I think Suzanne was the best performer last night, even if I wasn't keen on her as a person.
Chris - as has been said before - being quite a big lad, is better suited to the funkier routines and unfortunately the final consists of 2 routines where you need to be more graceful, so they were better suited to Suzanne, imo.
I don't agree that these things are rigged, but I did feel from the start that it wasn't going to be Chris's night.
As for Philip though - he's got every right to voice an opinion of course - but to say that Chris thought he had it in the bag is, imo - a bit unprofessional and implies he didn't actually like Chris much.

I'm sorry - I think some benefit from the sympathy vote when the judges (Jason in particular) are unnecessarily cruel and insulting in their critique - hence Aggie and Greg staying at the expense of better skaters - but I truly can't see that viewers would vote in sufficiently high numbers because they saw a child crying.

I recall series 1 when Stephen Mulhearn asked Phillip who was best one week (not the final) - and he replied "Bonnie." I thought this was very unprofessional of a co presenter of the main show - and I did complain to ITV.

Just on the child crying - it wouldn't have won by vote to be honest - it annoyed me that he was clearly scared by all the noise and should have been taken outside to calm down a bit, imo.....and I agree with you - I don't think people are gullible in sufficient numbers to fall for the sympathy vote - not at such a late stage in the competition.

I dont understand why you have to comment on every post I make

then accuse me of doing a wind up

You must be really interested in what I watch to comment about past programmes I have commented on

For me (and I didn't see the This Morning Interview, I can't find anywhere to download it ) the difference between us 'Joe Public' giving our personal opinion and the Presenter Phillip Schofield giving his, is a £££££ cheque that should render him impartial.

Or maybe I'm diving off the wrong dale here?

I don't understand, the comments were after the show, and that means they were all guilty because even Fern said Suzanne was the best and deserved to win so was she being unprofessional as well

Not really
Its just the really nutty posters with bizarre posts that stick in my mind and your trotting out the exact same nonsense again that you came up with when Biggins beat your favoured celeb Ms Dickinson in IACGMOH.

It is the £'s sign that makes the difference, well said

Are you saying he cant give any opinion at all on the show or just give negative opinions

I don't think he is entitled to opinionate on a show he presents - if he wants that freedom hand the baton (and the cheque) over to someone else.

I think his remarks that 'Chris thought he had it in the bag,' was akin to kicking a man when he's down.

It said more about Phillip than it did about Chris.

So he is not allowed to express an opinion at all on the show, good, bad or indifferent. So freedom of speech which is a basic right of every human should be withdrawn from him. Very Draconian

Had Phillip said
"Chris was gutted at not winning it. I feel sorry for him"

I do suspect the whole thing would have gone without comment. Im sorry but people wanting to censor what is said good or bad happens in other countries, People fought wars to allow everyone the basic human right of free speech. If you dont like it...tough.

Now come on - that is not what I said and you know it.

In this instance there was a conflict of interests - he presented DOI and should therefore have been impartial on any other show he is involved in - in this instance This Morning.

Both Phillip and Fern are guilty of allowing personal opinions to show through - I remember last year Fern raising her eyebrows and shrugging her shoulders at Emily's placing on This Morning's leader board. Like many others I felt the public kept her in for reasons other than skating, and I didn't like seeing better competitors go out - but the poor girl had already been villified and reduced to tears on more than one occasion. Viewers were asked to phone in their preferences - their money, their vote - it was not within Fern's remit to comment favourably or otherwise; another case of kicking a competitor while she was down - bit like pulling the wings off a butterfly imo.

Hear hear!! All three were great finalists!!




Do you practise trolling or does it come naturally?? I ask this as I've just had the pleasure of reading your posts over the last couple of pages and they don't seem to advance the topic under discussion ie Phil's comments on yesterdays This Morning one iota. I did watch it and I found his comments unprofessional - he has no idea what Chris was thinking or feeling on Sunday night and to suggest he was arrogant enough to think it 'was in the bag' was unnecessary. I have expressed my thoughts on Mr Gardiner's unprofessionalism as a judge in other places so will not bore you with it here. TBH Suzanne came out of that interview as the only professional one on the sofa!!

