what, the show hasn't started yet. But that hasn't stopped people losing their heads over assumptions and guesswork.

I'll say to deaf ears agan. Why don't we just wait, see and then judge rather than judge before we know that facts.

But she will be there to judge the amateur, not the professional. Occasionally the choreography is commented on but you don't hear the judges say "Great enegy but Anton your flicks and kicks weren't sharp enough"


SCD was probably the only talent shows that had all judges with a dance background. What qualifications do Amanda Holden, Denise Van Outen, John Barrowman, Barry Humphreys, Cheryl Cole or Ruthie Henshall have other than been there, done that?


I think it does. We may not have liked the "Ask Len" segments on ITT last year but they replaced Joe Bloggs coming on to plug their new single/album/book/film etc.

That's not true - I don't think anyone who criticized the judges for their favouristism, over-marking and personal criticism of JS was saying lets replace the judges with someone with less knowledge of ballroom/latin. I think the judging panel needed a refresh but the beeb have gone the wrong way about it. I would say Len needed replacing the most but at least he had some latin/ballroom knowledge even if he was the worst offender for over-marking and his ego taking over.

[quote]
But that's the point they do comment on the choreography, an area in which Alesha knows zilch, and part of the competition is the ability of the pro to teach the celeb. Would Alesha be prepared to say "Get him/her to acting/ballet classes pronto,' as Arlene did: and if she did would the pro be tempted to ask "how many novices have you taught?"



Just because other shows go for style over substance is no reason for SCD to go the same way.

I think Alesha has made a wrong career move by being a judge on Strictly. Surely if they wanted a younger woman one of the professional dancers e.g. Karen or Camilla would have been a better judge than Alesha who is a pop singer!! Arlene sometimes embarrassed me with her comments to the young competitors and it looked a bit unseemly to see a woman of her age flirt like that. Entertaining it was not, in my opinion!! Nevertheless she has years of experiences and perhaps some of her comments could have been toned down a bit. I think Alesha will drive us all crazy with her manic laugh and cute comments. Now do not get my started on Len and the amazing about of coverage her got on It Takes Two with his master class and Question Time with Len etc.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Completely agree. If the only qualification that Alesha has is that she is a former contestant who won, does that mean that EVERY past winner was considered for the job? I think not. We all know this is about one person and one person only - Cheryl Cole.

Surely it's all about experience, background, & overall credibility - it's what really matters!

If Australia DWTS can have a judge like a respectable & experience Helen Richey, why can't they keep Arlene??

http://www.foreverdance.com.au/images/Helen_Richey.jpg

Because Australia's DWTS is in Australia and it isn't a BBC programme?

Britiain, and in particular, the BBC, has been accused of ageism many times in their attitude to women (Kate Adie, Moira Stewart and Selina Scott, to name just a few.)

And Bruno has?????(lol)

Some people need to chill out, smell the coffee, get a life and give the girl a chance!!!!!

JJ

"You people"???

Once again you are not allowing others to have an opinion different to yours.



Excellent reply - I agree 100%

Why should she? Had Alesha not accepted the role, Arlene still would have got the chop anyway as clearly she wasn't wanted anymore. Frankly i think Alesha is wrong for this role but there's nothing anybody can do about it now other than stop watching, something i wont do. This agism bull is annoying me as well Bruce is 80 so they can't be that ageist . Arlene was irritating anyway with her constant alliteration, it was always the same ones as well :yawn::yawn:. I personally don't think it's right that Alesha is taking a lot of the flak for this, she didn't sack Arlene, the producer did.

I'm afraid I agree with HediB's point about what Alesha will most likely say and do. I don't say it out of malice, it's just that I can't see anything else she can say, and with well over 100 routines in a Strictly season to comment on, it could be a real problem for her...

And exactly how long do the contestants have to become really knowledgable ? 4 days maybe each week, so what is the point of having highly trained judges when they are judging total beginners, I say this time and again, it is an entertainment programme, not the world bloody championships.
if you dont like it you will find a big red button on your remote, that is the off switch , use it and stop bleating about something before you have even given it 30 seconds .

Because that would leave no more room for the bellicose, the bitchy and the backstabbers in this sordid little thread.

That would have been brilliant IMO They manage it on DOI. I would have been all for that. We don't have to hear every judge talk after every dance as that would be very time consuming (or they could make the programme slightly longer). That would have been a good panel as they would've all had different areas of expertise, including Alesha as an ex-contestant.


Bruno! Sometimes I like him but most of the time I find him incredibly annoying, patronising with definite favourites who he consistently over marks. I don't think I would have cared much if they'd replaced him. The panel would have been more balanced too.

And for your information I HAVE chilled out (even with all the coffee!) and I've most definitely 'got a life'! Just because I comment/have an opinion on something that you disagree with, does not mean to say that I haven't got a life, I'm just very opinionated


Exactly. Although I suppose over the course of Strictly we do get a lot of repetition by the judges anyway.

I'm definitely starting to come round the the idea of Alesha though, she may be really good for all we know. I have my doubts but I genuinely hope she proves me wrong

I think you might be Arlene with all that alliteration!

Sorry but I simply don't understand this. We know what Alesha's role is - to judge the performances of the dancing couples. The lay persons viewpoint is represented by the public who have a vote. Many people, and I am one, believe a judge should know something, preferably rather a lot, about the object or skill they are judging, whether it be ballroom dancing, showjumping or people who have broken the law. Alesha patently lacks that basic qualification.

Alesha does know something about learning to dance. She was taught intensively, week after week, by Matthew Cutler. She is not an inexperienced novice, she's a Strictly champion! She didn't get there by smiling prettily and making inane comments. Why are people choosing to be so patronising?

That's exactly what she is.

Some people are so self righteuos in my opinion ,. They dont like it so call for someone to resign .,
Why should she resign just to please some .?