|
||||||||
I love Kevin Clifton |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,080
|
Quote:
His choreography is excellent most of the time . But he has a tiny crew of non-likers who will criticise everything he does . Examples.
Too fast Too slow. Too twee. Too action-man. Too much content. Not enough content . His receding hairline is evident (oh how hilarious) . He smiles too much at the judges. He sulks at the judges comments. He scowls in hidden corners. He takes over in the Clauditoreum. EVERY . SINGLE. TIME . He has flounced from the Clauditoreum .(might be in the loo, but why spoil a good potshot). It's relentless, but unfortunately his non-fans are very very verbose and tend to feed off each others' negative comments so it looks like there are more than there actually are . Group think ? Probably . |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 16,124
|
Quote:
I think his partners may have had an effect though . None of them have been super popular .Kelly Bright most certainly drew some shocking brickbats on here for daring to live up to her name and be bubbly and loud . Then Louise
. Perfectly nice woman got labeled mumsy and beige and accused of dressing like a granny . Those are the milder 'insults' .So it's as much to do with his partners as about him . Women get treated very harshly in my opinion , much more harshly than men . T'was always so and unlikely to change . He could dance with a woman who rescued 45 children from a burning orphanage and she'd still get slammed for being too chubby/loud/thin/mumsy/beige/ or for not rescuing the orphanage cat . Kevin is not cool and doesn't have a sexy foreign take-me-to-bed accent or a rippling swarthy torso either, like many of the other pro guys . They should give him a male partner next year . Yep , a nice gay man with fabulous looks and def with a cute accent . That way he'd be guaranteed to win . |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,861
|
Does a pro get a contender?
Or does a pro make a contender? If 'the spirit of strictly' is all about someone who has never danced before 'becoming a dancer', why allow anyone to take part if they have had previous dance experience? How do you define 'dance experience'? Like many other Scots, I endured weeks of 'Christmas dancing' classes in the run-up to Christmas. Every year. From Primary 1 to sixth year. I can strip the willow with the best of dashing white sergeants and gay gordons - but would that make me a 'ringah'? Probably not ![]() Unless it turned out that - all the school evidence to the contrary - I actually had a natural sense of rhythm and musicality; beautiful hands and posture. And considerably fewer years (and kilos) under my belt. All that said, a pro who can make a contender could take me (and those of my ilk) further in the competition than you might expect. Cue a tabloid and internet examination of my Christmas dancing history...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 13,991
|
Quote:
Does a pro get a contender?
Or does a pro make a contender? If 'the spirit of strictly' is all about someone who has never danced before 'becoming a dancer', why allow anyone to take part if they have had previous dance experience? How do you define 'dance experience'? Like many other Scots, I endured weeks of 'Christmas dancing' classes in the run-up to Christmas. Every year. From Primary 1 to sixth year. I can strip the willow with the best of dashing white sergeants and gay gordons - but would that make me a 'ringah'? Probably not ![]() Unless it turned out that - all the school evidence to the contrary - I actually had a natural sense of rhythm and musicality; beautiful hands and posture. And considerably fewer years (and kilos) under my belt. All that said, a pro who can make a contender could take me (and those of my ilk) further in the competition than you might expect. Cue a tabloid and internet examination of my Christmas dancing history... ![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,376
|
Quote:
He might be the nicest, sweetest man who ever walked the earth....... but that doesn't take away from the fact that he hasn't managed to engage with the voting public well enough to give him the win on this show.
If he chooses/ is chosen to stay for next year, he really needs to tell the producers to give him a duffer to partner, as apart from his first year when his partner was probably the reason he didn't get the votes (she was too Marmite), he has been given a contender - something no other pro has been given. It's not fair that the other dancers have to deal with the less able candidates year after year whilst he gets handed a ticket to the final four years on the trot. Having to deal with an Edwina Currie, Esther Rantzen or Gloria Hunniford next year would go a long way to rehabilitating him with the viewers, as would the recognition by the judges that he and his partners make errors which are penalised when others make the, but ignored when Kevin does! Come on producers - give the guy a break and let him rehabilitate himself in the ranks of the also rans for a couple of years. Incidentally - Joanne and Ore were worthy winners last night.... 3 absolutely amazing dances performed with heard and soul in every move. |
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: glued to the computer
Posts: 10,035
|
Quote:
Aljaz got Abbey Clancy, Giovanni got Georgia, Trent got Pixie...