PS The comment from Chris about being gutted is taken from a backstage interview after the show - he said he was gutted the series was over as he had enjoyed the whole experience so much - ITV then edited that on the DOI homepage to read Chris was gutted....Suzanne won further fuelling the arrangant attitude misrepresentation!
Last edited by soapyjoes : 18-03-2008 at 11:05

The difference is that Fern doesn't present DOI, which Phillip does.





Theoretically, regardless of his personal opinion, he should be impartial in public, however, I think that Phillip making a comment after the show is over is far less unprofessional than the public comments Jason made throughout the run of DOI, in various news articles and interviews, criticising the contestants. As a judge, he's not supposed to have favourites or try to influence the public vote.

It wouldn't have been particularly impressive if Phillip said that during DOI but now that DOI is over for this year, what difference does it really make? It isn't affecting the outcome of the show - that's already been decided - and if as Ignazio (probably rightly) suggests, Phillip's made a bit of a prat of himself, well, that's Phillip's problem isn't it?

I don't see why Phillip's comment has become such a big deal

That would have been acceptable - and I think a comparison between political free speech and Phillips insensitive remarks is facetious. I don't think my ancestors fought in wars so that Phillip could comment on DOI - nor do I think that is a concern of those fighting in Iraq, the rebels in Tibet or any other ongoing conflict. They have greater concerns such as whether they will get out of it alive.

Because he's painting an unfair picture of a sore loser which he certainly wasn't - he was gracious in defeat as Suzanne was in victory

THE SHOW IS OVER!!!

Comments by anyone, anywhere, on any show, no longer have any impact - get over it folks, Chris lost. Philip Schofield was expressing his opinion, which he is, unsuprisngly, allowed to do. He is hardly an aggresive commentator, the point was not that harsh, he called it as he saw it (being much closer to the action than ANY of us) and he has made many very positive comments about all the skaters this year, including Chris.

Stop looking for reasons to get offended!

You're absolutely correct that Jason was far worse than Phillip - and you're right that it didn't affect the outcome - but why put the boot into a young man who must still be disappointed at the result. I was swept away by Suzanne - not only on Sunday, most weeks I felt she had the edge over Chris, but to imply that the latter'thought he had it in the bag was crass beyond belief.'

I was glad Suzanne showed more dignity.

oops - and there was me thinking Phillips defenders were advocating free speech.

Silly me - that obviously applies only to Phillip and those in agreement with him.

btw is the bit I've highlighted an order - or can I exercise my right to free speech.
Last edited by Ignazio : 18-03-2008 at 11:26

Saying Suzanne deserved to win was acceptable - clearly she did.

It was the implication that Chris was complacent - and 'thought he had it in the bag,' that smacked of gloating.

I wonder if Phillip pulled the wings off butterflies when he was a kid.

LOL, it is less an order and more a command (or perhaps a plea).

People of course (obviously) can get offended by whoever and whatever they like - but, it's a big bad world out there and it seems hardly worth the effort to get that narked by something Philip Schofield said on This Morning about Chris Fountain - but then what the hell would I know about it: I got offended when I saw Cilla Black was flogging Pyschic chatlines for £1.50 a min!

But haven't several people implied this - PERSONALLY, I think most people, chris and the betting sites included, thought Chris had it in the bag - I don't think PS was gloating I think he was merely stating a fact, a fact that people are choosing to believe was offensive or designed to do down Chris (which actually it isn't really, that is the interpretation of it, not the fact itself).

[quote=pjedin;22339880]LOL, it is less an order and more a command (or perhaps a plea).

People of course (obviously) can get offended by whoever and whatever they like - but, it's a big bad world out there and it seems hardly worth the effort to get that narked by something Philip Schofield said on This Morning about Chris Fountain - but then what the hell would I know about it: I got offended when I saw Cilla Black was flogging Pyschic chatlines for £1.50 a min![/QUOTE]


As should we all lol!!