Marks of 10 have repeatedly attracted questions on ITT, including the 10's awarded to Alesha, and even the 10's which Craig did not award. Questions about the sensational four 10's were asked of everybody in sight not just Philip. I gather Philip said it was in the dance-off waltz, not in the original waltz, that Matt twice got ahead of the music. If you truly believe the judges went by the dance-off waltz, then the four 10's waltz was irrelevant to the eviction.

I truly am confused what criterion you prefer for eviction. Is it performance to date, like Football League rules, or four 10's performance or meltdown on the day, like FA Cup rules. I would be quite relaxed to abide by either set of rules. But some would say switching at will from one rule to another would be bad faith -- your candidate right or wrong, at any price, to go through by any means, with the end justifying the means.

If this is vitriol please point to the vitriolic part.

I believe the OP was talking about the vitriol directed at Matt by a minority of vociferous posters on here not that the discussion on ITT was vitriolic

Well said, deaconswit and welcome to the forum.

Most of the posters here are actually reasonable people, able to appreciate others' views. Unfortunately, there are a minority of fans of certain celebrities who seem to adhere to the principle that they're right, everyone else is wrong and that freedom of speech gives them the inalienable right to denigrate not only the other celebrities' dancing but also make nasty personal remarks as well (as we have seen a lot during this series. Mind you, this is not a new phenomenon. It has happened every series, usually about either the 'worst' dancer being kept in by public vote - and the public have every right to vote for whom they want. This show is not the property of those few who post on here - or one of the better dancers (mainly because, probably, there is a fear that this celebrity may win over the one the poster supports. Sorry about the split infinitive there, by the way!).

Of course, freedom of speech is accorded to us all. Unfortunately, what everyone seems to forget is that (a) with it comes a sense of responsibility and (b) there is simply no need for nastiness (it reflects badly on the poster actually, more than the person they're denigrating). But it seems manners and respect are two words some people don't know the meaning of!

However, there has been some very reasonable debate (amidst the inevitable vitriol ) about whether Matt deserves his place in the final (and that's what free speech is actually all about - not Matt, per se obviously! But reasonable debate without resorting to nastiness). Whether he does or not is actually very subjective, I suppose.

I didn't have any particular favourites, and didn't mind in the end who reached the final as long as it was someone who could dance, entertain and make watching the programme joyful (something both Matt and Alesha have achieved - Gethin too over the last few weeks).

In the end, it's simply a TV light entertainment show and once it's over everyone will return to their lives (and other threads on other forums, presumably) until the next one!

And I have to say that even though I too am appalled at some of the sheer vitriol on here, it's actually quite mild compared to the, say, 'Showbiz' part of this forum (and, indeed, other forums!). Which is quite frightening if you think about it, as this is a (n) (admittedly small) representation of the society we live in!!

well said - wish there was a clappy hand emoticon thingy

I agree completely. I've been apalled at the nastiness and spite which has been ladled out all through SCD, and it was refreshing to read the initial copmment on this thread.
How sad to see that already it's started to degenerate into a slanging match.
All these dancers (even Kate G!) have put every effort into this and deserve praise.

I was a supporter of Gethin. Did I curl up and cry when he went out?
NO.
It's only a tv programme not life or death.

I would like to see Alesha win in the final, what will happen to me if Matt wins?
Nothing, I will survive to watch again next year.

If only the BBC had found a way to keep the three person final. *sigh*

The judges have undermined themselves this series with their ridiculous overmarking and reasons for it. I don't think one comment from Philip Jackson will have that much clout.

There is no vitriol - people can have an opinion and be annoyed at blatant bias if that is what they see. Everyone is in the T&Cs and everyone here is mature enough to voice their opinion...

I starting to get appalled at the number of "I'm appalled" threads...

I like things to last! However I didn't re-open this can of worms I said most of what I wanted to say Monday with my "stalking horse" clarification question. Matt is neither here or there (which appears to be one of his problems) even Craig seems to be worried about him remembering who he was. For the discerning of which you are obviously one I even included "Rumsfeld's Ramblings" to that effect.

