No one has been misled, she used three dogs for a show, end of. People are making a non story into a story, and falling for the hype. My god the magician does tricks, do you believe those are real too??
People get a grip!
People get a grip!
Jules O’Dwyer used three dogs in final performance, not two
11 of 13
Originally Posted by muddipaws:
“No one has been misled, she used three dogs for a show, end of. People are making a non story into a story, and falling for the hype. My god the magician does tricks, do you believe those are real too??
People get a grip!”
“No one has been misled, she used three dogs for a show, end of. People are making a non story into a story, and falling for the hype. My god the magician does tricks, do you believe those are real too??
People get a grip!”
You jest but the Daily Mirror is seriously suggesting that the prize money go to the choir because Jamie didn't really magically transport the note into a lemon.
Originally Posted by muddipaws:
“No one has been misled, she used three dogs for a show, end of. People are making a non story into a story, and falling for the hype. My god the magician does tricks, do you believe those are real too??
People get a grip!”
“No one has been misled, she used three dogs for a show, end of. People are making a non story into a story, and falling for the hype. My god the magician does tricks, do you believe those are real too??
People get a grip!”
Actually she did mislead people. The end of the act is the giveaway here.
Why wasn't the 3rd dog on stage with them when Ant and Dec was talking to them and reading out the phone number ? Why was the 3rd dog being hidden from the viewers ? If you don't intend to mislead people then you wouldn't hide the dog.
Originally Posted by SegaGamer:
“Actually she did mislead people. The end of the act is the giveaway here.
Why wasn't the 3rd dog on stage with them when Ant and Dec was talking to them and reading out the phone number ? Why was the 3rd dog being hidden from the viewers ? If you don't intend to mislead people then you wouldn't hide the dog.”
“Actually she did mislead people. The end of the act is the giveaway here.
Why wasn't the 3rd dog on stage with them when Ant and Dec was talking to them and reading out the phone number ? Why was the 3rd dog being hidden from the viewers ? If you don't intend to mislead people then you wouldn't hide the dog.”
And even if she could not bring it on, should have mentioned it, before the vote, really does come across as a fraud, she needs to be stripped of the title now.
Originally Posted by myscimitar:
“And even if she could not bring it on, should have mentioned it, before the vote, really does come across as a fraud, she needs to be stripped of the title now.”
“And even if she could not bring it on, should have mentioned it, before the vote, really does come across as a fraud, she needs to be stripped of the title now.”
No she doesn't, because the act isn't "Matisse, the Amazing Tightrope-Walking Dog". What about all of the other parts of the performance that Matisse did indeed do?
I do think she should have been open about Chase performing the tightrope walk, but people aren't half getting over-the-top in their outrage and moral offence. As usual.
Originally Posted by myscimitar:
“And even if she could not bring it on, should have mentioned it, before the vote, really does come across as a fraud, she needs to be stripped of the title now.”
“And even if she could not bring it on, should have mentioned it, before the vote, really does come across as a fraud, she needs to be stripped of the title now.”
Are you and that jerefprdterra poster the same person, by any chance?
Originally Posted by myscimitar:
“And even if she could not bring it on, should have mentioned it, before the vote, really does come across as a fraud, she needs to be stripped of the title now.”
“And even if she could not bring it on, should have mentioned it, before the vote, really does come across as a fraud, she needs to be stripped of the title now.”
If Jules & Matisse are stripped of the title, then I'm leaving this pathetic country. Massive over-reaction. They won fair and square.
Originally Posted by SillyBillyGoat:
“No she doesn't, because the act isn't "Matisse, the Amazing Tightrope-Walking Dog". What about all of the other parts of the performance that Matisse did indeed do?
I do think she should have been open about Chase performing the tightrope walk, but people aren't half getting over-the-top in their outrage and moral offence. As usual.”
“No she doesn't, because the act isn't "Matisse, the Amazing Tightrope-Walking Dog". What about all of the other parts of the performance that Matisse did indeed do?
I do think she should have been open about Chase performing the tightrope walk, but people aren't half getting over-the-top in their outrage and moral offence. As usual.”
Well I am not suprised, she has won a huge amount of money by cheating the public.
Originally Posted by SegaGamer:
“Actually she did mislead people. The end of the act is the giveaway here.
Why wasn't the 3rd dog on stage with them when Ant and Dec was talking to them and reading out the phone number ? Why was the 3rd dog being hidden from the viewers ? If you don't intend to mislead people then you wouldn't hide the dog.”
“Actually she did mislead people. The end of the act is the giveaway here.
Why wasn't the 3rd dog on stage with them when Ant and Dec was talking to them and reading out the phone number ? Why was the 3rd dog being hidden from the viewers ? If you don't intend to mislead people then you wouldn't hide the dog.”
Also why put one dog in at the bottom deliberately making it out to be the exact same dog that walks along the ropes only to get the original dog out of the other side? the whole bloody thing was set up and arranged to make it look like one dog doing the whole thing even to the point as your say of hiding the extra dog at the end.
