|
||||||||
Chase was wearing a collar with his name clearly on it! |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Another time, another place..
Posts: 24,629
|
Chase was wearing a collar with his name clearly on it!
Seeing as some have been quick to try and accuse Jules of deception, I think it's only fair to point out just as quick, that it's now come to light that Chase the 'stunt dog' was wearing a collar with his name clearly on it in huge letters, but viewers failed to notice it. Therefore he was quite clearly NOT meant to be passed of as Matisse as people have been claiming:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/b...earing-5806145 |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,636
|
Well that clears that up then!
It still won't shut the likes of jerefprdterra and myscimitar up, though. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In your house, guy's Butts
Posts: 3,194
|
Did you see how much the papers had to blow up a still pic of the collar showing the name tag, and so you really think viewers would look at the name tag as the dog went across the ropes, look again and be honest can you make it out anyway clear as the dog went across.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 683
|
Quote:
It still won't shut the likes of jerefprdterra and myscimitar up, though.
Quote:
Did you see how much the papers had to blow up a still pic of the collar showing the name tag, and so you really think viewers would look at the name tag as the dog went across the ropes, look again and be honest can you make it out anyway clear as the dog went across.
I think it's time to leave the lady and her dogs alone. If you feel that strongly about the show don't watch next year. There's programmes I moaned about and stopped watching- therefor I live a happier life
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,829
|
Quote:
Seeing as some have been quick to try and accuse Jules of deception, I think it's only fair to point out just as quick, that it's now come to light that Chase the 'stunt dog' was wearing a collar with his name clearly on it in huge letters, but viewers failed to notice it. Therefore he was quite clearly NOT meant to be passed of as Matisse as people have been claiming:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/b...earing-5806145 In the picture you can see the name on the collar, but you really can't see it in real time during the act. Hardly surprising that viewers didn't notice it at the time. The cameras did not zoom in on the name and enlarge the image the way the paper has. She could have had Chase on the stage with her after the act and said then that he did the tightrope trick, but she chose not to. I don't see this as a huge issue, but as she did not write Chase into the story I think we were supposed to think Matisse was doing the tricks. I think "deception" is a strong word, but equally can't see how this picture is evidence that the viewers were just remiss in not noticing the name on the collar. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 727
|
Quote:
I'd challenge the choice of the word "clearly" every time you used it.
In the picture you can see the name on the collar, but you really can't see it in real time during the act. Hardly surprising that viewers didn't notice it at the time. The cameras did not zoom in on the name and enlarge the image the way the paper has. She could have had Chase on the stage with her after the act and said then that he did the tightrope trick, but she chose not to. I don't see this as a huge issue, but as she did not write Chase into the story I think we were supposed to think Matisse was doing the tricks. I think "deception" is a strong word, but equally can't see how this picture is evidence that the viewers were just remiss in not noticing the name on the collar. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Basic confirmation that everyone who watches BGT is short-sighted like myself.
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 493
|
I don't really care about this story but you would need super eyes to able to see this on TV.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,746
|
Is this really the straw they are clutching at?
The first dog was put in at the bottom one side and taken out the other side totally and deliberately to make it look like one dog. Plus the fact that the other dog was not brought on at the end clearly show they intent to deceive that it was just one dog. NOTHING is going to change that. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 683
|
I agree that nobody could have read the collar on screen BUT the point is that the dog was wearing it! If it was the greatest conspiracy since the death of Princess Diana then the dog would not have been wearing it!!!!
Gosh people on here are cruel! Thank goodness dogs can't read or poor chase would probably hang himself from the tightrope!! |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 493
|
Quote:
I agree that nobody could have read the collar on screen BUT the point is that the dog was wearing it! If it was the greatest conspiracy since the death of Princess Diana then the dog would not have been wearing it!!!!
Gosh people on here are cruel! Thank goodness dogs can't read or poor chase would probably hang himself from the tightrope!! |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,746
|
Funny how the collar hasn't been mentioned till now as no one spotted it on the night and now the supporters are trying to run with that as it's the only thing they've got.
Maybe one of them could explain if no one had spotted it until yesterday, how could they have done so whilst paying for their votes? |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 683
|
Quote:
Princess Diana REALLY? It's a dog!
I agree it's just a dog, no conspiracy involved- just a dog who walked a tightrope. Nobody tried to cover anything up!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In your house, guy's Butts
Posts: 3,194
|
Quote:
Is this really the straw they are clutching at?
