But he's such a good character/real life person/Kevin Clifton/character/real life person/Kevin Clifton ...

Since when do they have form for saying other couples are overmarked? I find the way the Cliftons often circle the wagons and big up their own a little obnoxious and OTT, but this just feels like yet another way for people to try to make Danny specifically a victim.

I guess we have very different ideas of "professionalism". With your kind of attitude, little wonder there are squabbles among SCD "professionals".

That response to perfectly reasonable opinion, makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Don't confuse "observations" with "attitudes."

Precisely!!

Strictly is a light hearted, fun entertainment show & the girls & whoever else joined in were having a bit of fun, light hearted banter but hey wait a minute, one of them was a CLIFTON so let's get all uppity about it!!
Give me strength!!

They have form for saying that Kevin's partner is undermarked as per the final last year is what I meant.

What squabbles would those be? They all seem to be very supportive of each other and each others' celeb partners.

Sure you're not just imagining things?

I think Joanne didn't do Ore any favours with that because people will take out their "frustrations" with her and dislike for her on Ore - the same as people seem to do with Kevin and his partners.

At least Kevin makes his celebs his first priority (as it should be). And in that regard Joanne's behaviour was utterly unprofessional. Ore should be her top priority and as a professional she should be able to rein herself in when her actions may/will have a negative effect on her partner. But then she has overshadowed and overpowered Ore with her (ott) personality the whole series so far.

They seem to get on quite well, and have a great professional line up. No squabbles at all.

It'd be very hard for any professional not to "overshadow and overpower " Ore, even if they just walked through their part.
He's rather bland and appears "needy," no wonder many people aren't voting for him.

Yes, but your point initially was that by saying that Kevin is undermarked they're implicitly saying that Danny (who was just ahead) was overmarked. I disagreed, and then in response I thought you were saying that they had form for that (ie saying that other couples are overmarked). I just don't get that initial basic point. When I said, for example, last week that I thought Claudia had been undermarked, I wasn't saying that Daisy (one point ahead) had been overmarked. They're two separate things.

Not read the thread, but yes; terribly unprofessional. I can forgive Karen because she's no longer competing but Joanne, wow. There's disagreeing with the judges, and then there's terrible unsportsmanship like that. I couldn't believe it.

So, are you telling me that if you were in a competition with a close sibling of yours and they did very well in a particular stage, you wouldn't want them to get as good a mark as possible?

It's called being supportive.

No, it's me conflajuncting 2 things and expecting people to know what I'm on about.

To me, someone immediately after a score is in complaining of undermarking is implying that the one ahead has been overmarked (it doesn't matter who, just Danny in this case) Rightly or wrongly it's where my brain takes me.

If the same pair didn't have form for doing exactly the same thing last year - chanting undermarked for Kevin's partner - that probably wouldn't be my immediate reaction. But they did, so it is - and I can't shake the feeling there is an element of gamesmanship to it, however in error that may be.

It's woolly, but there it is.

Absolutely not. If I was just a sibling in the audience, then yes, but a competing professional behaving like that is despicable.

There's no point in bringing common sense and rationality into any discussion with the anti-Clinton brigade.

Just look at that ludicrous diatribe a few posts back and you'll see what you're dealing with.

All thoughts of reasonable perspective and proportionate response totally absent. Utterly bonkers.

Why is it despicable? Why is it unsportsmanlike? I don't hear any of the other professionals complaining about it.

In any case, the way you talk about it makes it seem as if she was the only one that was chanting it, when she wasn't. They were ALL doing it.

"Competing", being the operative word, ergo your observation is flawed.

"Despicable"...? Seriously? Do have a word with yourself.

All who? All the other Cliftons yes, not the rest of the competitors.


How does that make my observation flawed? By openly criticising the judges Joanne has shown a lack of respect for their opinion.

Supporting a fellow competitor is 'despicable'? What about those two brothers in a marathon or triathlon or something long-distance recently? One lad was wobbling all over the shop and his brother, competing against him, supported him over the line.

Mate, don't come on DS. They'll 'ave yer!

That is completely different and you know it. Using facile analogies to try and prove a point is just pointless. If Joanne had stepped in to help Kevin because he couldn't dance, then maybe it wouldve been relevant.

Do the viewing public honestly care so much that they would refrain from voting for Ore because they perceive Joanne to be supporting her brother ?
This has to be nonsense!

If "they " do the same because of some imagined problem of Kevin's, I wonder how he has made three finals so far? Odd that isn't it ?

Jo Clifton dies have a big personality, some may call it OTT, others may say she is vivacious and extrovert! Overpowering Ore ? Really ? He has a big enough , OTT personality himself and certainly isn't overpowered.

OK. Say one brother had finished and then stood at the end to cheer on his brother? Would that raise your ire?

Cheering, yes. Luckily triathlons are not marked.

Actually, there was a protest about the finish
But under triathlon rules assistance is allowed to other competitors.
(Alistair also said he would have helped anyone in that position because he had been helped in the past).
Just for completeness