The whole thing set up to hide the fact and people are trying to make out that it's nothing?
Then of course because money and a vote were then based on this deception and it becomes the subject of some very serious laws - Not some people's opinion on a forum but the law.
Do some still what to think there is nothing to it?
Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523:
“If Jules & Matisse are stripped of the title, then I'm leaving this pathetic country. Massive over-reaction. They won fair and square.”
“If Jules & Matisse are stripped of the title, then I'm leaving this pathetic country. Massive over-reaction. They won fair and square.”
"Jules & Matisse" So just the one dog in the title of her act then and another hidden and covered up.
Oh everyone, look at Matisse doing everything. Oh wait!
Chase was NOT meant to be passed off as Matisse, he was wearing a collar with his name clearly on it, but viewers failed to see it:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/b...earing-5806145
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/b...earing-5806145
Originally Posted by SillyBillyGoat:
“No she doesn't, because the act isn't "Matisse, the Amazing Tightrope-Walking Dog". What about all of the other parts of the performance that Matisse did indeed do?
I do think she should have been open about Chase performing the tightrope walk, but people aren't half getting over-the-top in their outrage and moral offence. As usual.”
“No she doesn't, because the act isn't "Matisse, the Amazing Tightrope-Walking Dog". What about all of the other parts of the performance that Matisse did indeed do?
I do think she should have been open about Chase performing the tightrope walk, but people aren't half getting over-the-top in their outrage and moral offence. As usual.”
So you.yourself agree that she was not open about a big part in the act.
Yes, others call that a cover up. A deliberate one by the way she hid one dog whilst the other did the ropes and then brought the other dog back. It was set up to deceive.
Deception when people's money is involved is call fraud. A very serious crime.
There is nothing trivial about it and it's shocking that some are trying to excuse the misuse of other people's money.
Fortunately their are laws against that and so was don't have to rely on someone's opinion on an internet forum.
Originally Posted by CollieWobbles:
“Chase was NOT meant to be passed off as Matisse, he was wearing a collar with his name clearly on it, but viewers failed to see it:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/b...earing-5806145”
“Chase was NOT meant to be passed off as Matisse, he was wearing a collar with his name clearly on it, but viewers failed to see it:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/b...earing-5806145”
YEAH YEAH YEAH
That is why the whole unit was set up to hide the other dog and to deliberately pass it off as the same dog that walked along the ropes.
If not please tell us why the original dog then came out of the other side deliberately making it out to look like just one dog had gone up one side, along the ropes and down the other.
I can't believe that some are actually trying to suggest that the act was going well, then she just put the original dog in a cupboard for no good reason, whilst she did some work with an obviously different dog and then for some strange reason not designed to deceive, the original dog magically came out of a different cupboard at the bottom on the other side!
IS ANYONE REALLY SERIOUSY TRYING TO MAKE THAT ONE FLY?
HAHAHAHAH The dog was wearing a collar that said CHASE.
Clearly the actions of a woman trying to trick people. Sure fire way to trick people into thinking the dog is Matisse, put a collie on him saying Chase.
HAHAHAHAH.
Still, the posts will roll in saying she was cheating etc etc etc.
Despite the clear proof that she had zero intention of deception. If she did. Chase would have been wearing a Matisse collar.
.
Clearly the actions of a woman trying to trick people. Sure fire way to trick people into thinking the dog is Matisse, put a collie on him saying Chase.
HAHAHAHAH.
Still, the posts will roll in saying she was cheating etc etc etc.
Despite the clear proof that she had zero intention of deception. If she did. Chase would have been wearing a Matisse collar.
.
Originally Posted by Old Endeavour:
“YEAH YEAH YEAH
That is why the whole unit was set up to hide the other dog and to deliberately pass it off as the same dog that walked along the ropes.
If not please tell us why the original dog then came out of the other side deliberately making it out to look like just one dog had gone up one side, along the ropes and down the other.
I can't believe that some are actually trying to suggest that the act was going well, then she just put the original dog in a cupboard for no good reason, whilst she did some work with an obviously different dog and then for some strange reason not designed to deceive, the original dog magically came out of a different cupboard at the bottom on the other side!
IS ANYONE REALLY SERIOUSY TRYING TO MAKE THAT ONE FLY?”
“YEAH YEAH YEAH
That is why the whole unit was set up to hide the other dog and to deliberately pass it off as the same dog that walked along the ropes.
If not please tell us why the original dog then came out of the other side deliberately making it out to look like just one dog had gone up one side, along the ropes and down the other.
I can't believe that some are actually trying to suggest that the act was going well, then she just put the original dog in a cupboard for no good reason, whilst she did some work with an obviously different dog and then for some strange reason not designed to deceive, the original dog magically came out of a different cupboard at the bottom on the other side!
IS ANYONE REALLY SERIOUSY TRYING TO MAKE THAT ONE FLY?”
It's called telling a story, for the story to make sense it had to seem like the same dog, but the fact it was wearing a collar with its name in huge letters shows that she was trying to show it was a different dog and not passing it off as Matisse.
