Originally Posted by Monkseal:
“The show needs MORE talented male competitors, not fewer. Part of the problem with Jay is that he was the obvious stand-out male contestant, with his nearest competition for the hunk vote being a guy with one working arm and a 42 year old going out every Saturday and doing the Rhythm Nation dance because he was devoting 4 hours a week to training. What's notable about all the recent walkover male winners (Harry, Louis, Jay) is that they had no real young male competition whatsoever. In this series, by the time all the female-favouring voters had worked out which of Anita, Helen, Georgia, Kellie and Katie they liked the best, it was over - the Jay Bandwagon had built up enough steam over three months to roll over them all.
If you'd given Jay a Matt Di Angelo, or a Ricky Whittle or even a Housewives Favourite Matt Baker to tussle against (none of them boy-banders or even eventual winners), and created a bit of a question as to which man was better, you might have had a more all-round exciting fight. And even if not, and the testosterone vote overwhelmed the women, we've just had four series in a row where the ladies outperformed the men on average, in two cases substantially so. Having the reverse for once wouldn't be so bad.”
Agreed. Well said. Contestants just have to be young(ish) and fit. Who they are almost ceases to matter once we are halfway into a Strictly series.
The Irish crooner was dire this series, and I would not watch a show if full of contestants of the likes of Russell Grant, Craig Kelly, Paul Daniel, Chris Parker etc to watch their journeys, any more than a show full of Allison Hammonds, Judy Murrays or Carol Vordermans. All those personalities are wonderful in their career slots but few make a successful jump to the training room, let alone the dance floor.
Having said that, I have to make exception for two wonderful jumpers this series - Ainsley Harriott and showjumper Jeremy Vine.
”
:
