Well that's your opinion... my opinion is all rounders are better than a one trick pony who is in the wrong profession.

I would have thought the minimum requirement of being in the singing 'profession' is that you are able to sing?

And he can... you seem to be struggling with the difference between opinion and fact. And for someone who started an unbiased thread about the best man winning, you clearly didn't really mean it...

None of your posts have been constructive, they've just been digs.

Rubbish. You are starting to sound like a broken record. Saying the same thing on every thread irrespective of the subject matter. Slag Joe off and big up Olly. The public will speak tonight and I hope you are a gracious loser (unlike Olly).

Actually I haven't 'slagged' Joe off, I've just not agreed with your opinion. If you read them properly you'd see I merely stated that Joe is more for the stage than an album. That is what's called "constuctive critisism".

Making pointless jabs like Olly being stuck working for Simon at Sysco isn't constructive... neither is repeating about Olly not being able to sing or dance, as if it's fact.

So saying all I've done is slag one of them off, is hypocritical.

Olly is my fevourite because I think he's a born entertainer. His voice isn't as technically good as Joe's but I do think that X-Factor's weakness can sometimes be to think it is a vocal olympics - applause for particularly long high notes - that isn't what music's about. This is what leads to the dreary power baladry that we have to endure form X factor winners year after year.

I thought that last night Olly showed he was the one who offered something different.
His voice is good enough for recording (the charts are not filled with technically brilliant vocalists but with decent singers with charisma) and I loved the way he out Robbied Robbie with his "Why's that Robbie?" in the middle of Angels - a proper LOL moment for us.

This is very reminiscent of Will & Gareth and my thoughts about the winner are on similar lines. Olly has got far enough in the competition to have a recording career on the back of it, but second place will let him develop his own style sooner, and save him from having to start with that dreary Mylie Cyrus stupidness. or whatever it is they've got lined up. I love Will but actually thought that winning held him back for a couple of years and would've done more for Gareth.

Joe would be a very worthy winner, a really nice lad with a great voice, and he'll suit what they have lined up for X-factor winners much better.

See that's constructive

My opinion exactly, Joe is very good for what Simon has layed out for this weekend. But Olly is an entertainer/performer, and for me that wins hands down. Nowadays, a nice voice isn't enough.

"Here's my problem with Joe... fab voice, niche market. And no personality either sadly."

"Joe just stands there like he's messed himself."

All very constructive....

Well he does! Go back and watch how he was around George compared to Olly around Robbie.

And he does suit a niche market, that is constructive.

I think Joe is a really good singer and a really nice guy. Its just that I prefer Olly as he is such an entertainer and these days they are pretty thin on the ground in today's music and that is excluding Williams who I think is great!!!

Exactly, me too.
I love Joe, but I love Olly just that little bit more
And who cares if he doesn't have the strongest voice around, half of the singers who are high in the charts aren't the most amazing singers! But they can perform, and given a good song, he could be really great.

Well the one trick joe has is that he can actually sing and in tune which I thought was the most important thing in a singing competition.

I hate the way people are suggesting that IF Joe wins Olly will be a bad loser.. What evidence do you have to get you to that conclusion?

I think one of the problems with Joe is that they have dressed him about 20 years older than they needed to! Makes him look even younger and awkward on the stage IMO.