|
||||||||
New Rule for next year |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 244
|
New Rule for next year
If you are in the bottom two more than once you're eliminated automatically!
They save people like misha b, union j, again and again, yet evidently they continually get the least votes, so it's pointless saving them. You should be allowed one bad week, but after that no more second chances. Less so with union j, but misha got put through over people who might just have had one bad week, which was a bit unfair when she was lowest a lot. In future this makes more sense, as judges can like someone and choose them no matter what, which isn't fair to those who vote either. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 481
|
Maybe a three strikes and out rule is better?
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 39,237
|
What if two fall into the bottom two for a second time at the same time, and there aren't enough weeks ahead to fill the show if both are eliminated?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,122
|
What if two acts who have been in the bottom 2 before though end up there against each other though ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,335
|
Quote:
Maybe a three strikes and out rule is better?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 244
|
Quote:
What if two acts who have been in the bottom 2 before though end up there against each other though ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Herts
Posts: 4,925
|
This would mean you could possibly be automatically eliminated despite never actually having received the least amount votes. You could be climbing in the ranks week on week (as one contestant leaves each week) and still be eliminated for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,122
|
Quote:
Eliminate both of them
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,506
|
Good it's shit anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Manchester
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
What if two acts who have been in the bottom 2 before though end up there against each other though ?
Or, more realistically, treat it as we now do with a deadlock and go with the public's vote, lowest out. The real problem with this system is that you will end up with shows where there is no need for a sing off, although I would counter that with the act leaving gets to do a goodbye song maybe? |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: West Oxfordshire
Posts: 11,639
|
If you are in the bottom two twice, how about a big trap-door in the floor springs open and you fall 100 feet headlong into and fall into a bath full of green gunge and all the previous series' losers? That would help boost the ratings!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 22,691
|
Quote:
If you are in the bottom two more than once you're eliminated automatically!
They save people like misha b, union j, again and again, yet evidently they continually get the least votes, so it's pointless saving them. You should be allowed one bad week, but after that no more second chances. Less so with union j, but misha got put through over people who might just have had one bad week, which was a bit unfair when she was lowest a lot. In future this makes more sense, as judges can like someone and choose them no matter what, which isn't fair to those who vote either. I personally think that James would have been in the bottom two again this week with Union J and they done the results in reverse order with James the 2nd least votes, Chris in the middle and Jahmene topping the vote this week! |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 244
|
Quote:
Totally agree with this! As much as I liked Union J, it does get a bit too much when the panel are constantly voting to save them. It was obvious tonight that had they been in the final two with Chris Maloney and it had gone to the judges vote then all the judges other than Gary would have voted for Union J to stay, even if they had known that Chris had more votes than them!
I personally think that James would have been in the bottom two again this week with Union J and they done the results in reverse order with James the 2nd least votes, Chris in the middle and Jahmene topping the vote this week! |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Black Country lad in Yorkshire
Posts: 118,112
|
Quote:
Maybe a three strikes and out rule is better?
I can see them introducing a rule to get rid of an unwanted contestant. For one week, announce that next week you will be voting for who you want to eliminate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,253
|
I think that's a terrible idea, to be honest - only thing they need to change is to actually vote based on the sing-off, rather than to change the criteria to suit yours (or the producers) agenda.
I'd have no problem with someone being in the bottom two and surviving every single week if they were the better singer in the sing-off. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 244
|
Quote:
I think that's a terrible idea, to be honest - only thing they need to change is to actually vote based on the sing-off, rather than to change the criteria to suit yours (or the producers) agenda.
I'd have no problem with someone being in the bottom two and surviving every single week if they were the better singer in the sing-off. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,695
|
The last part of the OP refers to Tulisa
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 244
|
Quote:
The last part of the OP refers to Tulisa
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Left London
Posts: 19,883
|
After about the first 3 weeks of saves the lowest should just go anyway, reveal the bottom 3 for the first 3 weeks to avoid arguments about thinking people are safe etc and by week 4, most people have their favourite, tough that the judges disagree, public vote controls it, lowest out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 903
|
If they are going to introduce a leader board as the USA have, and which the papers have said Cowell plans to do, you are going to see a difference in voting and winners anyway
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 991
|
Quote:
The real problem with this system is that you will end up with shows where there is no need for a sing off
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,144
|
Quote:
Pointless though. They are not going to win if they are constantly in the bottom two, so why? what purpose to keep them there week after week. It is not right
And your stance of it you might aswell just do away with the B2 and just do person with least votes leaves |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 18:07.