I must admit that while there are times when I want to say to Kevin, "Calm down," I don't get the hatred towards the Cliftons on this forum. People are allowed to dislike them, but it seems much more than that regarding the Cliftons. Sometimes it seems like people are just looking for reasons to hate them. And for all those who say there shouldn't be so many members of one family on the show, what would they say if Oti's sister and husband were to be recruited as pros? Oti is poplular, so would she suddenly become hated? |
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,168
|
Quote:
What a strange thing to say. He's the only professional dancer who has "managed to engage with the voting public well enough" to reach the final four times in succession! If Kevin is to take the blame for his partners not lifting the glitter ball, then surely he also deserves the credit for being the only professional dancer not only to reach the final four times but to have a 100% record for never having failed to reach the final?
The fact remains - in the four finals he has been in, he and his partner HAVEN'T managed to convince the public to give him the win. Last year was the classic example - he and Kellie were shoehorned into the final by the judges, and despite being top of the judges leaderboard, with the top "advisory" scores - the public went for the quieter and more unassuming, undermarked Jay as their winner. I doubt that the four finals would have been achieved without the help of the judges/ producers - which begs the question - WHY are they so desperate for him to get his hands on the glitterball? Hopefully, now that there has been a Clifton win (albeit the WRONG Clifton) they won't be pushing him so hard next year. He needs next years partner to be the female equivalent of Iwan Thomas and go out in week one or two - and if nothing else, being given a not terribly popular duffer we would see if he does have a personal popular vote like Anton does. |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 89
|
Kevin's been overexposed - and that's not his fault. With four finals in four years we must have seen more of his dances and interviews and reaction shots than even the long serving pros (I can't do the maths!).
He didn't choose his partners for goodness sake. He's part of a narrative devised by the producers. All his partners seem to love him and appreciate his support. Everyone who works on the show seems to like him. He has very few out and out disasters too. But to avoid Clifton fatigue, it's time to give him a rest and put him with a duffer. Absence will no doubt make the heart grow fonder. |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,654
|
Quote:
I doubt that the four finals would have been achieved without the help of the judges/ producers - which begs the question - WHY are they so desperate for him to get his hands on the glitterball?.
If they're so desperate for him to win, why do these efforts always seem to stop somewhere around the semis? Why is the only time they gave him a real push in the final the time that he had the one partner he's ever had who was transparently unpopular? |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,168
|
Judges / producers can control (to some extent) the couples who get to the final...... but once there they are exposed to the public and have no protection available - it's a straight popularity vote, and unlike us humble viewers, the producers know exactly which of the finalist has the public vote and who doesn't. Four lost finals, four different partners, nine different dances - the only common denominator is Kevin!
I agree that the judges choices for reprise dances were obscure.... Both Danny and Louise were given dances they had done badly/ made mistakes in..... yet Ore was given one of his high scoring showstopper performances - begs the question - why?? Just because Gene Kelly's widow was going to be there?? But - give us (and Kevin) a break next year, give him an older duffer and let him go out early. |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,943
|
Quote:
Judges / producers can control (to some extent) the couples who get to the final...... but once there they are exposed to the public and have no protection available - it's a straight popularity vote, and unlike us humble viewers, the producers know exactly which of the finalist has the public vote and who doesn't. Four lost finals, four different partners, nine different dances - the only common denominator is Kevin!
