Bruno's judging is NOT impartial

5 of 5

mossy2103

01-11-2007

Originally Posted by Puffle:
“What I meant was - the week before X factor had sharon Osbourne walking out and the big kerfuffle about that, so BBC were most likely concerned about people turning over to watch what's going on with X factor, finding they prefer it (especially as the results show is live on a Saturday night) as there is a bit of b*tching between the judges and general nastiness, and staying rather than coming back to SCD.

This years strictly has been very 'nice' so far - no controversy (don't forget B&C did a lift in their first dance last year so controversy was there from the start), everyone gets on extremely well, no backbiting and everyone supportive. The beeb needed to do something to keep the viewers hooked and without Gabbygate what better way than for the bad-boy-turned-good to turn bad again?

Of course, we will never know if this is true or not just as we will never know if JFK was bumped off by the CIA or genuinely murdered.”

Yes, of course X Factor had some helpful (self-generated?) publicity, however, there is no real evidence anywhere that anyone at the BBC was the least bit worried. Nor need they be.

CaroUK

01-11-2007

They need to the thing they do in Gymnastics - ignore the lowest and highest scores and just count the other 2.

That would stop Craig's low marks and Bruno's high ones.

mossy2103

01-11-2007

Originally Posted by CaroUK:
“They need to the thing they do in Gymnastics - ignore the lowest and highest scores and just count the other 2.

That would stop Craig's low marks and Bruno's high ones.”

Good idea, and that would open the way for a couple of extra judges to bring the total to 6, ensuring that we get four actual scores as well as some additional views.

Puffle

01-11-2007

Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“Yes, of course X Factor had some helpful (self-generated?) publicity, however, there is no real evidence anywhere that anyone at the BBC was the least bit worried. Nor need they be.”

As I said, we will never know if this happened or not but it's just a theory that I and other people on this forum have.

mossy2103

01-11-2007

Originally Posted by Puffle:
“As I said, we will never know if this happened or not but it's just a theory that I and other people on this forum have.”

As I said, a good old conspiracy theory - t'interwebby thing is full of them

And of course, just because others share any theory does not make that theory any more true, it just makes it more comfortable for those that believe it .

Tissy

01-11-2007

Originally Posted by Veri:
“Why?

You think the cameras never give us a better look at anything than the judges get?”

Only when they zoom in very closely on someones face

Far too often the cameras miss out footwork etc., even the `red button` commentators seem to have a problem with it.

Check theses threads out if you doubt me

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/s...d.php?t=678418

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/s...ghlight=camera

Romus

01-11-2007

Originally Posted by Endemoniada:
“But then of course it's chicken and egg. Bruno's POV is that the public can't be trusted to vote for the good dancers so he gives them extra marks when his colleagues mark them too low in his estimation.

There is a very good argument that people who seriously want to see good dancing should be congratulating him rather than getting all out of shape over 1 extra point. ”

Bruno should have given Kelly an 8.

In the case of Penny, he upped a middling performer's scores and with Gabby, undermarked her.

There seems to be a lack of consistency with all these judges. Set routines for all couples, separate marks for tech and artistic ability and public vote only 25% of total might help to alleviate this situation. I personally think these measures would make the programme more interesting, and they might force the judges to mark in a more logical and objective manner (which they should do anyway but don't appear capable of).

But taking into account the fact that the public is being asked to vote for their "favourites" before they've even performed their next routine is unfair across the board. What is the point of them dancing if this happens.

They'll see Kate saved once again, and Penny will appear with either Dominic or John, and the judges will save her yet again. I do think that Kate skulking in the background saved, while Penny, John and Dominic, who are far better dancers have to take the flak is very unfair.

Rather a farce.

blondey

02-11-2007

The judges marking is a joke, Bruno and Craig are the worst, they are just not consistent, they overmark and undermark all the time.

PrincessNidor

02-11-2007

To be fair none of the judges are known for their consistency and impartiality.

I mean Len's 6 for Kate was a little high too!

5 of 5