OK, I give up. How much is she paying you?

She's become the Conservative Party's mascot. I think that lots of people tend to not associate what happens to them..cuts in services, less jobs, cuts in benefits, students no longer able to afford to go to uni etc - with doing anything about it nor questioning why 'Granny 'Widdicombe is on Strictly.There's massive, political naivety and passivity- whilst thinking that it's rebellious to vote for her because she's 'funny'. Very sad. It's a free country though so at least that's something.

Benefit in kind .

Don't mention the word 'benefit' around Ann. She'll have you down the jam butty mines before you can say, " But I'm a member".

Whilst Craig continues to vent his nasty spiteful comments, its not unresonable to suggest that Ann should be entitled to respond to them. If Ann had been voted to be speaker of the house she would quite rightly not have tolerated a loose cannon like Craig firing off nasty comments in all directions all the time.

One thing wrong with this statemant is that Ann is gettig re retaliation in before he speak

And I personally have not heard nasty spiteful comments from Craig rather he is speechless or tries to give construtive critism on how she can improve, but since Ann hasn't listened I doubt very much she will improve.

I started off disliking her for all sorts of reasons, now it is mostly because I cannot understand how you can enter a comeption that is judged and not lislten to the judges opinion of you, BIZZARE and really very rude

One of the main problems and the reason why Ann finds herself in this situation is that Craig has Never offered her any encouragement or said anything constructive to help her improve, he is blatently trying to fix the show with his incredibly low marks and nasty comments and clearly decided early on that he just wanted to say these things to get her out which is so unfair. Its also very important to remember as Brenden reminded us the other day, that this is 'an entertainment show' not a competition.

Craig is the master of the scathing comment.

While they may be appropriate to deliver to someone who is looking to make their career in the dance world that is fair enough - but SCD is an entertainment show where celebs sign up to learn to ballroom dance for the delecctation and delight of the viewers and the vast majority will never go near formal dancing again once the show ends, his pithier comments just aren't necessary.

Some of his "animal allegories" are just plain nasty (hence why Ann came up with the Dumbo response - to defuse it) and are said just to humilate the people in front of him because he can.

I agree that he quite often DOES make the most constructive comments, but the way he phrases them, especially to the poorer dancers, comes across as just plain nasty. Yes he is there to criticise and judge, but there is not need to humiliate the contestants while doing so. Ann KNOWS she is terrible (and Gavin, and Michelle, and Felicity know they aren't that good either) so she doesn't need to have that rammed home to her every time.

If Craig actually gave her constructive criticism and suggestions without the smart arse comments - Ann would probably happily listen - as it is - she has obviously heard enough of his comments to know that as far as she is concerned he DOESN'T have anything constructive to say to her! She does listen to the other three!

I think they must definitely spend some time thinking what they will say, judges and contestants alike, at least the judges.

Their comments tend to be original, funny, not often repetitive and must have had a bit of preparation.

Nothing worse that the XFctor endless loop of "You made it your own", "you gave it your all" " you owned it" blah blah etc etc.:yawn::yawn:

Much much better that they do a bit of preparation.
and Craig is just devine, darling

Ever heard the expression 'none so deaf as those who will not hear?'

You really are very selective when considering the comments of others.

Although Brendan acknowledges the entertainment factor of SCD he does not dismiss the competitive aspect. If he really thought it was of no importance he wouldn't bother teaching Michelle to dance, he'd go down the same route as Anton and just drag her around the floor.

You made similar misjudgement when you posted that Brendan wants Ann to win. It really would be nice Terry to have a reasoned discussion with you - free from blind adoration.

And she had a genuine sense of humour about herself and seemed to be genuinely enjoying her time on the show.

The thing I don't get about the whole 'It's such entertaining FUN!!!!!!!!!!!!' shtick being bandied about with regard to A&A is that I've yet to see Ann give a genuine smile or have a really good, eyes-watering belly laugh.

She's enjoying the attention, that much I have no doubt about, and seems to completely believe in this 'lovably acerbic maiden aunt' persona she has concocted, but I've never seen her actually look like she's having a riotously fun time out there.

She is a career politician and therefore more than able to come up with a reply quickly.

