Why can you bloody get it?! This is a talent competition this isn't a bloody Spielberg movie.

Jules has entered into a competition with her dog MATISSE. The British public have been led to believe that MATISSE is able to perform these fantastic stunts, including a tight rope walk. And it wasn't MATISSE who did that.

How is this the same as a movie?! We KNOW actors have stunt doubles. We KNOW Tom Cruise doesn't really jump off a building. But the British public who were voting WERE NOT TOLD that it wasn't Matisse doing that trick. A trick that they were doing to get votes to be crowned the winner of a competition.

STOP comparing it to a bloody movie.

The fact is it was done under false pretence. She wanted the public to think it was Mattisse, it wasn't and that is the issue.

Correct.

A grand total of 200 have complained.

Even if we assume all 200 of those a) actually voted and b) would not have voted had they known how it was done, the result still would've been the same.

That 2.2% difference translates into over 100,000 votes.

I agree. The public was cheated, no getting away from it.

Well said, fantastic post.

Can't believe some are defending her, the more I think about it the more incredible it is.

it has, but onto another part of your argument....

You do realise that you're manipulated far more in the x-factor, don't you - The back stories, the order in which they sing, making up vocal groups, press, tv interviews, production values etc. All designed to make you vote a particular way.
The same applies to BGT, too. The lad at the piano could have used a grand, but he had an upright to make it look like his piano, the female magician had a poor backdrop to perform her trick,
The lad who forgot his words was supposed to be in line for the win, but screwed up.

It's all a manipulation, and whoever you voted for, you fell for it

Jamie Raven wanted people to think that he magically made the note appear in a lemon. By your logic he's a cheat, too.

Oh wait, you're an idiot and they were both ACTS, performances utilising misdirection. At no point were we explicitly told that Matisse was the dog on the tightrope, just like nobody grabbed us by the head and said "this lemon trick is really magic, honest guv."

Get a life.

The movie stunt double argument is almost laughable. Everybody knows that reality television is scripted to the highest degree but this is misleading, a movie isn't supposed to be reality and this was deceitful.

Why should we need to have been told? The act is called Jules and MATISSE.

You get a life.

No, an actual proper comparison would be if a stunt double of Jamie Raven came out, fooled everybody into thinking he was Jamie and then did the trick and won the show. How you can't see that that's the issue is incredulous

The women trains several dogs another dog she trained that had been on in the semi did one trick in the final it was not called Mattisse so lets throw her out of the comp & while we are at it lets throw the bloke who came second out as he stuck the note through a hole in the Lemon an old trick that many know & was obvious to me so it was not really magic as we know it, give me a while & I'll think of a reason to disqualify the Welsh choir as well

After the semi final we were clearly made aware of the fact that Chase is also part of the act. Jules even said afterward that she would use more dogs.

(The fact that people might not have watched the semi final is totally irrelevant.)

Yes I know that, but where was the dog on the final? Where was the mention of the third dog? There wasn't one. Chase did his little trick on the rope and was never seen again. Because it was clearly 'supposed' to be Matisse.

If she's found guilty I hope a compromise is reached.

A contestant won the jackpot of one million pounds on Red Or Black, afterwards we found out he served time in jail for attacking his ex girlfriend, but he was still allowed to keep the money.

Nothing is going to happen, and I'm not even saying that something should happen. But I do believe it was a deceitful and deliberately misleading thing to do. As I've said, it's like somebody else going out and pretending to be another one of the acts and winning on their behalf.

Arguably the most stupid argument I have ever read. Go look up what a magician does.

Chase couldn't come out at the end due the backstage setup, really there's no conspiracy no matter how hard you push for there to be.

No more stupid than everything you've posted in this thread.

Lmao. Who told you to write that? Are you a producer? Couldn't come out to the backstage set up. What? Come off a bit of a wood and come round the front?

You should audition next year as a comedian mate.

OH and also...where was the dog after the show had finished? Where was Chase at the start of BGMT? And the interview on BGMT. They covered it up no matter how much you try and say they didn't.

Whether you agree or not, there are a tonne of people annoyed about this and more and more people coming forward to complain. An investigation has been launched by ITV as well now and Ofcom will soon follow. If there was nothing unethical about it in the slightest then why is there such a widespread admission that the act was misleading?

Actually it is, by a long distance. Possibly the worst argument ever. Mind melting of epic proportions.

A magician is supposed to fool people and use illusions. It was him doing the tricks, it wasn't Mattise doing the act. That is a fact.

What I have posted is backed up by facts on the evidence we have.

I think it was a real dog.

It was however a fake Matisse