People are saying you can't see Chase's name on the collar except in the blown up newspaper images. After rewatching it you can see on normal viewing that it says Chase, both dogs are wearing collars with their names on, both are viewable enough to see they are different:

http://i1272.photobucket.com/albums/...psquhndzn6.png

http://i1272.photobucket.com/albums/...pslakq9zz3.png

I've paused them, but you can see them without pausing them too, I watched them on YouTube on an iPad min and it's completely obvious so a large tv screen should show it up even more.

Good spot. I think we all need a trip to the Optician's.

She'd obviously tried to make it as noticeable as possible that it was two different dogs. Short of dressing them up or putting a coat with their names on them, which could be potentially dangerous for a dog on a tightrope, and of course she'd then be called cruel for dressing her dogs up. It shows clearly though that she was not trying to pass it off as one dog as some are saying.

I'm clearly going insane.

I can't see the dog's name.

If anyone else can see the dogs' names in those photos, then I relent and will be taken to the funny farm forthwith.

Also, weirdly, I didn't actually watch the performance frame by frame. Anyone else? If so, again, off to the funny farm for me.

Toodle pip!

On a serious note: Yes, I get the point that the owner labelled her dogs. Fine. That's not the issue here. The issue is the deception intrinsic in the presentation of the show. But anyway....

You can clearly see they are two different names, and you don't need to pause it, go on YouTube, find the act then look at the dog whilst it's on the rope, about 1.6 minutes in. If that wasn't enough when the dog faces you just before getting on the rope it is totally obvious it's not the same dog as it has a much narrower blaze up its face.

I've looked at it again.

And looking at it incredibly closely, focussing entirely on the collar (although why I would be doing that during the actual show, I don't know), but yes, I can just about make out some letters that look like SE or ASE on Chase's collar.

However...and this is a key point....the dog collars are identical and a casual viewer, like most ITV viewers, would have just assumed they were the same dog, and that SE was part of MATISSE.

They're wearing identical black collars - apart from their names. Had one collar been black and one white, then yes, I think, as a casual viewer, I might have noticed that difference. But not otherwise, sorry.

I'm just being honest.

The name can't be Matisse because it is clear enough to see that there are no two 'S's in the letters, and it's not long enough. Also the collar has the writing on the shoulder of the dog on the rope, it's under the chin in the second, collars don't move that much especially not in that short a time. And the face is definitely different.

What does it matter? The viewer will not be looking for a different collar when watching a dog entertaining. They'd be engrossed in the entertainment instead of looking at technicalities.

I'm with you there lol.
I'm finding the whole thing hilarious now how far some of the supporters are going to 'prove' their point.
Its actually quite entertaining within itself.

I can see the dogs' names. Off to the funny farm you go, then!

It is hard to see, and I doubt many would be able to see it on live tv when they're watching the act

They would if people were looking for it.

Yes cos that is what people spend their time doing. Checking out a dog collar.

This defending is going a little bit too far.

Night

Well people on here were frequently looking to see how Jamie Raven was doing his tricks.

Yeah but why would they

If they spotted letters on the dog's collar. Or were trying to work out how the dog got there so fast.

Its sad isn't it

I'm going now. Really

Night again.

Yes but answer the question why would you be doing that?

I'm sure if this was UDI you'd be up in arms insulting everyone

To work out how the dog got to the tightrope so fast. People can only blame themselves for not realising it was Chase because it was in plain sight. Nobody was conned at all.

That is not plain sight and people just assume the dig would run up a ramp or something. Your argument is so flawed and pathetic, seriously give it up

Yes that's why why there have been threads and news articles on viewers spotting a hole in the magician's lemon and ice cubes in his hand, and that the Welsh choir master refused to hold his hand in the final. If people can spot these whilst their watching surely they can also spot a dog's collar with two different names on?


He was indeed, and even if people didn't spot him, there was clues to show he was a different dog if you looked. So it's not a case of Jules misleading the viewers as has been claimed but rather the viewers not spotting what was in front of them. I've a good mind to send the two photo's to the papers because so far, none of them have picked up on the fact you can see the dogs' names without blowing the image up.

I don't think people would assume that at all. And the dogs wearing collars with their name on is definitely what I'd class as 'plain sight'.

But that's the whole point! In the story it's meant to be the same dog so of course they're going to look similar! But the fact they have completely different collars on shows that she wasn't trying to deceive anyone.

I don't think anyone was looking for the name as the act was billed as just the one dog, and it was clever to change to dogs behind a panel so no-one would notice it was a different dog.

so you have started this thread when you have already started a thread entitled "Chase was wearing a collar with his name clearly on it!"

Why are just two of you spamming the forum with multiple threads on the same subject and shouting down anyone who feels that they have been conned and defrauded in the voting just because you two are fans of the act?