The first dog was put in at the bottom one side and taken out the other side totally and deliberately to make it look like one dog. Plus the fact that the other dog was not brought on at the end clearly show they intent to deceive that it was just one dog. NOTHING is going to change that. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,703
|
Quote:
Funny how the collar hasn't been mentioned till now as no one spotted it on the night and now the supporters are trying to run with that as it's the only thing they've got.
Maybe one of them could explain if no one had spotted it until yesterday, how could they have done so whilst paying for their votes? |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,773
|
Quote:
Princess Diana REALLY? It's a dog!
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,829
|
Quote:
Or perhaps the producers (including Simon who is executive Producer) told her it would look better if she didn't bring him out. Why does everybody assume that the acts get to decide exactly how their act is done? If that was the case they would never be able to keep the show to a schedule. People should really consider how ignorant they are before making slanderous accusations.
I don't know whether Jules had the choice to bring Chase out or not, none of us does. Bringing him out would hardly have knocked the whole show off schedule, particularly not if she'd arranged before hand to do so. I find it hard to believe that she would have been either advised or strictly told not to bring him out. I think the judges would have got a kick out of the reveal of the stunt dog. I find it equally hard to believe that the producers would think it would look better if she didn't bring him out at the time and then say later that another dog was used. That doesn't make much sense to me. I concede it could have happened that way, I just don't think it likely. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In your house, guy's Butts
Posts: 3,194
|
Quote:
It was quite clearly a different dog you don't need a collar to see that, the markings on their face are different (the white is wider on one).
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,122
|
Quote:
I agree that nobody could have read the collar on screen BUT the point is that the dog was wearing it! If it was the greatest conspiracy since the death of Princess Diana then the dog would not have been wearing it!!!!
Gosh people on here are cruel! Thank goodness dogs can't read or poor chase would probably hang himself from the tightrope!! Apparently what was needed was a gigantic neon light olive the dog saying NOT MATISSE. I REPEAT NOT MATISSE. Whilst Jules wore a THAT IS CHASE T-Shirt and a voice over informed us that the dog on the rope was in fact Chase. The very fact the dog was wearing the collar says she wasn't hiding anything. Yet that simple fact seems to have passed some people by. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In your house, guy's Butts
Posts: 3,194
|
Quote:
Don't you be coming in here talking common sense.
Apparently what was needed was a gigantic neon light olive the dog saying NOT MATISSE. I REPEAT NOT MATISSE. Whilst Jules wore a THAT IS CHASE T-Shirt and a voice over informed us that the dog on the rope was in fact Chase. The very fact the dog was wearing the collar says she wasn't hiding anything. Yet that simple fact seems to have passed some people by. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,122
|
Quote:
A coller that was only seen in the papers the next day, with a mega blow up image, no-one could see this moving tiny name on the night..so say that could see the dog name as it moved across the rope is just daft!
I'd explain it yet again but I'd be wasting my time. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,746
|
Quote:
It was very clever to hide the dog behind a area no-one could see and again after the trick, I believe this was to hide the fact the dog was changed.
I mean the extra dog wasn't shown at the end for the very reason that they were trying to past it off as one dog. All these excuses that are only just appearing are just that, excuses. And how many noticed at the actual time of payment that there was collar with a different name on it or the dogs face markings have changed? No one at all! (OK make it 0.0000001% of people noticed just to cover the pedants) So at the time of payment, due to the actions that had taken place in the act, people were misled. That's against the law, not a matter of opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21,643
|
Quote:
Maybe one of them could explain if no one had spotted it until yesterday, how could they have done so whilst paying for their votes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,746
|
Quote:
Nobody who voted for the act gives a toss.
Fancy trying to speak for` everyone and getting away with it on DS. You should start up a dog act. |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 433
|
Quote:
Yes it's exactly that - the whole thing set up and designed to deceive from the start.
I mean the extra dog wasn't shown at the end for the very reason that they were trying to past it off as one dog. All these excuses that are only just appearing are just that, excuses. And how many noticed at the actual time of payment that there was collar with a different name on it or the dogs face markings have changed? No one at all! (OK make it 0.0000001% of people noticed just to cover the pedants) So at the time of payment, due to the actions that had taken place in the act, people were misled. That's against the law, not a matter of opinion. The point of the vote was, you voted on the entertainment value. NOT which dog did it. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:40.