Now it's my turn to want that "stands up and applauds" smiley - couldn't agree more, Chilli

I seriously doubt most of these posters are old enough to be able to spell "vitriolic"

I think there's an older demographic than we might think. I know I'm personally contributing to the over 30 old enough to know better but bored at work group

Yes he did, and it was a perfectly valid question to ask if it was worth 4 10s, seeing as it was the first awarded this series. And Philip was entitled to reply honestly.

I think it is now the 4 muppets on the side of the floor (Arlene the honourable exception) against the majority of opinion including most of the professionals who have been asked who think that Gethin should have gone through.

Who remembers the furore when they showed Erin saying Zoe's SINGLE 10 wasn't deserved?!

Oh, for those wide-eyed, innocent days!

It started raining 10s shortly after that, as I recall!

Hallelujah, it's raining 10!

For her quickstep...from Bruno (of course) and he gave it despite Zoe admitting a mistake.

yeh I remember - I didn't post here then but I lurked and there was outrage. I think people said quite seriously after the final it was one of the reasons that Colin lost because Erin has been "sour grapes" over the 10

I know what you mean..... I'm in an even older cohort than you..... but some of the threads/posts are just so childish it's easy to assume they are posted via adolescent hormones

Surely you understand this is the consequence of global warming.

oh I know where you're coming from - reminds me of the row I had with my sister age 14 over which one of Duran Duran we'd most like to marry

to the original poster- God bless you..that was a fantasic post and i agree 101% with it. As a matt fan, even i will admit that he messed up 1 week..but why do people focus on that one week? he has redeemed himself and is a WORTHY FINALIST!!

I love this! Brings back happy memories.

Just to prove I'm not biased here is an independant view
http://betting.betfair.com/specials/...betting-4.html

This brings up yet another serious issue rigged voting. It's one thing for the fanny lovers to spend their live savings voting quite another if organised betting syndicates are determining the outcome.

Thank you.

I think I LOVE YOU.

People focus on that one week because the judges made such a ridiculous meal of it - when it happened, with Len's ridiculous "He's only 20" comment and the overdramatised split int he panel; then at every single opportunity on both last weekend's shows, to the point where it eclipsed both the other dancers' performances.

One thing which, I agree, should have been consigned to history instead got turned into an interminable soap opera by people (the producers/the judges) who should have let it lie. The judges displayed blatant favouritism and changed the rules of the dance-off to suit themselves.

As far as the references to vitriol towards Matt go, I have personally seen very little: if anything, there is more vitriol FROM Matt fans along the lines of 'sour grapes' and 'bad loser'. If Matt had not been saved last weekend, I suspect they would be rather less gracious about the problems other posters have. What a lot of Matt fans seem to miss is that there is a vast amount of legitimate bad feeling towards the judges and their inconsistency, and their abuse of the ground rules they claim to stick to.

Most of this bad feeling has been expressed quite coherently and intelligently and I see no problem with this: contributors to these Digital Spy SCD threads generally appear to be people who care about the show - why else would we all spend so much time posting?

The questions that have been raised in the last week go way beyond the shallow 'Who's my favourite?' - they're about the credibility of the show as a whole and should be aired.

While there are some things that annoy me, I doubt they'll be changed. Take the overmarking - if they went back to the style of marking from series 2, say, it would give the impression that next year's celebs weren't as good as this year's intake. And while people watch the Sunday show (and I must admit to being guilty of this - I love the pro dances and the backstage stuff), they won't get rid of that. And as long as that exists, I don't see them getting rid of the dance-off - it's filler, in a show designed to dent ITV's Emmerdale audiences.

To the OP - thank you for pointing out the various things that the four quarter finalists brought to the show. As for the vitriol, it's only a very small amount of people who post like this. Unfortunately, they get around a lot.