Originally Posted by Poppysinbloom:
“I remain convinced that she was picked for tactical reasons to try and ensure Rachel won. Simple as that. I didn't mind her throughout the series aside from being angry at whoever it was wanted to keep her in the running.”
I think this is it in a nutshell.
It was very obvious the producers had an agenda to get Rachel to win, so how better than to pick someone who was less popular as her rival?
The trouble is, Rachel wasn't that popular with the public, either - both she and Lisa were in the dance-off more than once.
And, although the producers couldn't/wouldn't see it at the time, there is no point of having a Strictly final between two contestants whom the public aren't that keen on.
There's some residual griping on here that Tom shouldn't have won. Sorry - can't accept that.
Tom may not have been technically perfect, but he had one thing neither Lisa nor Rachel possessed - showmanship. That's what endeared him to the public - he sold the dance. He put character into his performance. As did Austin - but it was fixed so Lisa would take his place in the semi-final.
The vilain in this is then executive producer Sam Donnelly, who should have been ashamed of herself for her blatant attempt to manipulate the public vote (which was leaked during the run - and proved to be pretty accurate).