Anton is 42?!!!!! I don't believe it.

As I predicted Craig did a huge U turn on his comments on Patsy on ITT last night, the problem is you can't undo it. IF craig never said anything like that about Patsy then he should sue the Mirror or at least give an equally supportive piece to the Sun.

The apology was very limp IMHO, he admires ALL the celebs and think they are wonderful and work so hard, yadda yadda yadda. Not exactly vociferous support or apology to Patsy which was warranted after the tone of the article.

He's still a meany really.

Don't think it's that easy for Anton anymore. At the start, he was 100% supportive, patient, encouraging but it's become obvious over the past few weeks that it's beginning to take its toll on him. It really does "take two" and Patsy needs to be more supportive of Anton in return. At the moment, it's a bit of a one-way street where he's doing all the work to build her up every week and that's taxing on him. Yes, he's the professional, but she needs to work on herself, too.

I think there are two issues here. Firstly there's the matter of Craig's comments in the press, which were, in my view, totally inappropriate for someone who is judging the competition to make. Ok, so he's denied some of them, but all of them were bad news. He also made very positive comments about the others which show bias and thus compromise his position as a judge. I would imagine he's not stupid enough to sue over something which is ultimately so trivial. It's an incredibly expensive and stressful process. I do think he got away far too lightly on ITT - had I been interviewing I would have pressed him further. Claudia was way too soft.

The other issue is Patsy's comments on ITT. I think that Craig, Bruno and Arlene have every right to be furious at her attitude - but not to go mouthing off to the press or let it affect their marks.

I think the way forward is a big group hug and genuine apologies from everyone.

Maybe Claudia knew how things stood and did not want to further upset anyone by raking it all up properly so didn't probe. I think further interviewing would have required her to quote his phrases back at him, and that is giving them a second live BBC airing and also giving The Mirror press.

I think, looking back at the article, I can imagine a scenario where the reporter asks him all about the programme but then blows up all the Patsy things. I can believe him saying she should 'pull her head in and start concentrating' because a few judges have said this generally about the celebs. I also imagine that he said he was a bit miffed about her comments about his credentials as a judge and said the thing about 'looking on the internet would show my CV'.

As for the other stuff, it is quite possible that the reporter said ' how does it feel that a two-bit actress from a second-rate show questions you' - and he went on to answer normally, and they just tag it on because he didn't expressly say: "oy you can't call her that"

Who knows when the interview was done anyway? And why slag her off then apologise a bit and then praise her later? He knows it compromises his integrity and wouldn't want to put himself in a position where people will be looking at his marking and not trusting it to be totally impartial. He's a very successful man and worked with so many people in hit Broadway and West End shows, he's won Oliviers for goodness sake. He must know how the business works and have people skills and be above this sort of thing.

It's ridiculous. Without The Mirror, there would be no 'scandals' -they whip it all up like a storm in a teacup and leave other people to clear up the mess. It is very exasperating!