Loving Scott's dancing and that amazing jive of his previously
Pamela - how good is she and her drive is amazing!
But...two nines for Scott's routine was outrageous and it took him a point collectively above Patsy. A fair mark..6 or 7? 8 at generosity's tops?
Pamela's Charleston was blatantly out of time with shaky landings - how could - in any stretch of the imagination - that score a 9 and Alesha and Bruno, come on - two 10s!!????

Such a blatant voting to save the 'better' dancers ahead of the public favs really soured last night's show..

Personally, I'm in favour of anything that keeps Kara, Matt, Pamela and Scott in ahead of Ann

But surely the judges job is to vote fairly on the dances alone, devoid of favouritism or ploys to keep the 'best' dancers in. We, the public, can vote as we like

I agree.

And while some of the votes may have been a bit high, it didn't really matter as we got pretty much the correct order on the judges' leader board.

So I don't get the hysteria at all. Anything that puts everyone else ahead of Ann is fine by me ...

That clearly appeared to be the intention. To be fair, I have some sympathy with the judges..Scott and Pamela had proved themselves capable of some great dances over previous weeks, should they risk them being eliminated for one sub-standard routine ?
Having said that, I agree. It does make a mockery of the marking. All the talk about "striving" to get a 10, it being the pinnacle of excellence on SCD etc..and then they throw in a couple of 10's for for a dance that was average by Pamela's own standards.

It was no attempt to save Scott. The only place he feasibly could have gone was one place below Patsy rather than one above her. Given that he's thoroughly tonking her in the public vote, it made no difference to him. Pamela maybe, or it might be an attempt to save the perennial bottom two. The lower Scott (or Matt) is, the harder it is for them to survive. Or it might be to keep Patsy low down so she buggers off given the increasing bad feeling around her.

So agree! It was indeed the very fact that by Pamela's very own high standards that her routine was decidedly mediocre..

I hope the beeb clip the judges wings as if this continues next week it will be totally ridiculous...

So how do you feel about the blatant voting to save the "poorer" dancers ahead of the "better" dancers? 5's for She Who Must Not Be Named Any idiot can see that is not a fair mark and overgenerous. If you are going to mark the cr@p ones so highly then you have to compensate by giving the good ones even higher scores.

Quite. That's called cheating anywhere else now isn't it. Sooner they get rid of SCD the better.

Oh come on ianswaiting, you know Len's 5 paddle is his 1

As for Bruno and Alesha, I reckon they marked on rehearsal performances and didnt move from those even if the live performances were below par. Perhaps that is what is happening with all the judges scores each week as they seem to be even more consistently bizarre than in previous series.

But then didn't Kara by all accounts completely mess up her rehearsal for a couple of the dances she got Alesha/Bruno 9s/10s for?

I thought Pamela deserved her 10s tbh.

Public overmarks Ann week by week

I agree most of the time, but until this series, 10s were special and that charleston will be held up as the best charleston of the series when it so patently wasn't.



Never in a million years did she deserve those 10s, it didn't have the double bounce and swivel that the judges go on and on and on about being a fundamental of the dance.

I would have had no problem with 8s or 9s for it as she sold it very well, but technically it was terrible.

Of course it's cheating but I'm getting desperate!

Unfortunately, 10s already lost their meaning a few years ago. It was only in the first few series that they were special.

I think maybe the judges are panicking that 'you know who' is so popuar that they need to keep the best dancers up at the top of the leaderboard. Others such as Gav and Patsy are therefore just cannon fodder. They have obviously been forbidden by the powers that be to trot out the usual 'I hope that sanity will prevail and the GBP will start voting for the dancers in this competition'.

Really? Tell me more....!

Yes, it is. Which is why She Who Must Not Be Named should never receive anything higher than a 3, instead of the ludicrous marks awarded to her by three members of the judging panel.

Not anything concrete, but the low training hours, Robin not turning up for ITT with no reason given, Patsy giving an interview basically saying she wants to leave, and Brendan making veiled insults against her all add up to a pretty negative suggestive picture.

When I first saw this thread, I thought "oh, here we go again". Fortunately, there are some voices of reason in here. : )

What difference does it make what scores "she" gets, as long as she's at the bottom of the leaderboard? Desperate times call for desperate measures, yeah? The judges are using the only power they have now.

While I feel slightly like a cheat for saying so, I agree. If I could trust the public to vote on dancing talent, I would say that it's a disgrace the judges are trying to save certain contestants. But I can't trust the public - they vote for the Chris Hollins and John Sergeants and Ann Widdecombes of the world. So yes, I hope the judges continue to do everything they can to keep the good dancers in the competition. The public can moan as much as they like about how unfair it is, I couldn't care less, it's their fault we have to resort to this in the first place.

Hubs an me have our own little home judging panel.
Scott was marked way too high by those two reprobate judges, but we really enjoyed Pam and James, found their dance was jolly and full of interest and fairly marked.

Just shows we all have our own individual opinions and we don't have to agree. We certaintly seem to be the odds one out onthis forum.

Kara and Artem were (till the last few moments) fantastic btw!

Len also made a comment during the judges feedback last night about maybe she should practise a bit more.

I think when the judges vote in this way it only encourages people to vote for people like Anne just to annoy the judges. Not me by the way.