Originally Posted by Old Endeavour:
“YEAH YEAH YEAH
That is why the whole unit was set up to hide the other dog and to deliberately pass it off as the same dog that walked along the ropes.
If not please tell us why the original dog then came out of the other side deliberately making it out to look like just one dog had gone up one side, along the ropes and down the other.
I can't believe that some are actually trying to suggest that the act was going well, then she just put the original dog in a cupboard for no good reason, whilst she did some work with an obviously different dog and then for some strange reason not designed to deceive, the original dog magically came out of a different cupboard at the bottom on the other side!
IS ANYONE REALLY SERIOUSY TRYING TO MAKE THAT ONE FLY?”
“YEAH YEAH YEAH
That is why the whole unit was set up to hide the other dog and to deliberately pass it off as the same dog that walked along the ropes.
If not please tell us why the original dog then came out of the other side deliberately making it out to look like just one dog had gone up one side, along the ropes and down the other.
I can't believe that some are actually trying to suggest that the act was going well, then she just put the original dog in a cupboard for no good reason, whilst she did some work with an obviously different dog and then for some strange reason not designed to deceive, the original dog magically came out of a different cupboard at the bottom on the other side!
IS ANYONE REALLY SERIOUSY TRYING TO MAKE THAT ONE FLY?”
Are you seriously still trying to tell people she was deliberately being deceptive when the dog was wearing a collar that said CHASE.
Get a bloody grip.
The female magician used a double for her motorbike trick and no one is getting their knickers in a twist.
Originally Posted by CollieWobbles:
“Chase was NOT meant to be passed off as Matisse, he was wearing a collar with his name clearly on it, but viewers failed to see it:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/b...earing-5806145”
“Chase was NOT meant to be passed off as Matisse, he was wearing a collar with his name clearly on it, but viewers failed to see it:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/b...earing-5806145”
They were not meant to see it. Come on, can any one of you on here honestly say you were able to see it? Only for the papers picking it up by analysing blown-up photos in hindsight. you would all be blissfully unaware that you were hoodwinked.
Originally Posted by myscimitar:
“And even if she could not bring it on, should have mentioned it, before the vote, really does come across as a fraud, she needs to be stripped of the title now.”
“And even if she could not bring it on, should have mentioned it, before the vote, really does come across as a fraud, she needs to be stripped of the title now.”
Too right!
Originally Posted by egghead1:
“The female magician used a double for her motorbike trick and no one is getting their knickers in a twist.”
“The female magician used a double for her motorbike trick and no one is getting their knickers in a twist.”
Nobody cares, since she didn't walk off with £250K.
Originally Posted by Lyceum:
“Are you seriously still trying to tell people she was deliberately being deceptive when the dog was wearing a collar that said CHASE.
Get a bloody grip.”
“Are you seriously still trying to tell people she was deliberately being deceptive when the dog was wearing a collar that said CHASE.
Get a bloody grip.”
Thank you for NOT explaining why she hid the dog at the end as well as make it look like the same dog with the set up.
Let's go with your make believe world where there was no intention to deceive and that the other dog had gone on a tea break at the end of the act and not hidden to continue the deception.
I mean why was ONLY ONE DOG missing from the cast if it played a part that they were not going out of their way to cover up?
It's so bloody obvious exactly what they were trying to pull off and have got caught doing it. Never mind the apologist of DS with make up any old excuses for you.
Originally Posted by egghead1:
“The female magician used a double for her motorbike trick and no one is getting their knickers in a twist.”
“The female magician used a double for her motorbike trick and no one is getting their knickers in a twist.”
Hardly the same thing at all. A magic act IS and has ALWAYS BEEN an act of deception. That's it's only goal and so everyone know what they are getting.
That's one hell of a difference from an act mean to show the dog in the whole title of the act, actually doing the act itself. And if not, certainly not pass it of as the dogs work when it's some other dog,
If one of the dance acts had started to dance, all disappear into a cupboard and world professional dancer come out dressed as them and pass themselves of as them by not saying anything about them and hiding them whilst the original take the bow, then that is just deceiving the audience.
Under your excuse we can have a singer next year who can't sing a note but mimes the whole thing to a stunning singer and then claim that it's all them and hid the professional until being caught out.
Originally Posted by Old Endeavour:
“Then of course because money and a vote were then based on this deception and it becomes the subject of some very serious laws - Not some people's opinion on a forum but the law.”
“Then of course because money and a vote were then based on this deception and it becomes the subject of some very serious laws - Not some people's opinion on a forum but the law.”
Haha as if you think that would stand up in a court of law. bless you!
No laws have been broken. OFCOM's code of conduct MAY have been broken, but the only thing that can happen is a fine or punishment by the regulator themselves. The British Justice System have literally no say, and if someone tried to take BGT to court over a couple of quid's worth of phone votes, it would be thrown out almost immediately.
So go on, keep trying to look clever.
11 of 13
