Who is they? And what target? Are you talking about the twitterers?

He won't quit & he most definitely shouldn't quit. He was invited to be on the show & the public are voting to keep him in. He has already said on twitter that he will stay.

I can understand some people being frustrated that he's still there, but the selection is such that there's the possibility of such a thing happening any year now.

The situation is a direct result of the BBC's decision to try to attract more viewers, so the proportion of "true dance fans" voting can be exceeded by increasing numbers of people just watching and voting for the entertainment value every year.

This could develop into a perceived bigger problem for some, than that with John Sergeant.

It's impossible to tell, but I wonder how much polarisation there really is in the reasons why people vote. I wonder if in reality it's quite fluid, so that, for example, people vote for different people for different reasons in different weeks, that there's an overlap where people vote for the best dancing AND the most entertainment (specially now, with the free online votes) and where other reasons that are more blurred perhaps, kick in. I have, for example, often voted for a contestant whose dance might objectively be considered neither especially competent nor especially entertaining, but whose effort or improvement was clear to me, or where I felt the judges had placed them other than where I would have, or subjected them to a criticism I felt unfair, thus using my vote to "even the score".

Dave is a better dancer than Ben

Unless you include foot-work.

I respect your first-hand knowledge of AT but are you sure Dave is a better dancer than Ben?

Musicality alone, Ben gets the beat and rhythm, though awkward in his execution. Dave doesn't seem to have any innate sense of rhythm. AT ALL.

Or chests.

I agree eventually the power of Tom and Austin's fanbases would have propelled him into the Dance-off where the judges would have given him the boot.

Widdy proved that sooner or later the fanbases of people who can actually dance will see off the non-dancers. So it will be with Dave - it's a question of when rather if that happens.

Love it

It doesn't matter how good or bad a dancer a contestant may be, no one deserves to be in the show any more or less than any other contestant. Dave has every right to be in the show for as long as he keeps getting the votes.

Strictly is a light entertainment programme based very loosely around a dance competition. As a result, the viewers all look for different things in Strictly: some are more focused on the dancing, some on the 'journey', some on the entertainment, some on the personality of the contestant and/or their chemistry with their celeb partner, others on a combination of any or all of those aspects. Dave seems to be a nice guy, has a good partnership wtih Karen and is enthusiastic about the Strictly experience, even though he's never going to make a dancer. He's obviously getting the votes from people for whom the actual dancing isn't the most important aspect of Strictly.

The concept of the show is that it's a combined judges' and public vote and that format isn't about to change. Based on the show concept and format, Dave has just as much right as every other contestant to be in the competition for as long as he keeps getting the votes. The reason he is still in is because the public vote keeps saving him, so if you must blame anyone (not that blame should be assigned, since no one is actually doing anything wrong) then blame the public, not Dave.

Personally, I'm more than ready for Dave to be eliminated but I'll fight to defend his right still to be in the competition. Dave most certainly should NOT withdraw. John Sergeant set a terrible precedent in that respect, not one to be emulated.
Last edited by memmh : 07-11-2013 at 13:27

When? Rachel (actually Pasha) was my favourite. Arguably a better dancer than Dave. But...

Long Live Dave!


He is right not to give a stuff about the unknown people tweeting him and telling him to resign. On a personal level, face to face with the contestants, he probably has moments where he's shame-faced or sorry about the situation -- his expression last Sunday told that story -- but that's owing to his personal dignity and kindness.

I do think that Dave has a dignity and apparent integrity that to a greater or lesser extent was missing from previous 'dance duffers' on the programme (and is untainted by the political (Widdi) and anti-intellectual (Sargeant) prejudices) which I can understand appeals to voters. Of course, he has a book and TV series to flog, but he also inspires as someone who genuinely gets the joy of trying something new even if he can't be the best at it.

There would be less pressure on Dave if the BBC were clearer that this is a light entertainment show and not a dance competition. The panel should say 'Vote for your favourite, don't concern yourself with who is the best dancer!' Paradoxically this might make less people vote for contestants like Dave because the pleasure of winding up others who want the better dancers to remain would be diminished

The presenters do already refer to voting for "your favourite" which, of course, can be by any personal criterion.

No he shouldnt quit its not his fault people are voting for him. I do feel like that in the next couple of weeks he will be eliminated

Yes but the panel creates the illusion that it's a dancing competition from the start and to be fair more often than not this is what it turns out to be in the end. The bit in between is all about bumping up the ratings

Someone put me right on this...

As I understand it, at the lower end of the scale, someone might be prevented from entering SCD because of ill-health or work commitments that would stop them from training the required minimum of hours. There isn't a clause that says, 'No, you're just too baaaad'. At the upper end, ill-health, work commitments, and a too-high dance standard are the prohibiting elements. So Vincent really couldn't enter... You can be too good but it's impossible to be too bad.

Dave's there by rights.

OK I grant you a lack of ryhthm; and foot-work maybe; and muscles for lifting and pecs, but he does move around more than Ben who simulates a lamp-post cum lifting mechanism for Kristina.

Sad that neither of them would be able to perform at a wedding.

And furthermore, anyone who can give birth to the riposte that his detractors "can stick their heads in a bucket of custard" can choose precisely how many more weeks he stays, as far as I'm concerned.

Nice one, Dave.

Not in time to the music, though.......

Dave should no more quit because he is bad, than Natalie should quit because she is too good.



The 'obligations' were no more conflicting than Len and Bruno's DWTS/SCD obligations. Less so in fact, as P&O had already arranged with John that he could postpone his work cruise schedule or they would accommodate both him and Kristina (and their mid-week training) so he could do both simultaneously.

The longer John was in Strictly, the more of an attraction (aka money-earner) he would have been for P&O. They certainly did not want him to leave SCD, and certainly not at their behest.

Your take on the situation missfrankie, was proven at the time to be a load of cobblers, as a quick Google search would show, so I am not sure why this misinformation is still being repeated.

Ben can stand up straight and look impressive. And knows left from right. Of course one might view those as an unfair advantage.

I think this is the case. In the past I only usually voted towards the end of the series or if I thought my favourite might be in trouble. This series I've spread my free votes (okay, all five of them ) around several contestants, including some of the duffers - although early on, that was partly tactical, to try and keep my preferred duffer over the another. I've stopped voting for Dave, despite loving his exuberance early on and still really loving Karen, but that particular train has run out of steam for me. I did vote for Mark for the first time last week, because I thought he might be in trouble.

I hope he does not, why should he quit when people are paying money to vote for him? Its an entertainment show and though he is the person I would least like to see win I really would not mind if he did.

If he gets the votes to do so then he is entitled imo.Why does it even matter who wins anyhow?