Are you outraged by the result but comforted by Mr Goodman?

He's the most complicit.

He 'would've saved' Jamelia. No. He is in the easiest position to come out smelling of roses.

Evidently from moles, etc. even the audience wasn't behind Peter. Len voted according to the audience when it seems a lot of people think the other judges were told who to vote for.

Maybe Len should vote first in future.

Yeah, it's easy to look like you have integrity when your vote didn't mean anything. Len has done that before. The other judges were obviously told to vote for Peter anyway.

Idea - have Len's decision put in sealed envelope - add to the drama!

Agree 100%. Len had nothing to lose by saying he would have saved Jamelia when the others had already sent her packing. I noticed the audience cheered when he did so - they were obviously behind Jamelia. Len would have looked a right turnip if he did not choose to save her after singling her out for praise on Lens' (stupid) lens.

The whole thing was a con job and a bad one, at that.

How does his vote being meaningless, and for the other person, make him the most complicit? Are people just using this farce as an axis to swing off to slag off whoever they want? If so Karen Hardy was really annoying me on It Takes Two this week, give me a minute...

Puzzles me too!

Isn't that what happens anyway - the judges give their votes in before they have to give them outloud (like they do with the actual dance scores) to give the graphic bods enough time to bring up the voting glitterballs?

I thought the gist of the thread was suggesting Len changed his vote to please the crowd!

Don't they all press a button in terms of who they want to save, right after the dance? So the graphics are ready on screen.

I've never been, so you'd have to ask someone who's there, but unless there's actually a screen there in the studio why would they need to press a button? It's a pre-recorded results show, so the graphics can be added in later.

I know they score in that manner. But back in the days when the results were live, they still presented the graphics in the same way. Thinking about it more, they mention Len's "casting vote" so maybe he does get to keep things in check and vote reactively.

Craig, Darcy and Bruno all voting the other way seems farcical.

But there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that. So to say Len was the most complicit seems just a tad unfair., unless the OP is able to see inside Len's head.

It means he's no "hero", his vote in DO would not change anything so he had a luxury to keep his "good uncle Len" image. Others had done the work.

Not in the DO. They just say their choice and Tess counts up to four

One of the men here at work said - when we were discussing Lens choice - well that is easy for him to say 'after' the event and that it could explain Darcys reaction - it being the opposite of what she had been expecting (maybe). Just a thought. Mind you he dosn't like Len anyway, thinks he's two faced.

They are all two faced. They do what they are told by the producers. They have lost their professional integrity.

Arguably so, but that still doesn't make him the MOST complicit.

Maybe he would have saved Jamelia, I think he scored/placed her above Peter originally and she seemed to have improved in the dance off more than Peter.

And I reckon Darcey, at least, was wavering (hence her reaction when Len spoke)

Which is why they can't risk broadcasting the results show live

Len marked them both equally but during Peters comments it was mostly a list of things wrong and Jamillia got a list of every thing great about her dance. He clearly liked Jamelia's dance better.

Craig & Darcy have to go look at themselves after marking Jamilia higher than Peter and then voting her off.

I don't believe that the judges are told by producers who to vote for. But I do think some tactics might come into it sometimes and that is why perhaps Len said he would have voted for Jamelia, to soothe her feelings abut her exit. Kindness like that is ok by me, just words, no real effect.

I bet Len loved taking the moral high-ground in this instance. It's easy to gain favour with the public when the responsibility is taken from your hands.

For the first time this series the person the 'producers' would rather keep in the competition was the weakest dance in the dance off. This happens every year, It was obvious to everyman and his horse that on this occasion Jamelia danced better than Peter. However you (as a judge and the producers and a programme maker) are faced with a situation where you have a deeply unpopular contestant (Jamelia) who has been in the dance off several times and a first timer who is in the eyes of the producers a massive name for the show.

I have absolutely no idea if the judges are told who to vote for (I suspect not) but I also think they want to stay in the job. I think there might justifiably have been a bit of upset amongst the viewing public if a first time dance off'er who whilst he annoys me a lot, did have a bad night and could improve, was sent home over the dance off queen.

This is one of the reasons I hate the dance off and think it should be up to the public vote.

How is it obvious? And if the judges were told to vote for Peter, why didn't Len get the memo?


Why would he do that? Why would he care what a few hundred people in the audience at Blackpool think?



Indeed no evidence that he was complicit. And even if he did change his vote at the last minute to curry favour with the studio audience I fail to see how that makes him most complicit. I agree with you as a piece of rhetoric the argument on which this thread is based doesn't really hang together does it?



Why would the producers care who gets put through? The BBC have nothing to gain or lose irrespective of whether Peter or Jamelai lasts another week or two. In the past these conspiracy theories have been supported on the basis that so and so works for the BBC. Neither Jamelia or Peter are in the BBC fold so what motive is there for the BBC being partisan.

But if the BBC were to be issuing such instructions then what do you want the judges to do? Defy the terms of their engagement contracts so that they never get booked again and risk being sued for breech of contract?

And IF the BBC were giving voting orders and IF Len chose to defy them in a futile act of career suicide, that hardly makes him compicit.

Absolutely. The dance off is designed to smooth out accidental/temporary dips in audience popularity. But it works against itself when there is a very unpopular contestant who is an average dancer rather than a dreadful dancer.

It's bad for the show if it becomes clear that the least popular contestant is being put through week after week after week, so the producers are going to want to see an end to it.

I think this week, they just miscalculated and ended up with more reputational damage than they were curing.