I agree that the judges choices for reprise dances were obscure.... Both Danny and Louise were given dances they had done badly/ made mistakes in..... yet Ore was given one of his high scoring showstopper performances - begs the question - why?? Just because Gene Kelly's widow was going to be there?? But - give us (and Kevin) a break next year, give him an older duffer and let him go out early. |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,744
|
Quote:
Danny was given a very high scoring dance to repeat - the fact he made mistakes in it because Oti changed the choreography slightly to be more Len pleasing i.e less faffing at the beginning isn't the fault of the judges choice in itself. The problem is that Louise needed to do a latin dance for contrast and rhumba was too quiet and moody and a bit boring and too similar in mood possibly to the AT- the paso ditto but it probably required too much costuming on a night when that was a factor (I think it's a part of why Danny wasn't asked to repeat his FT) and the same would have been true of the Charleston and her samba was too recent and equally underperformed. She could have been asked to repeat her jive I suppose that was alright but I think they knew Ore was jiving later and possibly wanted more of a range for production reasons and thought she'd be hurt in comparison to his.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,376
|
Quote:
He may have reached the final four times, but at least one of those was with a little help from the judges on leaderboard placing, in the earlier shows ensuring safety.......
The fact remains - in the four finals he has been in, he and his partner HAVEN'T managed to convince the public to give him the win. Last year was the classic example - he and Kellie were shoehorned into the final by the judges, and despite being top of the judges leaderboard, with the top "advisory" scores - the public went for the quieter and more unassuming, undermarked Jay as their winner. I doubt that the four finals would have been achieved without the help of the judges/ producers - which begs the question - WHY are they so desperate for him to get his hands on the glitterball? Hopefully, now that there has been a Clifton win (albeit the WRONG Clifton) they won't be pushing him so hard next year. He needs next years partner to be the female equivalent of Iwan Thomas and go out in week one or two - and if nothing else, being given a not terribly popular duffer we would see if he does have a personal popular vote like Anton does. If the BBC is really so desperate for Kevin Clifton to get his hands on the glitter ball, ask yourself why they don't give him young, twentysomething partners instead of the three out of four he's had that have been several years older than the oldest-ever female Strictly winner? Then ask yourself why the judges chose such a dog of a "Judges' Choice" dance for Louise against Ore and Danny's glitzy golden-age-of-Hollywood numbers? And finally, simply ask yourself 'why'? Why the hell would the BBC give a stuff whether one hired pro dancer gets the glitter ball ahead of another? You know maybe there's something in your thinking... Maybe some high-up at the BBC favoured Aliona, so they partnered her with fit young pretty boys they knew the public would vote for blindly, irrespective of merit, but in between times they cleverly gave her a couple of hideous lumps, so the punters would pity her. And it paid off - she won twice, the suckers!! I think that theory stands up to about as much scrutiny as your Clifton Family Conspiracy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 80,198
|
Quote:
They were placed higher because they were better. I understand that a brassy, pushing-40 soap starette may not be everybody's cup of tea, and lots of people thought Jay was adorable on the strength of one quite good jive followed by a series of mostly stiff disappointments, but that doesn't make it a judging conspiracy. They judges voted as they saw it. If the public were always going to choose the puppyish pretty boy, so be it.
If the BBC is really so desperate for Kevin Clifton to get his hands on the glitter ball, ask yourself why they don't give him young, twentysomething partners instead of the three out of four he's had that have been several years older than the oldest-ever female Strictly winner? Then ask yourself why the judges chose such a dog of a "Judges' Choice" dance for Louise against Ore and Danny's glitzy golden-age-of-Hollywood numbers? And finally, simply ask yourself 'why'? Why the hell would the BBC give a stuff whether one hired pro dancer gets the glitter ball ahead of another? You know maybe there's something in your thinking... Maybe some high-up at the BBC favoured Aliona, so they partnered her with fit young pretty boys they knew the public would vote for blindly, irrespective of merit, but in between times they cleverly gave her a couple of hideous lumps, so the punters would pity her. And it paid off - she won twice, the suckers!! I think that theory stands up to about as much scrutiny as your Clifton Family Conspiracy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 28
|
Quote:
Yep .
