To be fair that has worked in Anita's favour with her Paso light Paso as well, but I agree with your point about consistency

Exactly... I don't disagree about Anita's paso. I was only using the dances between Anita and Kellie as a for instance and not because I think Anita has been the only contestant to be a victim of the inconsistencies.

I think enjoyment and appreciation of an entertaining dance comes into it.

If a dance is 'light' and full of tricks in order to disguise poor dancing ability and lack of technique (which I feel very much was the case with Anita) then it does tend to get pulled apart.

I liked Anita - I know she was an 'absolute beginner' but her actual dancing/steps/footwork really weren't that good. She could strike a good pose and Gleb put together some fancy stuff - sometimes too fancy IMO.

I'm all for the under dog doing well - I think Anita has gone as far as she deserves - IMO - not much to choose between her and Katie. On the night - Anita's dances were awful - Gleb was entirely responsible.

There wasn't a dance-off in Ann Widdecombe's series and she still didn't reach the finals. There weren't any more shock exits in series without the dance-off than there have been with it, in fact probably less. Series 8 and 9 had no dance-off and I don't think many people would argue that the wrong people reached the final in either. The risk of losing good dancers is just played up by the show as a reason to give the producers more control with a DO.

If they had ignored the lack of Salsa and put Anita through on the basis of dancing better and ignoring Glebs choreography, I would argue that Katie was a victim of the inconsistency.

I wouldn't say Anita was a victim of inconsistency, more that she was unlucky she was up against a dancer who improved in the dance off.

Maybe it's just to create another programme - it fills the schedule on the cheap.

Quite why anyone likes to imagine the producers prefer some celebrities over others to the extent of 'fixing' things is beyond me.

There is a professional/judges critique and score - and then the public get a say - sounds about right to me.

This is true but I dont think the show is fixed a a whole and yes some things can be manipulated ; like giving some contestants ridiculously high marks in some weeks while underscoring others.
I did think that Anita was underscored in some of her earlier dances.



I have to say though that with all this " uproar " I cant see Kellie/Kevin or Katie/Anton winning no matter how good they dance this Saturday.

But they still had the Sunday results show in series 8 and 9. They did it exactly the same but just didn't make them dance again - just announced the result. They could still do that and fill up the DO time with another pro dance or a guest etc. I don't think many people want to watch two of the worst dances of the night again anyway.

The ratings for the Sunday results programme might suggest otherwise

BIB - Anita had more than the three lifts they are supposed to have in both AT and salsa, and it was never mentioned. That was pretty generous of the judges.

I think that getting rid of the dance off would be a big mistake, because the quality of the show might be extremely poor by the end.

Personally, I want to see good dancing in the final, and I don't want the voting to be biased in favour of those with no dance experience. Each dancer has his or her own "journey" on Strictly, and it is wonderful to see people like Georgia, who studied hip-pop and street dance at dance school, being introduced to ballroom dancing, and improving vastly every week; and Kellie transitioning from brash and flash to sophisticated and sparkling.

It's a great pity that so much spite and nastiness is being directed towards the participants - celebs and professionals - who work like trojans to give us this amazing show. It is the height of ingratitude and typical of this selfish, spoilt, thoughtless and over-privileged society we live in now that people can be so dismissive and unkind about other people's quite outstanding achievements.

I would think people watch to see the results, not those 2 dances again. If the ratings for the Sunday show dropped significantly when they ditched the DO then I stand corrected, but if they didn't it suggests they would watch anyway.

From memory (as in the Ratings thread), and looking at recent years, the peak in ratings is not significantly higher than the average (it is higher, but not significantly so), which suggests that people generally watch the whole thing. If they only watched for the results then it would be reasonable to assume that many more would tune in for the final 10 mins or so.

I like the dance off, ooooh the tension, the jeopardy, the music the red light, the delight, the fear, the tears, the bravery, the not knowing if they will stuff up at the last minute or pull it out of the bag. I love it all.

I think a lot do. I also think that people sort of love the wait. Even those that can't resist the spoiler, love the tension of just the wait.

Part of the show for me.

