It's just people were saying no other judge would say that and now Craig gave Alesha a public support.

Maybe so, but all the judges have been offensive from time to time. Craig RH did his Kangaroo comment, Bruno laughed most unpleasantly when asked whether to save Joe or Zoe and Len did his rant at the D-O when Ali and Zoe were in it.

I wasn't supporting Alesha in my previous post - I was a big fan of the way Arlene Alliterated Appallingly and how she could barely control herself when confronted with Austin's bare, waxed, chest in his Paso - and would have her back in a shot if I was in charge.

My point was to emphasise that ultimately, the judges are paid by the BBC, and above all else - even good dancing and good manners - the BBC wants publicity.

Above all else squirming Strictly execs want to save face.

Alliterating Arlene has been confirmed as a Tour judge in 2 months, and reported to be considering an invite to return in SCD8. How to U-turn discreetly without being seen by 8 million? £500K prize for the best answer on a postcard?

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/vie...-on-Strictly-/

He supported her publicly because she's a judge too - he wouldn't have had a choice.

Nonsense. Craig RH disagreed vehemently with Len's comments so many times in ITT. He also disagreed with Bruno and Arlene sometimes with his usual deadpan manner. Of course if Craig disagreed with Alesha professionally, he would say so publicly in ITT, and why not?

Alesha was in the dance off once (the week Letitia went out.) Letitia pulled out all the stops in that dance off but no one was surprised when the judges voted unanimously to keep Alesha in. One would think that shock might teach a little humility - seems not.

Strangely there has been much discussion of whether Ali's VW was as good as Alesha's - and the week Alesha found herself bottom 2 she danced the VW and the Paso!

All this is true - but Alesha made it about herself. "I can't believe Zoe has gone and I had to endure THAT."

She was the only judge to vote to save Zoe and her attitude on Saturday was a clear reflection that she's still smarting at the power of the public vote.

I found this article in the Evening News quite telling:
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/opinio...he_seaside.php

The difference being as stated that we aren't paid for our opinion although point taken I was overly rude about Christine last year for which I will admit to being in the wrong and some of the things people have said on here about some people which were wrong. I don't know what Alesha is like as a person I liked her as a contestant and she seemed to be a nice person. However I think she was a bad idea as a judge at the time and I think that her comments vary between the inane and the bitchy - last night fell into the bitchy category.

Postings in this forum are subject to the UK law of libel, and I believe that on demand from an aggrieved party pursuing legal redress DS will reveal the name of the poster. That has happened to other forums.

There is a difference of scale. A Strictly judge would speak direct to 9 million viewers (as last Saturday) giving no chance of reply. A DS forum post will be lucky to be read by 1000, with peak Strictly Forum readership 3000? The biggest DS poll (hinting forum headcount) that I have ever seen numbered 1,100 but there are a lot of occasional lurking readers who do not participate actively.

Well she's not there to provide comments on behalf of the rest of the judges is she? All judges comments and marks are their own.

If she'd used the plural, she'd have been panned for either:

i) speaking on behalf of the others without knowing what they really thought;

ii) vote-rigging/collusion, as she could only truly be speaking on behalf the others if they'd decided their comments in advance of the dance;

iii) being pretentious, for impersonating Queen Victoria; or

iv) a further grammatical faux pas

The reference she made to Zoe was probably out of order, as it smacks of impartiality, but given the blatantly biased scoring last year to get both of Lisa and Rachel into the final, impartiality is no reason for special criticism!

Other than that, her comment was no more offensive than the stuff that Craig RH and Bruno routinely come out with. What probably made it worse was that she said it so sincerely. CRH and Bruno give all their comments as if performing in pantomime, so they are going to appear less offensive than their words might actually imply on face value.

Anyway, bring back Arlene! Everyone will be happy then - except the people who don't like Arlene.

I think you mean "partiality".

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooo not Arlene.

She was awful.

You are quite correct.

My excuse is that I've been brainwashed - via watching SCD - into believing that the default/normal state for judges is to be "partial" that I've started to think that being impartial is somehow wrong!!

Good catch!!!!!

I do see where you're coming from (although I won't pretend to agree) But I think many of us felt "Come on - a 90 second endurance test isn't much to ask in return for for the hefty salary she's being paid."

I would be more than happy to see Arlene return - and no doubt I'd complain at some of her perving over Ramps and Fosters of the competition - but I could forgive that in return for constructive and well informed criticism.

I really hope you are just jesting, Ignazio. Do you really want to hear Arlene saying to the likes of Christine and Matt: You look like Madonna and you look like a bored Guy Ritchie?

Or do you consider "I just want raw sex!" to be well-informed?

If we were to replace Alesha as a judge (which I don't object to, not because I don't like Alesha, I just think there are better candidates out there), I would like Karen Hardy would be a much better choice, if the choreography corner segment she did in ITT is anything to go by.

But Karen won't, will she? At least not until or unless her dance teaching businesses hit tough times. The BBC can ask, but they can't beck and call.

Spot on.

I jest not - Some of her comments in the past have made me cringe; but I do think she knows what she's talking about and much of her advice e.g. ballet/acting classes and arm/leg extensions was valuable and paid off.

I've long been an advocate of Karen - so yes I could certainly live with that!

That artical was spot on
Erin did give Alesha thunderous look lol I spoted that to

Ignazio,

I think Alesha is in a definite "no win" situation, but having taken a tidy wedge to be a judge, she has to take criticism on the chin, just as Craig has to, as he, too, has taken a tidy wedge (albeit to spend 8 weeks in close proximity to Flavia, rather than sandwiched between Len and Bruno in the case of Alesha.)

The real issue is that somewhere along the line, the judges became performers. The show would indeed be dull if they just sat there and stuck up their paddles, or opined dryly on a few timing issues, but I think things have gone a bit too far. They can be critical and amusing, without being offensive.

"It was a dance that only a mother could love" to Joe C was pitched at the ideal level - it makes the point (the dance was cr*p) without getting too personal.

Len's "Spanish Waiter" comment to Austin last year would also have been good, if he hadn't said it so grumpily.

Craig's comments about Jo Wood's dances being good until she started moving were also (just about) OK.

I think Alesha's real problem is that she isn't funny. Craig RH is, and the other two can deliver a prepared line with good timing (although not always.) To make a performance impact, Alesha only really has the options of extreme marking or blunt/rude/offensive comments.

I think Karen would jump at the chance of being a judge.

When she opened her new studio the reason she was unsure about dancing again on SCD was because of time constraints. She's always made it clear she would still like to be part of the show and, as I say I think she's love to be a judge.

I'd love her to be a 5th permanent judge along side the existing four judges.

Duplicate post ops

To be fair if Erin has something to say, she answers back to all the judges, not just Alesha.

But it is a forum Ivan, so I'm sure you agree that those who found Alesha's cutting comments offensive have the right to post their opinion.

What surprises me is that she appears to have forgotten that the reason she was hired was to empathise and nurture the celebs: or so we were told.

Now she actually thinks she's qualified to judge.

Has the lady gone power crazy?

That's my opinion - and mine alone.

The same goes for Alesha.

She's a tough cookie.

Surely she doesn't need half of DS to defend her