What I do not understand about the judging of Dancing on Ice is that Mikey obviously had a very difficult routine this week but it was not shown in the marks. It seems, if you do a difficult routine it is not appreciated by the judges and marked accordingly. So why bother? Lots of showbusiness smiles and lifts and you are away with the fairies!!

Hayley was significantly better than Daniella, even with a fall, what else could the judges do but mark Daniella lower?

Hayley's fall was 50/50 and if you look at replays of it (ive seen it a few times) she leans too much into the lift meaning Dan has no option but to fall as he cant steady himself.

Suzanne was on This Morning yesterday talking DOI and they showed a clip of her doing her bolero in the final 2 years ago and i must say that she is a far superior skater to Hayley. Yes i know she is showing a final routine and Hayley hasnt reached that far but i went onto Youtube and looked up Suzanne's week 5 routine to "Are you gonna be my girl" and in my mind she skates more fluidly, gets in and out of lifts easier, and solo skates. I dont like Suzanne and i do like Hayley but comparing the 2 i can clearly see that Hayley is being overmarked. If the judges continue the way they are then it may backfire on her as she is clearly the judges fave. The public hate being manipulated into choosing who to vote for and therefore Hayley may have problems later on if she continues to top the leaderboard.

When Suzanne was on This Morning she asked Jason why they voted someone who is doing more complex routines like Mikey level with Emily and Heather who arent doing anything complex. He refused to comment on this and got around it by saying Mikey had a bad week. He didnt answer the question showing they acknowledge the injustice of the scoring sytem. Chris Fountain also said on his twitter that there was something weird going on in the scores this week and Kyran Brackan said that Hilary should have been in the skate off v Heather and that Daniella should have topped due to Hayley's fall. I agree with him and trust him due to him having been there and done that.

I feel for Brianne, Matthew, Molly and Alexandra who have had to come into this porogramme not knowing anyone. They have had a disadvantage but seeing Hayley get Dan is so wrong. They have a trust in each other that the other couples spent the first few weeks building up. In my mind this is very unfair and if a celebrity was signing up for this programme next year do you really think if they were dating a skater they would be able to skate with their partner? No. David Seaman, although having already done it wouldnt be allowed to skate with Frankie so why should long time friends Dan and Hayley be allowed to. It is an injustice and the other couples must feel upset by it although they will never say. For her to have known him most of her life she hasnt got much chemistry with Dan. In my opinion Mikey and Mel, Kieron and Brianne and even Dr Hilary and Alexandra have more chemistry. Daniella should have had Dan (i know their names are the same but still) and Hayley have Matthew. Also to me Hayley hasnt improved since week 1 and in 4 skates she is still at the same level whereas Kieron, Mikey and Daniella have improved week on week.

I know this may sound like i dont like Hayley. I do but this week turned me off her slightly as she gets overmarked for falling. That's not her fault i know but i cant see it changing anytime soon.

Her judges favouritism will probably turn people of like someone else said before me as she is clearly judges pet who can do no wrong. Someone else said that Mikey was massively marked down for his few stumbles but she doesnt get marked down for her fall. That is something that if it continues will sicken me to this programme.

I am a Kieron, Gary, Mikey and Daniella fan so this isnt me just being picky about Mikey being undermarked.

Soz for my 2nd long post on here.

She didn't get "overmarked for falling". She had marked DEDUCTED for falling.

The difference is, her total was significantly higher than Daniella's before the marks were deducted.

Let's say they took 3 marks off for a fall - 3 marks is a LOT.

24-3=?

Also, yes, Suzanne was better. Suzanne's week 5 score was also 4.5 marks higher.

Her routine, fall aside was just as good as Daniella's and therefore they should be equal marked; then when you factor in daniellas's stumble and Hayley's fall they should both be penalised, Daniella say a 0.5 mark for her mistake, but Hayley more as her mistake is bigger, say a 1.0, ergo she is lower on the board than Daniella.

