Spellbound are mainly kids and Diversity had a mini-me Krusty up front.

I'm all for separating the kids from the adults but then we have the problem of previous winners like Spellbound & Diversity, we would have to have a group BGT too and it all ends up a bit like XFactor then with all the categorising.

its ironic that I was thinking the only reason why the old guy was put in was sympathy for him.

Maybe they shouldnt allow OAPs in either?

And they should make those dogs do their act in a sack because theyre just so darn cute.

Im amazed people are saying kids shouldnt be in because it sets an unfair playing field for the other acts as opposed to any concern they may have for kids being put into such a high pressured competitive situation at such an early age

I didn't give a reason (many others didn't either), BIB is exactly my reason, well that and they shoud be out doing kids stuff, with a little bit of not generally liking the acts thrown in.

Are you kinda saying we should bring back Junior Showtime?

That young lad, Ronan, has a voice and why hide it

Ronan was a million miles better than any other act tonight

Maybe because Ronan has an amazing voice and is actually very talented?

Joe the BMXer should have gone through over Ronan, and those martial arts sisters over that insanely mediocre pianist.

sorry i thought Joe was the best(yes i did vote for him) and the girls bruce sistaz , i wanted those two to go through, they entertained me, as we have enough singing competitions as it is at the moment.edit i have just seen that smiirky thought the same i wonder how many other people feel these two were robbed

This may look awful but I really hope those kids ,one of which sang with a snake around her neck and the other one who sang "My Way" don't get through to the finals on Saturday - I want to enjoy watching the finals.

They were both robbed, for definite.

And what about acts like Diversity and Spelbound; a mixture of kids and adults where the kids are just as talented and deserving of a place in the 'proper' show rather than a watered down version?
The problem isn't the kids themselves, it's the producers giving attention to ones who aren't anything special, and the judges putting them through.
Besides, if you consider the sheer amount of kid acts that have got to the semi-finals in previous years, usually only the really talented make the finals anyway. Ronan and Holly Steel excluded.

Good Idea

He was 14, so i'd consider him a teenager.

Also, not all kids are brats.

Some kids do well in the show because of what?

Talent!

That's why the judges believe in them, even though it may not be all the time. Like Robbie, they thought he had the 'cute factor' and they put him through, just to keep him happy and then reject him.

Anyone over the age of 10 or more would not get an advantage.

For instance, in 2008, Charlie Green, an 11 year old swing singer, lost out to Strike for the final but he showed no signs of emotion. Neither did Shaheen Jafargholi for not being in the top 3 or any other acts.

They didnt get to the semis (dont think so).

Yes they both didn't.

It's obviously because the judges didn't think their act would be good enough, or the public won't like it. It's also because they were both 7, and would find it hard to cope after what happened with Hollie.

I thought Ronan was fantastic. He's got a great voice and I just loved the way he sang it very low key, no unnecessary showing off or trills and not even a massive note in there like Feeling Good. At 12 it's amazing for him to be so poised and confident like that and I just really appreciated the whole performance.

Because if you don't vote for them, they will cry and throw a massive fit if they don't get through to the final

Same!

Stage school/trained kids who have done it all before as well. They're coached to handle pressure of performing better than some kids, you can tell instantly (I haven't watched it this year at all) which ones on these kind of shows have had training and which ones haven't because of how they handle it, and which ones are able to deal with it. Also from 2008, Faryl and Andrew were other ones if you want to move slightly away from the "stage school" mould.

I'm against little kids who clearly aren't up to it entering, but that is because they're not up to it, not because of their age, and it is better to have talented kids in it than talentless adults (X-factor is for that! ).

To be fair, I tend to hate kid acts now after Hollie Steele ¬_¬
But I loved Wobbie so much He was so sweet! Even if it was a bit of a set up by his pushy mum, i'm gutted he didn't get to the semi finals

The cutesy kiddies are there to appeal to the Granny market, who foam themselves blind over said acts.

apparently youth is a talent now...

I agree, it's not as if that kid was that good even for his age group, he was average at best.

BUT the other one who got through, Paul, he was all over the place in his piano playing....not good at all.

A kid and a sob story going through lastnight.

all the kids on this program are horrible, they shouldn't be doing this at their age !!, if they really di have a talent then give it a few years, where surely it will only improve and give them a chance to enjoy their f*cking youth !!!, and the queer-haired child last night wont be able to sing like that in a few years anyway, so it all pointless