It's possible. I think the credit crunching recessiony economic downturn crash of DOOM was a big part of the reason the ratings last year were the highest they've ever been, despite it hardly being a vintage year quality wise.
BBC in Boycott Panic Over Arlene Sacking
6 of 6
Originally Posted by soulmate61:
“The judges do not have a swear-box, or Len would have been bankrupted. But there should be a laugh-box. Every time Alesha laughs
she should put in a £9,000 donation to Children In Need.”
“The judges do not have a swear-box, or Len would have been bankrupted. But there should be a laugh-box. Every time Alesha laughs
she should put in a £9,000 donation to Children In Need.”
That laugh is something else
Ditto, hate the laugh. Wish this was all a bad dream. Alesha was quite good to watch, but certainly far from perfect. And had lost a lot from her performance come the christmas special. How she feels she can comment on the professionals and their partners.......... big ego comes to mind.
Suppose I will still watch, but the chemistry between the judges will be so different. Rubbish decision by the BBC, why on earth make that choice?
Suppose I will still watch, but the chemistry between the judges will be so different. Rubbish decision by the BBC, why on earth make that choice?
I love Strictly, I love the glitter, the sequins, the brilliant professionals, the total feel of escapism - but I must admit the gloss has gone off it for me now with the decision to axe Arlene 
I'm just not looking forward to this years with the same anticipation I do normally. I will watch although my Mum and a few of her friends are talking of giving it amiss after the way the BBC has treated Arlene.
I'm just not looking forward to this years with the same anticipation I do normally. I will watch although my Mum and a few of her friends are talking of giving it amiss after the way the BBC has treated Arlene.
The BBC probably thought they were on to a winner here. Replace someone that virtually no-one likes with someone that virtually everybody likes, what could possibly go wrong?
Originally Posted by Jambob:
“The BBC probably thought they were on to a winner here. Replace someone that virtually no-one likes with someone that virtually everybody likes, what could possibly go wrong?”
“The BBC probably thought they were on to a winner here. Replace someone that virtually no-one likes with someone that virtually everybody likes, what could possibly go wrong?”
Trouble was they hadn't got a clue what they were doing- look at the callous treatment of Hayley
Originally Posted by footygirl:
“Trouble was they hadn't got a clue what they were doing- look at the callous treatment of Hayley”
“Trouble was they hadn't got a clue what they were doing- look at the callous treatment of Hayley”
Quite normal in the brutal world of showbiz!!!!!
JJ
Originally Posted by Jambob:
“The BBC probably thought they were on to a winner here. Replace someone that virtually no-one likes with someone that virtually everybody likes, what could possibly go wrong?”
“The BBC probably thought they were on to a winner here. Replace someone that virtually no-one likes with someone that virtually everybody likes, what could possibly go wrong?”
Trouble is, we love to hate the judges mean comments, and disagree with them. It provides a real talking point.
Harsh, and often downright viscious they may be, but I find that much more interesting than bland platitudes. Gives me something to get steamed up about.
Originally Posted by jjackson42:
“Quite normal in the brutal world of showbiz!!!!!
JJ”
“Quite normal in the brutal world of showbiz!!!!!
JJ”
True, and strictly (sorry) speaking, she was not sacked (as she was not in contract or employed), she would have been informed that her contract would not be renewed for this season.
But the manner in which it was done, and the drip, drip, drip of such negative and potentially unsavoury deeds hardly indicates a BBC production team in control of events.
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“True, and strictly (sorry) speaking, she was not sacked (as she was not in contract or employed), she would have been informed that her contract would not be renewed for this season.
But the manner in which it was done, and the drip, drip, drip of such negative and potentially unsavoury deeds hardly indicates a BBC production team in control of events.”
“True, and strictly (sorry) speaking, she was not sacked (as she was not in contract or employed), she would have been informed that her contract would not be renewed for this season.
But the manner in which it was done, and the drip, drip, drip of such negative and potentially unsavoury deeds hardly indicates a BBC production team in control of events.”
And you would think that lessons would have been learned from last year, wouldn't you?
But apparently not ... Not yet, at least.
In an article I was reading today, I think it was The Sun, the beeb's attitude about the pro dancers came across loud and clear. They're temporary staff rather than 'talent' (?) and it's the celebs that are important. This statement underlined what I've suspected for some time, that there has been an effort to push the pro's further into the background...
Frankly, I think their popularity may be resented in some quarters...
Frankly, I think their popularity may be resented in some quarters...
6 of 6
