They could make a rule that it's fine if they enter in a group with members above 16 and introduce a separate show for kids to compete in on CITV.

Do you hate kids that much? Connie, George, Faryl, Kieran, The Cheeky Monkeys, Gabz and Jack Carrol handled the pressure of the show well. Why CITV why can't it be shown on ITV with all 4 judges as the judges and Ant and Dec as the presenters. Maybe Little Brittains Got Talent could be shown during half term week for under 16s and normal BGT for mostly and adults and kids in a group with people 16 and older or a child with their parent like Stavros Flatley the following week.

They could show it on ITV but there's already two Syco shows on there. Another one would possibly be overkill. If they had it on CITV, it could be a kid's Syco talent show with different judges who appeal more to a young audience such as Barney Harwood or maybe Stephen Mulhern.

No I want Ant and Dec to present it and the same judges to judge it. And why should CITV show that goes off air at 6pm. There is a reason BGT is on during half term week.

There were countless dangerous acts throughout the series, you can't compare one dangerous act (who you obviously didn't like, I should add) to what Jules and Matisse did.

The majority of people aren't complaining because the dog act was dangerous, it's because she led us to believe that it was Matisse who walked the tightrope, when it was another dog. She lied to us.

The demonstration swords are not real ones, even Shaolin monks use bendy ones when doing some of their TV displays. Doubt she could cut a loaf of bread with the one she used on TV.

Ant & Dec would be unlikely to present such a show anyway given that they're presenting shows for pretty much majority of the year. I think even they need a break from their job. As for the judges, Simon Cowell would be unlikely to do it as he also judges X Factor, Alesha Dixon is trying to reignite her singing career and David Walliams would probably be busy with his script and book writing. The only one who'd definitely be available is Amanda Holden.

One judge out of four. They wouldn't be able to stick with the same judges.

To be honest, I think the main people watching a Children's BGT would be kids so it would make sense for it to be on CITV IMO.

If anyone 'lied', it wasn't her but the producers.

Jules could do the routine differently, and make the extra dog more obvious (like she did in the semi), but at NO POINT in the final were both dogs on stage. Not even at the end.

This led us to think it was Matisse who walked on the tightrope, which was not true.

Because the producers told her not to bring Chase out. There is absolutely no way you can blame Jules.

Prove it.

Did the UK cease to have any concept of innocent until proven guilty?

The default assumptions here should be that Jules didn't do anything she's denied, and that the producers DID do things they HAVE admitted. At this point, other than Simon arguably lying about what he did or didn't know, the show overall seems to have admitted to being responsible for how her act was billed, and Jules doesn't appear to have been doing anything other than following instructions.

The seeming need of the people here, the papers, and the GBP overall to crucify this poor lady are a shocking statement on British society. Reality shows lie, yes, I think we can assume that based on tons of things. But there's no reason to extend that to Jules short of proof. Innocent until proven otherwise.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s107/...pf4cSx1pJMQPG2





It is a FACT.

Both were at fault. Jules should've called the act something else, as she obviously knew what each dog was capable of doing, and knew she'd use more than one dog if she went through to the live shows.

The main reason they won was because of the trick on the tightrope (as the rest of the act was nothing that special).

It was Chase's trick that won the show, and he's not even acknowledged.

Jules wanted to call it something else but it was generalised to 'Jules & Matisse'.

And who would want to generalise a act's name?

The very people in charge of the show: the producers.

If what your saying is true, and it bothered her that much, then she'd walk away, but she was obviously happy enough to enter the show, and do whatever these "evil producers" told her too.

I could understand if it was a child, but she's a grown woman.

Well of course she was. You don't risk losing £250,000 and a chance to perform on the Royal Variety.