She was overmarked because she wasn't overly punished compared to wobbling Mikey and stumbling Daniella (not commenting on the overall weakness of Mikey's routine compared to his usual level just the wobble here).

Daniella and Hayley should be higher than Mikey because they were better, and they were, but under the rules with which Mikey was given such a bad mark, Hayley should also have suffered for her mistake and only received a mark for her performance which wasn't as good as her previous, or as good as the end mark and placing dictated.

I disagree, Hayley's routine was better than Danielle's and why she was ahead of her after the mistakes.

It does make you think that maybe she looks what marks they are giving and adjusts her marks accordingly.

The fall was not 50/50. Dan said quite clearly that he caught a sequin or something similar on the ice - I too have watched it again and it doesn't appear to be Hayley's fault.

In series 3 the first weeks were not separated into girls and boys. Using that criteria Suzanne's week 5 is equivalent to Hayley's week 4.
I was impressed with Suzanne and voted for her but I do recall those who supported others maintaining that she was judges pet. The judges cannot manipulate anyone who doesn't want to be manipulated - it's a free vote. Those who don't think Hayley the best will vote for their favourite.

[LIST][*]I prefer to put my trust in the hands of international skaters.[*]Hayley didn't fall she was dropped.[/LIST]




They were all new once and obviously some partnerships work better than others.

Don't you think these comments are somewhat contradictory.

[LIST][*]I'd hate to see your appraisal if you didn't like her.[*]See my others comments re; the fall.[/LIST]
That's the third time you've mentioned the fall in a single post.

You also mentioned it here:
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/s...25&postcount=3
and here
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/s...4&postcount=30

I think we get your drift.

As for your assertion that she wasn't penalised - watch your recording again - both Karen and Robin stated that they deducted half a mark for the fall and I've no doubt the other three would have made the same comments had they been asked.

Daniella was ginning like a Cheshire cat, wasn't she?! If she were on Strictly they'd certainly have something to say about that. But I couldn't hold it against her, she just looked like she was enjoying herself so much!

But many of us, including the judges, do not agree that Daniella's routine was close to as good as Hayley. In fact, I would go as far as to say that I thought Daniella was overmarked.

Also, I think Hayley lost about 3.0 AT LEAST. She lost 1.5 from Robin and Karen alone, so she must have lost AT LEAST another 1.5 from Jason, Emma and Nicky.

I wouldn't necessarily refer to Dan's explanation as evidence for Hayley's blamelessness; pro partners are often protective - particularly if he does think he should shoulder at least some of the blame . I have no strong views either way, I'm just being a pedant. She ended up on the ice unexpectedly, she was penalised by the judges - fair enough.

And talking of being a pedant , The non-split in series 3 actually means that Suzanne's week 5 performance is comparable to Hayley's week 6 one (which clearly hasn't happened yet.) Suzanne had done 5 routines by week 5 of series 3, Hayley's only done 4 so far. Comparing their fourth routine scores, Hayley gets 21.0 and Suzanne 22.0; Suzanne's score is her best so far whereas Hayley has previously hit 23.0. Again, personal opinion will mean views are different but the scores actually show them to be very similar so far with two higher scores each but with Hayley having a higher maximum.

Sorry for seeming to be picky; I can't help it. I see apparent innacuracies in what someone says and I feel compelled to point them out in detail. My mother says I should have been a barrister.

Forums are for debate - and I have no problem with opinions that differ from mine, when they're made with civility and good humour.

Bring back Ray to show them how its done

Doubt if we'll ever get another Ray.

Emily was definately overmarked. I know she is pretty and very barbie like, but a hopeless skater. As much as I disliked Heather she should not have been in the SO with Kieron. It should have been Dr Hilary and Emily with Emily to go. Sorry folks, nothing against such a pretty girl, just dont think she has improved at all. Someone even suggested Sharron should have been in the SO. No way, again I am not a great fan of her, but she has improved the most.