I do not agree with this post

I just find her repetitive and boring now, time to jog on me thinks :yawn:

20/30 posts a day seems beyond the call of duty Craig Kelly. did have this fanatic support last year .

Whoosh!

Rather a sweeping statement, there are plenty of other dancers rather than Ann that people tune in to watch.

One of the reasons for the higher ratings is probably the fact that it no longer clashes with X Factor, and if the younger viewers have been attracted this year (which was the stated aim of the Beeb), I don't suppose they'll be watching to see an older politician being dragged around the floor like a sack of potatoes.

You're the voice of reason: 100% agree with you

She has admitted that she tested the reference to Michael Howard ('something of the night about him') on colleagues before the delivery.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8435904.stm

Do you really think so called career politicians are as sharp witted as they appear. You can bet that those who don't have speech writers use the similar tactics to Ms. Widdecombe.

Come to think of it I can't think of any other memorable quip she's made.

Might he be giving low marks because the routines she "performs" are about as enjoyable as chowing down on cold sick?

He's always marked low (gave Scott a 4), it's not a vendetta against Ann.

I can only assume that you don't actually watch SCD very closely as I have heard Craig give Ann plenty of constructive feedback about her posture and the steps she is missing. On ITT this week he was extremely eloquent (and polite) about where Ann needs to improve. So before you make sweeping statements, it might be worth checking out the facts. It might also be worth bearing in mind that Ann has made it plain she has no interest in what Craig has to say in the first place and instead talks over him in a rude and arrogant way. She's also made it clear she intends to make next to no effort in the Latin dances, so what kind of feedback does she expect, exactly, from a judge with a background in choreography?

And how can Craig 'fix' the competition with his scoring of Ann when his marking is pretty consistent for all contestants (with the possible exception of Scott last week) and his role as the panto villain is there precisely to encourage people to vote for the underdog? If anything, Strictly is fixed in Ann's favour - not against her.

And it's competition within an entertainment format. How can it not be a competition if there is a championship title at the end of it?

That's exactly what I have the problem with with Craig's comments!

He is eloquent and polite and constructive on the spin off programme which gets a fraction of the audience of the main Saturday show.

On the main show he appears to be far more interested in getting the soundbite comments in and delivering his scathing put downs (and to me anyway) - with the sole intention of humiliating the celeb he is "critiquing".

The pro dancers don't find the scathing comments he dishes out on the main show helpful either. I've heard Flavia, Brendan and Anton say on ITT that if Craig was particularly nasty to a celeb - it takes the pro the best part of the first day's training to build up their confidence again to the level where they are in the zone to start taking the training in again.

Len usually gets it right when he does give critical comments in that he finishes up or starts off with the "You came out and you gave it your all!" or "overall that was a good effort!" or even "That was your best dance yet!" which leaves the critique on a positive note.

Craig makes a big point of saying that he's everyone's pal in the bar after the show, and he's pleasant on ITT or any of the other shows he goes on - so why does he feel the need to be so waspish on the main show?

Because that is what is paid to do. Being 'Mr Nasty' is his brief. It's what the audience expect of him and what the bosses want him to do. It's always been that way. He's the panto villain - end of story.

He may be a little more even-toned on ITT but he always stands by his scoring. And even on the main show, he almost always finds something positive to say - if the performance merits it.

Remember a couple of weeks ago when he said lots of positive things and everyone wondered what was wrong? Clearly the bosses took him aside and asked for 'bad Craig' to come back. Not least because, I'm sure, 'bad Craig' is a useful way to generate support for their favourite, Ann.

Has Craig gone too far at times? Sure (ask Mark Foster). But nothing he's said in this series has been as bad as that - or as bad as Arlene in her bitchier moments.

Unless things have changed a great deal from previous years, the whole show is pretty much scripted. Obviously, they try to script 'in the character of' and there is some ad libs (often, amazingly enough, from Bruce) but the 'jokes' and even the insults are nothing to do with the individuals delivering them.

Everything you say is spot on, the vast majority of reasonable viewers would agree with you.

I agree. She has no interest in the judges' opinions at all and it's really infuriating how she won't let Craig speak.

IMO Craig is never spiteful; blunt, yes - but he always gives a lot of constructive criticism which, if the competitor won't listen, is in vain!