I really wish one year they would actually say no to a few of the younger singing acts when selecting the semi-final line-ups. They go on about having variety and often chose between two similar acts but for young singing kids they never make an either/or decision.

In particular the younger girl wearing white and the boy with ADHD on guitar were simply awful. They could have easily been dumped for something better like the Free-Running/Parkour guy.

I agree and they so often sing adult songs with no feeling obviously as they haven't experienced anything yet

Yes, but they're not going to say 'no' to those kids. Imagine the tears and tantrums. Can't see SC putting up with that. Any of those sorts of acts automatically go through to the semi finals.

I really didn't like the girls but I thought the boy with the guitar was simply great........so there.

MY pet hate is a 12 year old singing 'I Have Nothing' or 'One Night Only' or any of the other divorcee karaoke classics (as I call them). They can't have the faintest idea of what they're singing about.

Though I'm ok with the kids who write their own stuff or sing age appropriate pop

They know that a lot of the GBP will vote for the kids which is why they put them through, and it's the same with the dog acts.

They look for the "ain't it/he/she soooo cute" vote.

Works for the mind-numbingly awful dog acts.

Works for the endless child acts.

Just a pity that somewhere along the way the notion of "entertaining" and "talented" seems to have got lost.

Just for once (and no offence intended) could you please consider un-grumping yourself?

none taken!

But, seriously, why were some of the worst child acts passed through and some genuinely talented ones overlooked.

Why was that appallingly bad talking dog passed through. Possibly, out of a long list, that was the worst dog act - ever. And, if you can believe some of the concerned animal lovers on here, potentially a very cruel and painful act for the dog.

*phew*

I do agree with the kids point and thought the dancers who got the Golden Button were simply awful.

Does the fact that we seem to be in some sort of agreement make me less grumpy or make you just a tad grumpy too?


The point was, and is, that some rubbish "acts" got through and some genuine "talent" got overlooked.

I suspect that some of the dross put though was just to provide some filler, some padding, so that the few good acts have a much better chance of success. Chances are though, sadly, that we will see some tearful kids again this year.

Nope. Its all down to you.

Completely agree, this is the one act I just cant watch, every year we are overloaded with these awful stage school type singers who most of time aren't even very good. That kid with the guitar was just cringe worthy. Look at all the good acts that have been overlooked for the semis that would have added variety and entertainment and instead we have to sit through a load of boring singers.

It's a variety show, so it would be rather pointless without singers.

Of course but the singer ratio is out of whack. They could dump at least 5 singing acts and still have plenty of singers to choose from.

No one is saying there should be no singers just that there are far too many singers compared to other types of act, especially kid singers.

Totally unbalanced.

Accept that there are different genres in dancing and singing, but, consider the figures:

15 singing acts
10 dance acts
4 dog acts
4 magic acts
2 impressionists

But, in detail, why on earth are there four dog acts? Presumably to satisfy Simons canophilia complex. One, yes, but a third rate 'ventriloquist', a yapping cur?

Why two impressionists? Probably the two worst ever on BGT!