Actually I think Emily had improved this week. She's still not particularly good and if she doesn't suddenly discover some latent ability in the next couple of weeks then I think she should be on her way but I don't think Sunday was her time.

On the other hand, far from improving, I think Heather had gone backwards over the past couple of weeks. If you look at the skate off from the point of view of improvement, I think Heather's inclusion was fair, if you look at it from the point of view of ability, Dr Hilary should have been there (I agree that Kieron shouldn't).

Emily has had a couple of weeks in which, imo, she should have been in the skate off but I don't think last week was one of them and I don't think, particularly, that she was overmarked. I do think that Mikey should have been scored a tad more highly though.

Do you actually watch the show?

Sorry to be picky, but last weekend was Hayley's 'week 4' routine, as she didn't perform in week 2.

This is Suzanne and Matt's week 4 performance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K4qLUkTRNA

EDIT: Still agree that Suzanne's the more competent skater of them both though!

Ignazio-I know they were all new once but everyone was including the judges and presenters but this year the 4 newbies come in and dont know the programme as well as the other pros. They have to understand the programme, bond with their partners. Yes i know that Fred and Mel etc have had to bond also but they know the programme. Hayley and Dan have known each other 14 years and therefore it IS an ADVANTAGE over the other couples.

Dan takes the blame for the fall to protect Hayley as someone else said on hear. On SCD the professional tends to cover up the celeb mistake by taking the blame so therefore on DOI it shouldnt be any different. Their fall was jointly both their faults but the judges only duducted 0.5 as Karen admitted afterwards. Therefore all the judges deducted 0.5 from her. But Mikey was deducted a lot more as Robin and Emma clearly marked down from last week, especially Emma who took a total of 2.0 of Mikey for a few minor stumbles. Therefore this is judges favouritism and isnt fair on the other competitors. If it continues i dont know why the rest show up as it clearly a one horse race.

Soz Ignazio for mentioning the fall 3 times. I thought as i this post has talked about it all week it was fine to mention it. Clearly not by your law. Everyone else has talked about it so why is not ok for me to give my opinion? Why am i not allowed to mention it as often as i want? Clearly your opinion doesnt agree with mine but surely im allowed it. No?

I agree about Suzanne's week 4 routine being better. I forgot that they had only skated 4 times and was comparing wrongly but Suzanne is a miles better as a skater.

But Suzanne isn't in it this year, and surely as this isn't a proper ice dancing competition, the marks are given according to this year's standard. What I mean to say, Ray's 24 last year would probably be at a higher standard as other people's 24 this year. I think it's always difficult to compare the standard of this year with previous years.

Looking at the recording again, it does look as if Dan is losing it first, and then Hayley overbalances. Something was obviously on the ice, I did get the impression that was confirmed by Chris and Jayne (but I might be making this up).

I should say that I really like Mikey as well, but apart from his stumble, his performance was not as good this week (although i still think compared to others he was undermarked, and don't get me started on Robin's weird marking of Mikey and Emily).

The advantage of knowing each other, well maybe it is an advantage, but it could also be a disadvantage. Sometimes it is better to work with someone that you don't know so well, than working with someone you know very well. Looking at Hayley's personality, she probably would get on with a lot of the other skaters (and the same applies to Dan).

What I'm still not understanding ist, why it is not possible to like a variety of different people (e.g. Hayley as well as Daniella as well as Mikey etc.).

Sorry not all of this post was directed or in response to shortiefluff .

So why is this year any different to other years?

That is not the point under discussion - Fred and Mel are pro and pro, Hayley and Dan celeb and pro. Their relationships are entirely different.

And yet you say the following - so their long term friendship clearly is not an advantage.


That is an assumption - it cannot be regarded as fact. I have rewatched it several times - and it's clear to me that Dan does overbalance first.

Others will see it differently - we must agree to disagree on this one.