I don't just mean for the result at the end, I'm sure people also watch for the pro dances, backstage bits and to see people called out under the lights etc., but they still did all that when they didn't have them dancing again. I just think that seeing two disheartened people dance their worst dances again when usually you know who the judges will choose anyway is probably not what most people enjoy about the results show and I think they would still watch without it. With no DO there was still the tension of seeing the final two under the lights at the end, but it was more unpredictable because it was down to the viewers. We can agree to disagree though .

Excellent article. The journalist is spot on. She made some very good points. Particularly concerning Darcey's scoring. How she gave Katie a 9 is beyond comprehension. She's really not fit to be a judge if she could score a dance that was performed so badly, with so many errors, a 9. It's true that Katie is certainly one of the weakest finalists we've had. It's going to spoil what would otherwise be a great final. Such a pity. Personally I'd prefer them to go back to a 3 couple final and have two couples eliminated in the semi. Having four is ridiculous and makes no sense. We never get to know who is second and third.

Indeed, agree to disagree it will be then.

So that bit might have been spot-on, but the rest? Excellent? Seriously?

Couldn't have said it better myself.

People seem to be under the impression that because they can (the internet allowing one to be totally anonymous), they should and do direct venom toward people they don't know and have never met. They never even consider the effect this can have on these REAL HUMAN BEINGS if they ever read this bile (which they can now, sadly, in the redtops and the Telegraph). It really only used to reflect badly on them - because what kind of person indulges in that kind of behaviour? But sadly, in these days of corrupt media and lazy journalism, such spiteful and downright vicious descriptions of TV personalities/actors/singers etc are eagerly pounced upon and included in 'pieces' in the rags which pass for 'newspapers' these days.

The writer of the article in The Telegraph comes across as a sulky, self-indulgent 10 year old throwing her toys out of the pram because her favourite personality didn't get the votes sufficient to keep her from the dance-off and lost out to someone who performed her dance better in the actual DO.

It's a sad reflection on society that we have succumbed to this type of peurile behaviour and see it as the 'norm' now. It's at times like this when I lose all hope for humanity (not that I have much to start with). We really are a pathetic species.

I'm not claiming that this should have been allowed for Anita. I only used her (with Kellie) as examples. What goes for one should go for all is the point that I was making.

Yes, seriously. It was a very well written piece. Raised some good points. Is a true reflection of what a lot of people are thinking and feeling (not just the people who post on DS) and rightly pointed out that Katie is a much weaker dancer than Anita. Also that Anton has been a poor teacher that can't teach latin. It also referenced this years storyline about getting Anton to the final, which has been incredibly annoying. I found the piece humorous as well, especially about the dry ice! It was a great article that hit the right note.

I heartily agree! It sickens me.

Katie was the lowest on the leaderboard. If Darcy had scored her two points less, it wouldn't have made any difference to anything. I think this is a no-win situation for the judges. I know people who voted for Katie because of her 4 from Craig - if she's had another hammering for the waltz, a lot of people might have felt the need to stick up for her. If they are too harsh, they are accused of creating a sympathy vote, if they are too generous they're inconsistent.

I wouldn't have a dance off, because I think it should be about the dancing overall, not one dance (particularly one dance out of two).

Well, having watched an absolutely beautiful rumba from Katie, I totally disagree. It was one of the stand-out performances of the series for me!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmeR9EeWpKs

As for that American Smooth from someone who has only been dancing a couple of months??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq5FKPHlhlU

WOW! Just WOW! Poor teacher?? I think not! Well done to Anton!

As for that journalist... I wonder if she has actually watched the show! She certainly knows nothing about dance.

And Twitter etc. But there are 10 million viewers. The Twittersphere Complaints Section, even if the small number of like-minded DS posters is included, is a tiny, tiny fraction of that, and is hardly likely to be objective either.

Well-written? Sorry, but starting a piece with the emotive words "Anita Rani and Gleb Savchenko have been outrageously voted off Strictly" is not a good start.

And to continue this piece with the words "Then, on Sunday night, to howls of derision from social media and half the nation, " beggars belief that this is written as an objective piece by a serious journalist.


But each to his/her own .....