A mass secret crush . Like when you pull the pigtails of the girl you fancy in primary school .Don't get me wrong , it's fine to dislike someone . That's human nature . Sniping at a pro or celeb is fine (lord knows I do it myself) , but there is something tragic about posting thread after thread, year after year about how awful someone is physically , mentally and in every way possible when there is nothing actually outstandingly horrible about the person . No rumours of temper tantrums, no flirting , no cheating, no bitching about anything or anyone . It's quite bizarre how ordinary this demon man is . |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 6,485
|
Quote:
They were placed higher because they were better. I understand that a brassy, pushing-40 soap starette may not be everybody's cup of tea, and lots of people thought Jay was adorable on the strength of one quite good jive followed by a series of mostly stiff disappointments, but that doesn't make it a judging conspiracy. They judges voted as they saw it. If the public were always going to choose the puppyish pretty boy, so be it.
If the BBC is really so desperate for Kevin Clifton to get his hands on the glitter ball, ask yourself why they don't give him young, twentysomething partners instead of the three out of four he's had that have been several years older than the oldest-ever female Strictly winner? Then ask yourself why the judges chose such a dog of a "Judges' Choice" dance for Louise against Ore and Danny's glitzy golden-age-of-Hollywood numbers? And finally, simply ask yourself 'why'? Why the hell would the BBC give a stuff whether one hired pro dancer gets the glitter ball ahead of another? You know maybe there's something in your thinking... Maybe some high-up at the BBC favoured Aliona, so they partnered her with fit young pretty boys they knew the public would vote for blindly, irrespective of merit, but in between times they cleverly gave her a couple of hideous lumps, so the punters would pity her. And it paid off - she won twice, the suckers!! I think that theory stands up to about as much scrutiny as your Clifton Family Conspiracy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: glued to the computer
Posts: 10,035
|
Quote:
They were placed higher because they were better. I understand that a brassy, pushing-40 soap starette may not be everybody's cup of tea, and lots of people thought Jay was adorable on the strength of one quite good jive followed by a series of mostly stiff disappointments, but that doesn't make it a judging conspiracy. They judges voted as they saw it. If the public were always going to choose the puppyish pretty boy, so be it.
If the BBC is really so desperate for Kevin Clifton to get his hands on the glitter ball, ask yourself why they don't give him young, twentysomething partners instead of the three out of four he's had that have been several years older than the oldest-ever female Strictly winner? Then ask yourself why the judges chose such a dog of a "Judges' Choice" dance for Louise against Ore and Danny's glitzy golden-age-of-Hollywood numbers? And finally, simply ask yourself 'why'? Why the hell would the BBC give a stuff whether one hired pro dancer gets the glitter ball ahead of another? You know maybe there's something in your thinking... Maybe some high-up at the BBC favoured Aliona, so they partnered her with fit young pretty boys they knew the public would vote for blindly, irrespective of merit, but in between times they cleverly gave her a couple of hideous lumps, so the punters would pity her. And it paid off - she won twice, the suckers!! I think that theory stands up to about as much scrutiny as your Clifton Family Conspiracy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,654
|
Quote:
Judges / producers can control (to some extent) the couples who get to the final...... but once there they are exposed to the public and have no protection available - it's a straight popularity vote, and unlike us humble viewers, the producers know exactly which of the finalist has the public vote and who doesn't. Four lost finals, four different partners, nine different dances - the only common denominator is Kevin!
I agree that the judges choices for reprise dances were obscure.... Both Danny and Louise were given dances they had done badly/ made mistakes in..... yet Ore was given one of his high scoring showstopper performances - begs the question - why?? Just because Gene Kelly's widow was going to be there?? But - give us (and Kevin) a break next year, give him an older duffer and let him go out early. As for knowing the public votes, Louise was either top or second going into the final ; unless Patrick beat Natalie in the semi vote (v. unlikely imo), Susanna was also either top or second going into the final ; and Frankie we're less clear on but in the quarters she beat Simon and the week before she beat Mark, and we also know she beat Caroline when she was bottom 2, meaning she'd beaten all of the other finalists at least once. All contestants with a healthy public vote - Susanna in particular escaped the bottom of the leaderboard again and again and again at the end. |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Leicester!!!
Posts: 13,029
|
Quote:
Brendan and Sophie is a perfect example of a pro getting it wrong. Hugely popular partnership right up to the final show, then a disco style show dance and "bye bye Sophie".
|
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: glued to the computer
Posts: 10,035
|
Quote:
What was wrong with their show dance?
