Originally Posted by mindyann:
“I think the problem for me is that this way gives the judges 2 bites of the voting cherry.
They first of all get the opportunity to rank the dancers and then when the public have had their say, to vote again.
If they do want the judges to decide who goes, then the marking part should be done away with and all the celebs should start from the same level in the phone in - and they pick from the publics bottom 2. When all's said and done - why keep someone in who, however good they are, aren't popular with the voters?
It isn't purely a dancing competition - it can't be. Willie is never going to be able to dance as well as Alesha but that doesn't mean his improvement and committment should be disregarded. Voting before the dances have happened means that you aren't being asked purely to vote for a dance - how can it be when you haven't even seen yet.
It seems to be a programme that is trying to straddle 2 stools - a dance competition and a Saturday night light entertainment family for charity show - and at the minute it is failing a wee bit at both!”
“I think the problem for me is that this way gives the judges 2 bites of the voting cherry.
They first of all get the opportunity to rank the dancers and then when the public have had their say, to vote again.
If they do want the judges to decide who goes, then the marking part should be done away with and all the celebs should start from the same level in the phone in - and they pick from the publics bottom 2. When all's said and done - why keep someone in who, however good they are, aren't popular with the voters?
It isn't purely a dancing competition - it can't be. Willie is never going to be able to dance as well as Alesha but that doesn't mean his improvement and committment should be disregarded. Voting before the dances have happened means that you aren't being asked purely to vote for a dance - how can it be when you haven't even seen yet.
It seems to be a programme that is trying to straddle 2 stools - a dance competition and a Saturday night light entertainment family for charity show - and at the minute it is failing a wee bit at both!”
They have done that on cirque de celebrite - the public vote, the judges pick but don't mark.
The problem is whether the audience will vote rationally enough to get the best people to the final . The Cirque de Celebrite audience marked on quality and avoided the temptation to go for the sportsman or the underdog or the clown or the young male popstar and people didn't tend to go much before their time . Some ethnic minority performers got too few votes relative to their performance but that was balanced by Ninia the underdog staying a bit longer. The dancing on ice audience kept some people in whilst better people went but when it mattered they fell in behind the judges to get the best people to the last two. Their voters avoided thel journey and underdog and vote for the popstar arguments and went for the dancing.
The SCD vote is a different case. In 2006 it consistently ignored the judges, reversed their marking order, kept underdogs in, threw good people out, and failed to get the best dancers into the final. Given that makes the content and the judging irrelevant its not surprising that the judges rebelled against it happening again. You can't really expect them to pretend every year that the finalists deserve to be there when they clearly don't think they do .
As it is I suspect we will still see the wrong people going as I suspect several males will get more votes than their danciing deserves and I doubt if Gabby or Alesha and perhaps even one of one of Penny or Kelly,will get where merit might take them.
