Len Goodman said what you would expect him to say, basically its all a matter of personal choice.

Its just strange that two of the judges marked PA one point lower than J in the first round , but then decided PA danced better in the DO, although he clearly didn't.
Just a matter of personal choice ?

One thing is certain, the size of the row has got the BBC worried.

Personally, I think Len made matters much worse

1 - They judge on the dance off alone.
Well, we know they sometimes don't.

2 - No one from production ever helps them script answers.
Hmm. Really Len?

3 - No one from production ever tells them what marks to give.
Well that's total horse dung, otherwise they wouldn't know to give lower marks initially and then keep bumping them up across the series. Someone clearly TOLD them to do that, otherwise they'd give 10s in the first show and have nowhere to go.

4 - Peter improved in the DO.
Not true.

Yes

Would it be the real PA or just an effigy, because that would affect my decision?

Well, let's see, whom to believe??? What a conundrum. Should we believe Jamelia, who, until this past week was universally slated "Can't warm to her" "She's that awful bint from Loose Women" etc., or should we believe the Head Judge.

Suddenly Jamelia had adopted the role of wronged woman *sob*, oh no, no bitterness here, just a thoroughly nasty woman who stayed beyond her time, taking revenge as only a woman can.

In the blue corner, we have Len, Head Judge, who assumed sainthood on this forum for saying he would have saved Jamelia. But wait! Horrors! He's reneged and explained all the brouhaha away. In the space of 15 minutes he is now the devil incarnate.

It's the producers fault for introducing pulp fiction into the show .
Now the panel have become travolta, jackson, thurman and rhames and there are going to be blood drenched bodies and chopped off pinkies lying everywhere . Like halloween but real .
Run people , run like the wind ! Or just switch off and read a mills and boon .

If they were going to fix it it would make more sense to have Len and Bruno save Peter, as they scored Jamelia/Peter the same. It's interesting, though, that Len said he felt Peter improved a bit but said nothing about Jamelia... he marked them both eight. If he felt Peter improved and Jamelia didn't surely he should have saved Peter?

This is what's really getting on my nerves though - Len says it's all a matter of taste but surely technique shouldn't be down to taste? Either he's doing kicks and flicks or he isn't. It shouldn't be a disputable point (unlike character/acting out the dance). I would have admired him more if he said they saved him on past performances and decided to give him a second chance... though of course that would have thrown the whole point of the Dance Off into doubt. So I think Len was being honest throughout all he said and yet, somehow, he muddied the waters at the same time.

As for continuity shots... if they're done all the time (after the Dance Off?) then why hasn't Jamelia noticed them before? Maybe someone needs to ask her that!

EDIT: In terms of 'scripted' responses I'll give the judges the benefit of the doubt on this one... I think they might watch the rehearsals, dream up a pithy response on that standard then say it on the night.

Don't watch the spin-off show. Can someone give a summary of what Len said?

Precisely! It speaks volumes about how the production team is content to treat us as if we were born yesterday.

Well played!

Absolutely, there was no mention of booing by anyone in attendance.

I love Strictly and I am happy they saved Peter. I want Anton to win. I am so sick of all these stupid claims. The winner is voted by the public, so does it matter whom they take through. Sometimes you have to save potential, if people are not happy with Strictly, they can always watch Jamelia's channel ITV.

To paraphrase:
It wasn't a fix, the original dances were only two points apart so not a massive difference (he & Bruno gave both 8), it all came down to taste, he thought Peter had improved on his original performance so he can see why the others voted the way he did.

I guess we can believe the evidence of our own eyes and use our own common sense. It's illogical to assume that because a few posters praised Len for voting to save Jamelia that this somehow permanently validates everything he says subsequently!

What's it like to disbelieve everything, to mistrust people. To accuse people of lying and cheating because you just can't accept that people don't do precisely what you think they should or expect them to.

What's it like to feel it's ok to brand people unfairly just because you have decided that you don't want to believe them

What's it like to be so sure that you're right, when you have no evidence or justification, that you will just never ever allow yourself to be satisfied.

What's it like to not be able to respect that other people have a right to opinions that are different from yours?

It far more illogical to accuse people of lying for absolutely no reason

You have shown you simply cannot bring yourself to listen to anything that does not accord with your view on this matter and you will keep repeating your own version of events no matter what is said or shown to the contrary,
So really why keep on.

You're right I think.

If by some miracle Peter puts in a brilliant dance on Saturday and gets high marks for it, people will say he has been deliberately overmarked to keep him in the show and attempt to justify the decision to keep him in.

If Peter is marked poorly and/or eliminated, his fans will say it is a fix and that he is being thrown under a bus to try and prove that they aren't biased towards him and that he didn't deserve to go.

Whatever they do from here on with him, they can't win. And I have no sympathy whatsoever.

This ^^

They are calling Len a liar, surely if you feel so strongly about this you should not be watching a show that you perceive to be fixed?

I think you are talking about your own behaviour here!

Oh please , this is a woman who signed up for a survival show in the jungle, then screamed at every tiny creature that ventured within ten feet of her , was shocked at the rain, couldn't cope with the toilet facilities bemoaned the lack of manicure facilities .
It was the jungle, but she was unaware of all the above .
On strictly she likely spent all her time admiring herself in the ladies loo, weeping gently that she polled the least votes yet again and therefore missed anything going on around her . She's not exactly observant , just very very bitter .

I don't have a problem with people calling Len a liar and I have always assumed that Strictly is fixed to quite a large extent but I still enjoy it.

Hmmmmmmm...

Will have to check out iplayer and see whether there really WAS improvement in Peters performance from first dance to DO.

When I was watching the DO on Sunday my perception was that he was actually worse than in the main show but I'm willing to look at it again.

I think you'll find you need to address that question to the mirror, there is nothing I've said that warrants that response from you

I'm open minded , fair , reasonable, and have not formed any emotional attachment to a view. It's unimportant.
You simply can't see anything other than your view and are willing to make seemingly endless unfounded and increasingly ridiculous accusations.
Carry on. I'm not interested. It's dull