Normally there is a dance off and the judges keep whoever they think did the best dance. So on Saturday why not apply that rule to the dances in the show? Melvin scored 1 point more than Anastacia so Anastacia leaves.

Unfair because they didn't get a second chance? Well people seem to think it was perfectly ok that Melvin didn't get a second chance.

Let's face it Anastacia was pretty awful even week 1 with no injury and 3 weeks training. Was she really any better than Melvin? The judges didn't seem to think so did they?

Very good point catkins.

After all, it is our added votes which determine who ends up in the DO. As there was no DO, our 'participation' should be sidelined in favour of the judges votes only. Exception would be if the two couples were tied on judges votes - in that case, revert to our additional scores.

Perfectly logical!

By all means.

As there was no elimination in Week 1, the leader board was ranked on combined scores.

Anastacia 50
Melvin 45

Sorted!

Because the public pay to vote by telephone? So this seems the fairest option.

I suspect this was why they went to an elimination - because the public score matched the judges score exactly - Melvin scored less cumulative points than Anastasia over the two weeks. There was no issue that certainly would have come about if Melvin was one of those mid-table plungers, who end up in the dance off through lack of public support.

My suspicion is that, had there been someone who was in the dance off position because they came so low in the public scoring, yet the judges rated them several positions higher than the other pair, they'd have announced 'no elimination', despite there being caveats in the rule book about eliminating without a dance off. Sad to lose anyone in those circumstances, but I predicted Melvin would be first out weeks ago, and I was right that he didn't have enough public support.

Because people would cry 'fix' that the judges could have rigged the result blah blah blah, because clearly some are never happy no matter the outcome.

Oh, and as has already been pointed out, Melvin would still have left on judges' scores, coming second from bottom on the leaderboard. But why let facts get in the way of things?

It could be said that Anastasia was actually the mid table plunge. It would have been extremely difficult for someone higher than her on the leaderboard to be in the bottom 2 while her scoring less than her in the public vote - possibly only Robert and Oksana - and my spidey senses tell me they weren't dead last in the public vote.

No way, too early to swear. The judges have their favourites, Ultimately it's an entertainment show and the public should have the last word. I have no problem with
scrapping dance off and eliminating the person with the lowest public votes.

Iirc, in the case of a tie when the judges and publics scores are added together, the public vote takes preference.

The show is being run for the benefit of the public, not for the benefit of the judges, so using public votes is fair.

Since all the hoo-ha about voting, the BBC are very careful to ensure that public votes aren't "wasted". In other words, that the public hasn't voted on something that they can't possibly influence. So in cases like this the public will always take precedence these days.

What would happen if both judges marks were equal and the phone votes equal as well. Very unlikely but not impossible.

Wonder if there is a rule for this situation in their book

Len is usually cast as The Ultimate Tie Breaker.

In the dance off, if there had been one, they were going to do the dance they did that evening - the 2nd dance for both of them. They were not able to choose which of the 2 dances to do so the judges scores for those dances ONLY should have counted.



Well the fact is, as I said above, they were only going to do 1 dance each in the dance off, the dance they had performed early that evening. If they were going to do 2 dances each then yes I can see the argument about the combined scoring although still unfair on Melvin not to get a chance to dance again.

If there had been a dance off then the judges are supposed to judge on the performance in the dance off alone not the earlier dance or the week before's dance. So say there had have been a dance off and they both performed the same then Melvin should have stayed because only an hour or so earlier they thought he did the better dance.

Why let facts and the truth get in the way of your thinking though



So why is the elimination not on the public's votes every week but the judges' opinion?
The producers or whoever obviously think that is a fair way until it comes to the final so why not on Saturday?

The judges deciding on a dance off means they can save the least popular to dance another day. Sometimes regardless of who danced best. Jamelia vs Peter last year for example. Plus it adds a bit of drama to the results show.

Never mind votes, or points, with little to choose between two of 'em, Anastasia was worth more ratings %. She's still there.

The differences between the dances were a single point, from a single judge. The other three all thought they did equally as well, so it is not as if one was clearly better.

Of course we all know the judges do that despite Len's pathetic attempts to deny it but they are not meant to.

Is Anastacia really that much more popular than Melvin? He was much closer to the bottom of the leader board than her yet still ended up in the dance off. If you read social media she didn't even seem that popular before the fiasco but is even less so now. In fact I am actually surprised how many people say they had never heard of her (even Americans saying that).

I did know of her beforehand and liked her although she has gone down a lot in my estimation. I didn't know Melvin but thought he seemed a nice, genuine person who, I think, given a chance would have grown on the public

Well, she received more public votes than him.

I don't know, who's Melvin?

Because the judges are biased and manipulate their marks as was demonstrated most clearly in series 6.

As a tax payer I object to the fat fee the judges receive in order to be production muppets. Their fee should be reversed with that of the pro dancers.

As has been clearly stated...

1. Anatascia scored better than Melvin overall. A lot better in wk1 and only one point worse in wk2. She would've been put through by the judges on the basis that she is the better dancer of the two and was hampered by the injury (yet still was ranked equally with a fully fit Melvin by three of the judges).

2. People had paid to vote. Their votes not counting would cause a huge headache for the BBC. They won't be going down that road again after what happened with Tom Chambers.

And as many will say "Austin wuz robbed". Mostly down to the judges repeatedly saving Lisa, when the public were not supporting her.

...Because she was injured??

My guess is that she will be in the dance off this weekend because British people don't like unfairness, but unless she's in the bottom two with Ed, or possibly Naga then she'll be going home as everyone else is better than her. They're doing a Viennese Waltz which she said was made for her because she has to keep her right arm (the injured side) in a fixed position and only move the left one.