I don't understand why the BBC has to worry about ratings - it can only be a 'mine is bigger than yours' thing. Ratings are important to ITV because of attracting advertising.

I've been a Strictly fan since series one but this year has been disappointing for all the reasons discussed here. I'll probably start enjoying it more when the couples get to do two dances each week.

I felt uneasy and and offbeat at the end of Saturday's show, I do hope that doesn't continue. I always supported Bruce but I'm fed up with him this series.

I think this is a really good point. The BBC missed a huge opportunity to make a big deal out of all the changes (other than Arlene/Alesha ) and show how it was responding to the feedback from the fans. Instead we get the standard announcement for 'the jewel in the crown' of BBC programmes as part of the Autumn schedule general announcement. Who ever is in charge of PR should be looking for a new job after missing such a sitter.

I used 2 like Strictly better but the last 2 years I've preferred x-factor.

I think Strictly needs a shake-up - some things about it are starting to feel a bit stale.

I definitely think they should bring in some new dances like
the 1s on the American version - as some1's already said the charleston + the lambada were good this week on Dancing With The Stars and even the country dancing would make a change. Some of the dances on ours are a bit samey - not sure we really need a waltz AND a viennese waltz.

They seem 2B allowed to go outside the traditional moves a little bit more with the choreography on DWTS as well and I think that’s a good thing.

Maybe for the results show as well we could get some different types of dance acts on rather than just having the professionals doing more ballroom. Now the results are straight after the show its just too much ballroom. Maybe could try some more modern street dancing - get some break dancers in or something completely different.

Also this is the first year I've started agreeing with the people who think Bruce should go. I used 2 kind of enjoy his bad jokes but he's making me cringe nowadays.

I agree; I think this year they have shown arrogance and disregard to viewers' preferences and the demographic. There's no way they should have got rid of Arlene; big mistake. The show lost all credibility with the introduction of Alesha over Arlene. What didn't help IMHO was the arrogance of the producers over the backlash; clearly viewers loved Arlene and although didn't dislike Alesha they took offence at her replacing a much loved panelist. Stirctly and X Factor are two different beasts; I love them both, but there's no need to try to trend up Strictly by using Alesha; it doesn't appeal to the demographic. People are sick of celebrities being thrust on them that the producers insist people like. Having said that I agree with the above posters that Alesha would have strengths as a co-host and would be much better suited in this position, but BRING BACK ARLENE NOW!

How short memories are.

The forums were full of posts criticising Arlene last year. She was far from "much loved".

As Joni Mitchell says: you don't know what you've got till it's gone

OK fair comment, but other judges get criticised too. Compared to Alesha though she is far more popular

The OP has overstated X Factor's ratings by almost 50%.

Notwithstanding that, it is worth noting that X Factor's extra couple of million viewers have not been at the expense of Strictly. SCD is only very marginally down (about 200,000 on average) on last year's viewing figures. There is some decent analysis in The Ratings Thread.

As to why X Factor has suddenly gained all these extra viewers, I imagine it's a combination of many factors: amongst others, for example:
[LIST][*]The BGT legacy;[*]An increasingly vacuous and starstruck youth who are attracted to the idea of instant fame and celebrity (albeit vicariously);[*]The SCD vs. XF clash is denting SCD's average;[*]More youngsters staying in on Saturday nights due to the recession.[/LIST]
Who knows? It does seem to me, though, that the foundations upon which X Factor's success is built aren't especially solid, whereas Strictly's are more sustainable.

Personally, I wouldn't worry. SCD is still delivering the goods for the BBC and it is still one of its biggest hitters.


EDIT: Worth noting, also, that of the 200,000 (on average) fewer BBC1 viewers this year, about 150,000 of those are watching on the BBC HD channel. So overall, in fact, the viewing figures are virtually unchanged.

I beg to differ!

Arlene's popularity could not have been any lower last year. She behaved stupidly and badly in Sergeant-gate, colluded with the other judges and the producers to off the public's favourites whilst promoting her own, and lied about her chosen ones in a (pointless) bid to up their popularity.

Her critiques were becoming trite and predictable and she is well rid of.

Arlene is more popular now because she's been made into a martyr. A martyr with two primetime Saturday night shows next year, but a martyr all the same.

Before that, she was never, ever popular. Ever. With the increase in popularity of Craig as Simon Cowell "tells it like it is" substitute over recent series, she was almost certainly the least popular judge with the public by the time she left, by some distance.

I much prefer Strictly to X Factor. I watched the audition stages on this year's X Factor, partly because they're sometimes amusing and partly because I'm a big Cheryl Cole fan, but I haven't watched X Factor since Strictly started.

X Factor's peak was 14.6m. that means that many people were watchng for about five minutes, probably when Cheryl was smiming.
the rest of the time it hovered around 12m. which means 12m people would rather watch something livelier than Antiques Roadshow on a Sunday night. hardly a surprise really.

as for Saturday night, if Strictly had a break before the results - maybe with Michael Mcintyre's comedy thing- I'm sure it's average rating would be up around 9m again.

In my opinion, the press have built up X Factor (and Britain's Got Talent) to be majorly important competitions and a large section of the public have been gullible enough to believe it all . The press coverage is ridiculous. It's got to a point where people are now geniunely taking these two shows deadly seriously, I don't know about you, but this worries me.

Strictly on the other hand has always been more grounded and has never taken itself too seriously, this is one of the things that has attracted me to the show.

It's a shame the strictly has fallen behind the X Factor, but this series is just not working, this is obviously another factor in the slightly lower ratings this year.

Until the public get over their obsessive fixation with the Simon Cowell shows, I doubt that Strictly will be able to match the heights of success.

The ratings for SCD are really no worse than last season so it's a little odd that people keep making a such a fuss about this.

Also odd how people blame the BBC for the clash, it's in the slot it's pretty much always had it's just a longer show so it clashes for a little more than it did last year. If anything it's itv who have Gone after a clash by moving the results to Sunday (which I am guessing along with the other changes this season it's simon testing changes for X-Factor US which would need to differ a little more to idol as fox will be airing both). BBC really could have gone all out and kept Sunday results if they were after a rating war.

As for Arlene being the cause, people hated her fawning over a celeb she fancied and her cliched and bitter comments to those she hated. It's better without this input. Also she deserved to not be renewed as she spent all last year saying she wouldn't be back as she had a musical to produce in the states at the same time. You can't spend a year doing that and then expect to not only have your contract renewed but also receive a massive pY increase

That's true to an extent, but an average ratings gap of around 3 million is more than last years which was about 1 million.

Also, the gap between the peaks is huge. Strictly's highest peak has been 9.3 million, X Factors has been 14.8 million.

The public have no taste

It's all down to Cheryl Cole. Alesha is not SCD's Cole.

From an expat perspective and it is our personal views, we are not interested if X-Factor has more viewers than SCD, but what we are interested to watch, is good dancing and this year, we feel the standard has been mediocre.

Having grown up with Brucie over the last 50 years or so; this year is one year too much. The show is far too long, where to the point it has become pedestrianised and sorry to say, boring. We are fed up with the judging and the 3 male judges. The judges are NOT the stars, but a small cog in the whole programme.

We feel it is not too late to make changes or a serious revamp. Sorry to say, but Brucie does need replacing, but by whom?

Another poster mentioned earlier about new dances as in the Lambada and Charleston; all we can say is YES. No need to scrap any dances, but just add these two. Do it now, not next year.

Bring a fifth judge in now, not towards the end. We know many people are not enamoured with her, but we feel Karen Hardy would do a good job.

Our main criticism is with the BBC SCD senior production team - if they had listened to their viewers, taken on board what was being said, had some decent celebrities and not so many couples, etc, etc, we believe this years SCD could have been a great series.

This year SCD has lost its sparkle.

Where do I start?

Stupid scheduling decision to force people to choose between SCD & XF.

Show now too long. There should be less of the training sequences, especially family 'surprise visits', etc - these may have fitted into the two-show format, but someone didn't think through the change to one show, to make it shorter and punchier.

The music is rubbish.

Guest performers who are well past their sell-by date (who thought Andy Williams was a good idea?)

Bruce - doddery you are.

Tess - yes, good idea above, replace with Alesha.

I still watch it, but it could have been so much better.

I said it then and I'll say it again now...

The appalling treatment of John Seargent last year badly damaged the brand.

I pretty much agree with all of this, and yet I am still strangely missing Arlene. Much as I've wanted Alesha to be given the time to establish herself, I think a big aspect of what may be perceived as a 'flat' atmosphere on the show this year is down to the change on the panel. I'm not necessarily saying that a change wasn't due, but there's zero chemistry on the judges' panel this year. I can't help feeling that Craig, Len and Bruno are very subdued this year, and that must have something to do with Arlene being axed and replaced by Alesha. Combine that with a somewhat lacklustre line-up of celebs and you have a show that to me seems to lack its usual sparkle at this stage.

I still prefer Strictly by a country-mile to the noisy and over-hyped X Factor, however. The BBC needs to be less concerned with winning a ratings war and concentrate more on restoring the formula that made SCD such a gem in previous years.

I think Alesha has more class than Cheryl but maybe that's just me. I find Cheryl to be unprofessional at times like last time on the xtrafactor, Simon was talking and she was like ''just shut up''. Hmmmm

It was ridiculous to put them head to head - total mistake one the BBC's part.

Completely agree but the media has billed Cheryl as "a national treasure and people's sweetheart" and unfortunately the majority of the country thinks that and therefore watches the X Factor. It can't be helped.

The show is too long and there were too many contestants.

Whilst I agree SCD has somewhat lost its sparkle I don't think adding new dances will help. For one thing adding new dances without jettisoning some already established would make the show even longer than it is now and its length is part of the problem. The American version is called 'dancing' with the stars for a reason as it is more losely based on ballroom, SCD is meant to be more along the lines of a proper ballroom competition and that was its charm, personally I don't really think they should change that.

I agree with the poster who said Bruce has gone on too long now and also think it is time he went, along with Tess. Alesha I agree would be lovely in that role, she can encourage the contestants to her hearts content and we can have a professional judge (someone like Karen Hardy) to give relevant opinions and pointers on the actual dances. The other judges I have no problem with.

Less celebrities but perhaps a higher percentage of people the majority will have heard of would be nice.

Having flicked over to the X factor last week it certainly has a much bigger, glossier feel about it, SCD looks like a parochial dance in the church hall by comparison, but again that was probably part of its charm. The singing, I thought was surprisingly bad on the whole. As for the guests, well X factors might rate higher but the two so far have appeared to be on some sort of substance (yes I know Andy Williams looks like he has already been on the embalming fluid pre mortem, but he's ancient so is allowed to be in the process of mummification), What is Whitney's excuse!

Overrall, I think they should stop trying to tinker with SCD and make it something it is not, bring in a younger, quick witted presenter, ditch AD as a judge and shunt her into presenting, less celebrities and fingers crossed.

As an aside question, as I always thought Britain was supposed to be the world mecca of ballroom dancing then why could they not find suitable home grown talent amongst the new professionals. Nothing against the new ones but it just seems strange, unless we are no longer a dominant force in ballroom dancing?