|
||||||||
Stop blaming Jules |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Stop blaming Jules
It's not her fault. It's the producers. Simon Cowell said: Quote:
The moment I found out I literally put my head in my hands. I spoke to a lot of people after, and I did raise my voice On talking to Jules on the phone:But it was mainly people owning up to it. They felt embarrassed, they felt frustrated, they felt stupid, but you've got to man up to this stuff. I could hear in their voices, some were in tears, just mad at themselves," Quote:
"I feel that I let her down and that the show let her down. On the act's name: She shouldn't have to be in this position because she didn't do anything wrong. But I hopefully reassured her she should put on a very good show for the Queen. As she explained to me last night, 'It wasn't just about me and Matisse, like Ashleigh and Pudsey'. They should have been called Jules, Matisse and Friends" Quote:
O'Dwyer came up with 'Jules and Matisse' because she had no other name for the act, but wanted to show us that she was a multiple dog trainer.
Quote:
The producers are absolutely gutted. I was so depressed yesterday for the show, for Jules and for the producers themselves, because they are not horrible people. On revealing Chase did the tightrope:They made a stupid mistake on a live show. They didn't think about how it would appear. I was frustrated because I didn't really know what I was judging until afterwards so I felt like a bit of an idiot. Quote:
"That should have happened, 100 percent, and she could have said, 'Oh, by the way, Chase was the one doing the tightrope'." You're blaming the wrong person.
You've got to own up to your mistakes. The viewers have to trust us and know exactly what goes on. There was definitely no intention from the producers to hide this, that I do know 100%. "It wasn't one person saying 'hide the dog', so I welcome any investigation so [Jules] can walk out with her head held high." |
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,123
|
'blaming' anyone at all is pathetic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
'blaming' anyone at all is pathetic.
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,829
|
Quote:
That should have happened, 100 percent, and she could have said, 'Oh, by the way, Chase was the one doing the tightrope."
I suggested on another thread that Jules could have revealed Chase's participation in the act. I wasn't blaming her, saying she should be stripped of the title or that she was being deceptive. I got a lecture on how tv programs work and was accused of being ignorant and libellous. Nice to know that, as far as the EP is concerned simply telling the audience and judges that another of her dogs had been used was an option. I really hope all this dies down soon. I suspect this is really casting a cloud over her win for Jules. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,424
|
Quite simply the responsibility for what is transmitted is down to those who make the programme.
Given that Chase wasn't on the stage at the end I could excuse Jules for not mentioning it in the heat of the excitement. If those in charge had deemed such a revelation necessary they could have prompted Ant or Dec to mention it. There should have been people looking through tapes of the rehearsals or there at the rehearsals to pick up on this. The fact that they did not or did not deem it important means the blame lies with them not Jules. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
Quite simply the responsibility for what is transmitted is down to those who make the programme.
Given that Chase wasn't on the stage at the end I could excuse Jules for not mentioning it in the heat of the excitement. If those in charge had deemed such a revelation necessary they could have prompted Ant or Dec to mention it. There should have been people looking through tapes of the rehearsals or there at the rehearsals to pick up on this. The fact that they did not or did not deem it important means the blame lies with them not Jules. |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,487
|
I haven't seen the act yet but in the final act was any mention of other dogs being used in the act ?
If no mention was made that two other dogs were involved then Jules and the producers are responsible . If it was the producer's idea to not mention the other 2 dogs, Jules should have put her foot down and said no we have to say that 3 dogs are involved . |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,746
|
So they have admitted that a serious mess up was made and that people were deceived intentionally or by accident.
No matter which they took people's money under false pretences. That is against the law. They can arrogantly keep her as their winner as what they do is not subject to the law, but voting systems involving money are and they won't be able to get out of that one. The whole act has been tarnished and those coming second, robbed of a fair competition. Yet they are trying to get her off of it - Yeah sure! SHE hid the other dog at the end no one else did! If she was playing fair, she would had all the dogs who took part on display at the end. She didn't! She is as guilty as hell. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,746
|
Quote:
I just hope this thread stops people on here blaming the poor woman now. God knows what she must be going through.
