Last night Cheryl had definite thoughts on who should stay on, and had made the vote 2-1 in favour of Paul. Louis said that he couldn't decide. There should be a choice to abstain, when a judge can't decide. That would be fair, but there is nothing fair about this programme, especially when the voting opens before anybody has sung.

In the absence of the abstaining option, Louis should vote for the act that already had the majority of votes. That way, his "can't decide" vote would not have influenced the outcome. What he did was make a definite vote in favour Jay, when he didn't intend to.

The judges vote have always been the unique feature of the X Factor. It's not designed to play fair but to create that extra drama and excitement for the viewers. In fact it is open for a judge to cast a tactical vote, to send off an act who may be a threat in the long run if not sent home.

If you want the voting system to be completely fair then the judges vote feature should be removed and make it based on public votes 100% Idol style.

If you do that you're taking away one of the most unique feature of the X factor. You can't have the cake and eat it too.

the judges should vote in private and then have to reveal it when dermot asks them to. this will stop alot of deadlocks.

I like the deadlock, especially when both acts are as bad as each other.

It allows the public to decide.

Agreed! The neutral vote would be a no vote but he clearly voted to send Paul home. He is a puppet

He did intend to. He had received his instructions from The Dark Lord.

This!

The only neutral vote someone can make is an abstention, which in itself is a vote.

Louis was clearly told what to do, the way he abruptly parroted out his orders didn't seem as if he was in any way conflicted about his decision.

Louus voted for jay effectively but knew paul was bottom

At the end of the day, Paul did receive the lowest votes. So it's not completely unfair.

What is UNFAIR is that there have been negatively edited of VTs in relation to Paul for the past few weeks - this was audience manipulation and Paul's popularity suffered s a result. It was obvious that Paul was miles better than Jay in the sing-off last night and that Louis was acting on orders from Simon

Have you seen the show before? I can't understand how people are surprised. Its blatantly obvious that a) its heavily manipulated and b) producers were out to get Paul. Its been like this for years.

The judges' vote is farcical anyway. They surely know the public vote before they vote on who to save. Unless both acts are in the same category, judges always save their own acts. Then the other 2 judges know the other judges' votes before voting themselves. A secret non-pre-informed ballot woul be fair rather than this farce.

I think the judges' vote is just a mechanism to save someone who "accidentally" got the fewest votes, of whom Katie Waissel may have been the most notorious.

Agree with this. If neither act is particularly stronger (like Paul vs Jay) I quite like letting whoever got the most votes to get through.

It is bloody awful - if they are judges then they should judge - far more drama than copping out. That way we could see a judge have to vote against their own act.

Only as a last resort. Quite honestly the decision should be done by tge judges who are experienced and pa

It would be better for the public to decide the result of the sing off. Have a ten minute slot when they can vote, and it would do away with all the nonsense of the panel.

It is a TV show - it is designed to be unfair so that we get the drama, the pathos, the "wah that is so unfair" response from viewers and the final tears of victory from the winner. Contrived bullshit for a weekend entertainment show. Quite simply the contestants are willing victims who have sold their soul for 15 minutes of fame and the small chance that they might get some sort of a career out of it. No sympathy for any of them who then feel hard done to. Their is plenty evidence to show why anyone with an ounce of integrity would stay well away from this sort of nonsense.

Honestly, the way some are reacting you would think that this sort of manipulation had never happened before.

Why? They have already decided who is last in the vote. Just dump the sing off nonsense as we all know it is pointless.

There are probably others who have been in the bottom two, had the lowest votes, saved by the judges. The judges are the ones supposed to be the professionals and paid highly for it. Louis should have stated his choice and why. He couldn't - it would have choked him. Why, because Paul on the day was the best, and that is how it should have been judged. Judges that do not have opinions and are not prepared to back them up with professional answers (not as Simon said of Jay, 'he's a Dad') should not be employed. They are not doing the job they are paid to do. I do not think they think they are employed or working, it is beneath them, they are Celebs. They are determining some-ones future not playing at being Divas.

Oh yes they are. They are paid the big bucks to do exactly what they are told. Do you really believe the sing off means a thing? Really? If you do a Nigerian friend of mine would love to speak to you about a banking opportunity.....................

Indeed, I used to think X Factor was a singing contest. Then 5 years ago I finally discovered it is a judges' pantomime with singers as fodder.

Well atleast we all know by now (as if there were any doubts before) why Louis is still a judge on the panel after all these years despite the rumours that last year was his final year.

Louis is the most 'loyal' judge in terms of fulfilling the role of being Simon Cowell and the producers puppet. It was soooo obvious that he didn't actually want to send the results to a deadlock his face showed that pretty clearly. I believe that he may have wanted to save Paul if he was purely making the decision himself.

If Louis really thought Jay was better than Paul and deserved to be there than why did he keep hesitating to send Paul home?. He clearly didn't give any valid reason for doing it and Dermot even asked him repeatedly for Paul's name which he obviously didn't want to give.

The reason Louis is there is to kiss Simon's a*** which he does better than any of the other judges

I really do not see the point to replying to some of these quotes individually , particular to those who are suggesting that myself and others are so gullible to believe in the basic tenets of the X Factor. I apologise to those who do not share their opinion.

I am appalled that there is this negative thought surrounding the ethos of the X Factor that the major point of the programme is to create a show on false hopes, that satisfy judges big bucks, and cut the hopes of aspiring musicians, which apparently creates a Butlins style entertainment for the undiscerning viewers. That is what some of my critics have described X Factor as, so they must be lumped into that public I have just described. I repeat there are many on this site do not qualify for this lowly position, and I apologise. They know who they are., particularly the Paul supporters.

But the bit in bold is spot on- that is exactly what the X Factor is. Seriously, nobody can believe that the X Factor is in any way a credible talent show. If it was then the likes of Stevi would have been shown the door in Day One. (To be honest, if it was a singing contest then very few of the finalists would have been there.) Think back on the history - remember Jedward in the sing off with Lucy? What act won that sing off, the singer or the Comic act that the producers could use for cheap laughs? And then there was Wagner, remember him? Are these the actions of a credible talent show?

Does the treatment of Paul not confirm for all that the show is nothing but a sham where the only thing that matters is ratings and advertising revenue. They chewed him up and spat him out for a bit of drama - nothing more.

I am sorry if it offends you that I see the XF in the way that I do. Not sure why you should, but for some reason you see it that way. I look on the XF as something to laugh at on a weekend evening.