I honestly don't know what you mean by this - Karen and Robin were asked for their comments and said they penalised the fall. I think therefore it's fair to assume the others applied similar penalty.

Where on earth are you getting these figures from?
Emma wasn't asked for her comments. It's clear she made a deduction, but what leads you to believe it was 2 points? The routine was marked lower than last week because it wasn't as good nor as clean (Robin mentioned the mohawks as well as the stumble.) Having said that I think it did deserve a couple of extra half marks, so on the basis I'd say he was slightly undermarked.

Therefore this not judges favouritism - there are 3 very experienced judges who mark on what they see.

But of course this is all subjective - if one agrees with their verdict, their marks will b considered fair - otherwise claims of under/overmarking will be made.

It certainly isn't within my remit to say who and post what - nor would I take it upon myself to do so. You are entitled to voice your opinion - but you kept emphasising that you like Hayley, before repeating yourself yet again. I simply wondered why this was necessary.

I didn't say Suzanne's week 4 performance was better than Hayley's - in fact I didn't even compare them.

I said that due the girl/boy split in the first 2 weeks, on week 5 (i.e. last Sunday) Hayley performed her 4th skate, whereas on week 5 Suzanne performed her 5th; so you weren't comparing like with like.

Emma wasn't asked for her opinion but as her mark was 2.0 lower she clearly deduted 2 pts from her previous week, and while some of it was due to a weaker performance, under the rules she deducted 0.5 for his stumble and 1.5 for the performance, which i have no problem with, but Hayley's fall was a far worse mistake and therefore should have been punished as such, if a wobbles a 0.5, a fall is more, regardless of the fact that it was 1 mistake. Yes i know im backtracking on my desire for a 0.5 punishment for each mistake but a fall does not equate to a wobble. Hayley was marked down for her mistake, Mikey was moreso, that is the only basis of my musings.

And as I have said in numerous posts, I like many of the contenders in the field, Hayley is 1 of those but she has to be marked accordingly and by the same rules as the others in the comp. Mikey was undermarked, Hayley should have been compared to him, yes she was better than him, but her mistake means by not as big a margin as the end result indicated and Daniella was virtually flawless yet was below her despite being her equal on the night.

This is a subjective competition for the viewer, but Hayley was not the best on the night and shouldn't have been given the best mark, and Mikey's mark so low. I did not write about Hayley to turn it into a Hayley vs. Mikey thing, just to illustrarte the voting disparity of last week. Nor did I focus exclusively just on her, and I dislike the fact that my posts are being disected and other aspects ignored to make another point that isn't relevant to my original 1, that certain contestants were overmarked, otherse'under.

And as its a subjective programme, Im entitled to my opinion and to express my thoughts, which is that Hayley is this years teachers pet. My belief for this is based on her very high score for a routine which wasn't better than the previous week and a fall, whereas her nearest competitor was clearly penalised beyond the wobble and bad performance. The judges need a bit more parity with the vote.

I love a good debate, but its not a debate when some tell me my opinions wrong rather than disagree.

It is now a little over 48hrs to the next dances, so surely this subject is now moot?

Robin said he took 1 away from Hayley for her fall and maybe Emma took 1 away too. 1 is more than 0.5. There is no reason Hayley should have the 1.5 taken away for poor performance because her performance was fantastic.


Nobody was virtually flawless, but Daniella most certainly was not. I would've put her closer to Mikey than Hayley.

I think they have the best relationship of all the couples!

I may have got this wrong but I thought they met as children then lost touch for years and only met again for DOI. I don't think they've been best buds for years.

I think they have the best relationship of all the couples
I may have got this wrong but I thought they met as children then lost touch for years and only met again for DOI. I don't think they've been best buds for years

They have been best buds for years. They never lost touch. They said so on This Morning a few weeks ago.

To the person who said Daniella wasnt flawless. I think she was virtually flawless and was better than Hayley who never looked comfortable during her performance before or after her fall. I think she deserved her marks and was better than Mikey who had a bad week.