Pull the other one! Shameful for other acts whose place she has taken. I hope like the Russian entry at Eurovision, people voice their disgust at the Royal Variety Performance. What a wonderful thing to show children that cheating gets you the fame and fortune that you want. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,746
|
Quote:
Indeed. But if they're to blame anyone, the proof shows it should be the producers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
I haven't seen the act yet but in the final act was any mention of other dogs being used in the act ?
If no mention was made that two other dogs were involved then Jules and the producers are responsible . If it was the producer's idea to not mention the other 2 dogs, Jules should have put her foot down and said no we have to say that 3 dogs are involved . |
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21,645
|
Quote:
She has a mouth doesn't she and of course could have brought the other dog on to clear up any deception. She chose not to and so is complicit in the whole thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
So they have admitted that a serious mess up was made and that people were deceived intentionally or by accident.
No matter which they took people's money under false pretences. That is against the law. Simon Cowell's only said anything because people were complaining. I doubt anyone would have even known if people hadn't got so worked up over a non-issue. Quote:
They can arrogantly keep her as their winner as what they do is not subject to the law, but voting systems involving money are and they won't be able to get out of that one.
1. It's not arrogant.And: 2. There was nothing wrong with the voting system used. People voted for the act as a whole, not just Matisse. Quote:
The whole act has been tarnished and those coming second, robbed of a fair competition.
Jamie Raven wasn't robbed of anything. The competition was fair. He lost. If he wanted to win, he should have been a better magician.Quote:
Yet they are trying to get her off of it - Yeah sure! SHE hid the other dog at the end no one else did!
Because the producers TOLD her to. She was hardly going to risk being kicked off the show by misbehaving behind the scenes. And it would have only gone against her; she'd have been called a 'diva' by papers no doubt.
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
The poor woman who didn't bring the other dog on at the end or say a single thing about it?
Pull the other one! Shameful for other acts whose place she has taken. How would you feel if people were calling YOU a fraud when it's not your fault? Quote:
I hope like the Russian entry at Eurovision, people voice their disgust at the Royal Variety Performance.
I for one don't because it wouldn't be fair on Jules, who wasn't at fault.Quote:
What a wonderful thing to show children that cheating gets you the fame and fortune that you want.
She didn't cheat, she only did as she was told.
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
She has a mouth doesn't she and of course could have brought the other dog on to clear up any deception. She chose not to and so is complicit in the whole thing.
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 17,852
|
I would not have voted for her had I known.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,746
|
Quote:
Have you any idea how ridiculous you sound?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21,645
|
Quote:
I would not have voted for her had I known.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,746
|
Quote:
It's not shameful at all. She won fair and square.
Quote:
I would not have voted for her had I known.
Why don't you understand that people were conned and rightfully object to giving money under false pretences. In fact it's down right insulting telling other people how they should feel about being defrauded out of THEIR money. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 17,852
|
Quote:
You didn't anyway, did you?
but I expected her to win, after the 3 legged dog appeared. So I think chase the stunt dog made quite a difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
I would not have voted for her had I known.
You do realise training two dogs to act will be harder than one (three if you count the three legged dog)? |
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 9,746
|
Quote:
You didn't anyway, did you?
Fact: You don't know how many people would have voted differently had they known and so all we are left with is an act tarnished by deception and voters defrauded. That before we get onto the other acts who have also suffered because of this whole thing. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
So not fair and square at all!
Why don't you understand that people were conned and rightfully object to giving money under false pretences. In fact it's down right insulting telling other people how they should feel about being defrauded out of THEIR money. If they paid to vote, that's their fault for not voting for free via the app. If they voted because they thought Matisse walked the tightrope, then they did it wrong (you're supposed to vote based on the act, not one small part of it). Plus it's ridiculous considering two acting dogs is more talent than one. |
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
That before we get onto the other acts who have also suffered because of this whole thing.
The other acts have 'suffered' nothing. They've hardly been injured because of this. |
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21,645
|
Quote:
Why not just answer posters instead of always trying to put down the poster due to the fact that you have nothing to counter the debate.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:34.



