Happy birthday!

The truth is out there.

And it definitely involves Teletext at the heart of it.

Happy birthday, Lainey!!!!

(Adopts hunchback position)

Pour one for me (a drink, obviously, not a hanky!)

Hippo bathday Lainey :yawn:

I'll raise a glass of my elder and cinnamon vodka to you (and loverly it is too).

Hope you've had a good one, not disturbed in any way by bells a jingling and hankies a waving.

And to all my fellow co-conspirators Seasons Greeting.

Mic

Oh, blow, botherations, I'm a naughty person as, to quote, 'You have included 12 images in your message. You are limited to using 10 images so please go back and correct the problem and then continue again.

Images include use of smilies, the vB code [img] tag and HTML <img> tags. The use of these is all subject to them being enabled by the administrator.'

So I'll be good and remove 2.
Bah humbug.

Hmmmm ....*places beautifully manicured finger to delicately pursed rosebud lips, stares upwards in a thoughtful manner* you could be onto something here. Handicaps, like in the racing, only relating to criminal records.

Speeding - minus 3
Shoplifting - minus 5
Drunk & disorderly - minus 5
TWOC - minus 8
ABH - minus 10
Expenses fiddle [MP] [not that we've had any of them on but you need to look ahead] - minus 2000

Hmmmm, could we also have a judges rule as well, something like:

holding up a seven and saying severrnn in a bloody anoying manner - banned for a week
Telling your fellow judge to shut up - banned for 2 weeks or sent back to the USA and made to stay there for a month
waving your 10 around wildly - made to sing with Brucie weekly (but on mute for the public - please)
For Brucie - any use of old show catchphrases - replaced by Tess
For Brucie - interupting a judge - red carded automatically and replaced by Tess (her replacement being Claudia)
for Tess - stupid dresses - replaced by Claudia

Any others?

It's been ages since I started this thread and since my last post which was ages and ages ago - I've not bothered to come back and I won't bother to come back after this either....

But I just wanted to mention that I was correct in one of my posts when I said that if indeed it is true that Chris Hollins was favored by the BBC - there actually are benefits that could have fuelled that decision.

We have proof of this now.... - i.e. he now hosts more shows than just sports on their breakfast show.

So the thinking could have been -> let a BBC person be given lots of extra exposure on It Takes Two during weekdays to hopefully help him win - and now that he has won - he has lots of followers who obviously voted for him to win and who hopefully will watch all new shows he now hosts, thus hopefully increasing BBC ratings for shows which may have previously only had low/average ratings...

NOW - this is a discussion forum - but loads of infantile people just seemed to jump in here to hurl abuse and behave laughably childishly - because they forget we're here to discuss and air our views and are entitled to our opinions - which Should be given without needless rudeness.

That is all I've always done and what I'm doing now - i.e. just giving my opinion.... - BUT I won't be back because I dislike all the rude arguing and much prefer civilised behaviour.

I've said what I wanted to say - i.e. there might be some truth that the BBC was furthering their own course/their own agenda.

Hope people will be civilised in whatever comes after in this thread - but I won't bother to come back here to find out - there are far more interesting and civilised, fun threads here at DigitalSpy which I prefer visiting. So there.

I rest my case.

Z T

I know that that is your opinion, but it is ridiculous! Chris is by no means the only SCD winner to benefit from his success - look at all Alesha's done since she won! This all arises because he happens to be a TV presenter and happens to work for the BBC - coincidences which were always possibly going to occur from the minute he signed up to the show. Not all the winners have been BBC stars, therefore any allegation that the BBC rig the show in any way is utterly laughable.

Chris and Ola were on ITT so much (and it wasn't actually more than once a week, which is standard, especially in later weeks, so I fail to see that argument either) because watching their training and interviews was actually interesting, and Ricky was never around to do press - he and Natalie ahd to train until midnight or later just to fit in the same amount of training as Chris and Ola managed to get done during the day! It's the nature of his job that made it harder for him to find daylight hours to train in than Chris, who is used to working in the morning then having free time during the day, which is why Ricky never had the time to appear on ITT. Would you rather he had done that than trained at all?

It's an undeniable fact that Chris and Ola were never in the dance-off due to public support - more public support than could possibly ever have been garnered from the minority of SCD Saturday viewers who watch ITT (not everyone is a big fan of the show, you know, some just watch it at the weekend.......). Nothing sinister about that, no conspiracy, nothing to do with the BBC (indeed, if it was, why didn't Chris and Ola dance near the end of the show more often - everyone knows the benefits of being last to perform and staying fresh in people's minds....Chris and Ola were first several times and often in the first half of the show....)

Some people obviously need to find a conspiracy in everything

Dead Horse -> Flogging of

There were similar petulant outbursts last year when the pairing with undeniably the greatest personality won.
As such, the personality was going to gain them work whether they won or not plus there had to be some reward for the months of hard work over and above a glitterball trophy, surely?

It's a great shame that work commitments prevented more exposure on ITT for Ricky and Natalie and they had to rely on dancing alone, for that was never going to endear them to the public in general.
The slightly more coverage in the last week was too little too late.

I don't believe that the BBC thought for one minute that Chris was going to win in the early stages, it was his appeal both singly and in his relationship with Ola which brought it about - the very attributes necessary for a successful presenter.

Chris alway did host more than BBC Breakfast sport anyway and why the heck would the BBC need to promote him so they could give him more work they could just give him more work anyway and there are far too many presenters for the work already so its all completely ridiculous......Chris and Ola won because the public took them both to their hearts and thats the plain truth.

Not sure what the point is, posting a long detailed comment, then saying that you won't bother coming back to see the reaction.

(but they will...)

Please, nobody else reply on this ridiculous thread.

Awww why not? Where's Cally'smum?

*Morris-dances backwards out of thread*