Hi all

I have to say I watched neither tonight but why not guess the ratings for the clash?

EE - 6.9m
Emmerdale - 7.1m

Just a guess, now what's yours?

Even though EastEnders won the last time they clashed I have a feeling that Emmerdale will win again this time because of the double wedding and everything.

My guess is:

EastEnders: 7.2 million

Emmerdale: 8.3 million

Just a rough guess, when this happens the audience is usually down for both shows and you can tell that quite a lot of EastEnders viewers also watch Emmerdale. It's a shame really that ITV makes us choose which one to watch so often.
Last edited by Pansiks : 16-02-2006 at 22:07

Did EE win last time?

The reason Emmerdale wins is because it normally get 8 million for the first half then viewers move over to EE at half time but as Emmerdale is still on a lot of the EE audience stay put and catch it at 10pm so really it is no where near a huge victory for Emmerdale as it gets made out to be.

Well during the head to head part EastEnders had 7.2 million viewers whilst Emmerdale had 7 million viewers so EastEnders won but it was hardly a spectacular victory. That was on the 1st of December so it will be interesting to see the ratings now but they don't really a mean thing when you look at the bigger picture.

That was the episode when Sonia confessed to snogging Naomi infront of the vic

I think it will be:

EastEnders: 7.3 million
Emmerdale: 7.8 million

I want it to be:

EastEnders: 16.9 million
Emmerdale: 6.6 million

EastEnders is still the more popular soap by far so I wouldn't worry about it because all this does is split the audience because a lot of the viewers who watch Emmerdale also watch EastEnders.

There's really NO proof that it's a reflection on quality and the most logical reason is that a lot of the viewers watch both soaps and stick with Emmerdale which usually starts half an hour earlier.

Ok as much as I love EastEnders, seriously give Emmerdale a break. I know it's half ITV's fault, but Emmerdale want to do hour specials, they should be entitled to.

IMO soaps work really well in an hour long format and Emmerdale's hour specials from what I've seen are ace. They have to clash with EE, there's really no other option...

I was only joking and to be fair, 6.6 isn't out of the ordinary for Emmerdale.

Most of these hour long Emmerdale episodes are just padded out with the big event(s) usually happening in the last 15-20 minutes.

I'm sure if ITV wanted to they could change the schedule and put Emmerdale on later and to be honest with you there is no need for a soap that is on 6 nights a week already to NEED a 1 hour special to cover a storyline anyways.

Ok I completely disagree with everything you're saying.

Firstly, why should ITV move Emmerdale from 7pm? This would like, alienate the audience who tune in at 7 daily

Secondly, I don't think I have seen a single hour-long episode that doesn't fill the hour properly... they are always top notch quality and brilliantly written to span the hour.

Sometimes 30 mins isn't enough for a big storyline / episode and Emmerdale is like the only soap that even bothers to embrace the hour long specials anymore.

The only thing I sort of agree with is that with it being on 6 nights already an hour episode may be a bit much, but everything else u are saying is unfair

They should move it to stop making the viewers choose between two very popular programmes.

Anyways as I've already said these head to head battles mean absolutely nothing whatsoever.

I think you're all forgetting that the Sunday episode was cut to put that hour special on. There was no need for it, it was just 2 episodes shoved together.
Blatant ratings stealing from EastEnders.

Nuh uh.

Actually they remove the Sunday episode as it is the least permanent of the lot, so that the episode quota is the same. The episode tonight is written for an hour episode, it only had one writer, and was supposed to be an hour, not 2 thirty minute episodes "shoved together"
Only there's a slight problem: ITV only care about their channel, not their viewers, so they aren't going to move Emmerdale from a slot in which it prospers to please people who watch both it and another soap on a rival network, are they? I mean if you were the boss at ITV would you?

Probably not but that is one of the key differences between ITV and the BBC.

When EastEnders clashed with Coronation Street for the first time back in August 2001 and won, ITV wanted an agreement that the two shows wouldn't clash again. This just goes to show that ITV will only liase/agree with other networks when it suits them. The BBC is different because they agreed with ITV not to let EastEnders clash with Coronation Street again which they didn't have to do especially as it was in their favour.

But you could say the same about Saturday Night tele. Only one channel may show the live final of their reality tv show as it is "unfair".

Channels don't look at others to see when they broadcast and quite rightly so. They should be allowed to it when they went and how they want.

Well ITV weren't saying that when EastEnders went head to head with Coronation Street and thrashed them were they? It works both ways, ITV are just pure hypocrites and my prediction is that the BBC will outlast ITV by far purely because ITV have lost the plot in recent years and their channel is just getting worse with no improvements being made whatsoever.

I wouldn't call it a thrashing. EE got 8.4m and Corrie got 7.3m.

Also if I remember correctly the reason they clashed is because ITV moved Corrie back 30 minutes for an HOUR LONG Emmerdale... I may be wrong though

It was still over a 1 million lead for EastEnders and don't forget that EastEnders was 5 percentage points ahead in terms of audience share aswell. Mind you clashes aside this was nothing new for most of the first 17 years of EastEnders life.

Yes but a thrashing would be something more like 11 million for EE and 6 million for Corrie. 1 million isn't such a huge difference

It's basically impossible to please everyone in this situation. ITV shouldn't move Emmerdale, it's just unethical lol

No that is why they clashed so I suppose that they could put an hour long episode of Emmerdale on on a Wednesday and move everything back half an hour. The BBC don't traditionally have a strong Wednesday schedule so there would be no major clashes.
Then of course they could put an hour long episode of Emmerdale on on a Sunday if they wanted to.

These hour long episodes of Emmerdale are ordered so that they do clash with EastEnders (i.e. on purpose) and that's what I hate about all this. I actually don't mind as much when soaps have to clash incidentally i.e. EastEnders and Coronation Street back in 2001 but when it's all engineered like this then it's just annoying. Add to this the smarmy comments from the people at ITV about bringing EastEnders down and it just becomes immature on ITVs part.

Pushing Corrie out of the 7.30pm slot it has lived in for 45 years though... which is also ... unethical lol


Well no because TPTB at Emmerdale plan the hour episodes because they have a history of good hour episodes and the viewers recognise this and tune in because they know they're in for a treat

ITV get a bonus in that it clashes with EE but they'd rather that than move Edale or Corrie from their normal slots

If these episodes were just randomly planned then atleast one of them would not have been on a Tuesday or a Thursday i.e. when EastEnders is on.

According to this site http://www.barb.co.uk/viewingsummary...estTimeout=500 on 1/12/05

EE = 7.43m
Edale = 8.19m