I still wonder if Brendan actually chose the music for the showdance, or if like all the other dances throughout the series, the producers didn't give him much (if any) choice. |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 80,198
|
Quote:
Danny didn't do badly at all in his quickstep the first time - he scored 36. Based on the comments I'd say Craig knocked a mark off because he's Craig, Darcey probably knocked a mark off because it was too early in the run, Len knocked a mark off for the choreography, and Bruno knocked a mark off because he saw a mistake that later turned out to be Oti going off-piste (she said). None of that is due to Danny. They laid him up for a sitter for 40/40 (seriously, how many times have the judges said they regretted it not getting a 10 the first time?) and another Flackers-esque sweep of perfect scores in the final and he biffed it.
As for knowing the public votes, Louise was either top or second going into the final ; unless Patrick beat Natalie in the semi vote (v. unlikely imo), Susanna was also either top or second going into the final ; and Frankie we're less clear on but in the quarters she beat Simon and the week before she beat Mark, and we also know she beat Caroline when she was bottom 2, meaning she'd beaten all of the other finalists at least once. All contestants with a healthy public vote - Susanna in particular escaped the bottom of the leaderboard again and again and again at the end. And to the point. |
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,298
|
Quote:
Sophie was more of classical, elegant ballroom girl. Disco didn't suit her.
I still wonder if Brendan actually chose the music for the showdance, or if like all the other dances throughout the series, the producers didn't give him much (if any) choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 🍷 🎼 ☔
Posts: 10,117
|
Quote:
Who was Sophie?, I can't for the life of me remember who she is!.... Give me a clue someone please with a surname?....
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,298
|
Quote:
Sophie Ellis-Bextor
|
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,212
|
Quote:
If they were that desperate for him to win, why get him to the final and then stymie him so obviously when he gets there? This year Louise got a dance she was hopeless at for her reprise (compared to both guys getting their second or third best routine of the entire series), a comparatively muted reaction to her showdance, and a general shifting of the narrative onto Danny vs Ore. The same with Frankie - get her to the final, then give her the samba (which she hated and looked awkward doing), have Craig actively take the mickey out of elements of her Showdance, and make the story in terms of judges comments very obviously Caroline vs Simon. Susanna even more so - she was plonked right at the bottom end of the leaderboard more or less every week from Blackpool onwards and was treated like a bit of a chancer right til the very end.
If they're so desperate for him to win, why do these efforts always seem to stop somewhere around the semis? Why is the only time they gave him a real push in the final the time that he had the one partner he's ever had who was transparently unpopular? Quote:
They were placed higher because they were better. I understand that a brassy, pushing-40 soap starette may not be everybody's cup of tea, and lots of people thought Jay was adorable on the strength of one quite good jive followed by a series of mostly stiff disappointments, but that doesn't make it a judging conspiracy. They judges voted as they saw it. If the public were always going to choose the puppyish pretty boy, so be it.
If the BBC is really so desperate for Kevin Clifton to get his hands on the glitter ball, ask yourself why they don't give him young, twentysomething partners instead of the three out of four he's had that have been several years older than the oldest-ever female Strictly winner? Then ask yourself why the judges chose such a dog of a "Judges' Choice" dance for Louise against Ore and Danny's glitzy golden-age-of-Hollywood numbers? And finally, simply ask yourself 'why'? Why the hell would the BBC give a stuff whether one hired pro dancer gets the glitter ball ahead of another? You know maybe there's something in your thinking... Maybe some high-up at the BBC favoured Aliona, so they partnered her with fit young pretty boys they knew the public would vote for blindly, irrespective of merit, but in between times they cleverly gave her a couple of hideous lumps, so the punters would pity her. And it paid off - she won twice, the suckers!! I think that theory stands up to about as much scrutiny as your Clifton Family Conspiracy. BIB: Not to mention the fact that said professional promptly (and 'coincidentally') quit after becoming the first to lift the Glitterball twice. Even John Logie Baird didn't perform THAT much 'engineering'.... |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 15:41.




. Perfectly nice woman got labeled mumsy and beige and accused of dressing like a granny . Those are the milder 'insults' .