I agree with you there. He was let down by the song he had to sing, but remained composed throughout, and after the decision was made not to put him through.

I do feel sorry for him. A better song would have given him a better chance. But others will come for him, he is very talented, and singers, especially those in talent contests, do get breaks where others don't.

It's absolutely hilarious and daft isn't it. Here he is, a singer and they're criticising the song? Simon was just looking after his personal interests.

Stick to what he did. He sang a song. That's his talent. What's the problem? The problem is, he didn't sing a song from Simon Cowell's Business Interests.

The problem was that most people really didn't like it at all. Cuteness alone would have had him in the final if it had been decent ...


It's hard to identify with a singer so much when you really dislike the song, that's obvious.

But that's like giving Paul Potts a soul number, then saying it's brilliant simply because he's a singer. When in reality, it would probably be poor because it's out of his range.

Different acts suit different styles of song. Charlie's strength appears to be swing numbers, yet he was given a weird hybrid of genres tonight that didn't match him.

yeah he composed himself so well under pressure.
I cant imagine someone like Andrew johnston coping like that.
So good on charlie. His dads friend must feel like a bit rubbish now.

No it's not and if you can sing, you give credit to the singing.

OK, you're talking about different acts and songs? Well he is a swing act singing a swing song? So regardless of whether you like Britney and had to listen to the Sugababes - comment on the singing and he can change the song for the final. Just a quiet word.

Charlie did not sing opera or Rock or even a Chinese Folk song. He sang swing so what is the problem? It's not copyrighted and owned by Sony BMG.

Also it was not a weird hybrid. It was swing but he was using scat during the song. A lot of swing singers did that.

Especially has nobody liked his song

The kid should have been judged on his singing. It's not the Euro song contest

Simon's in the wrong business then if that's the sentiment.

That wasn't pure swing. Listen to his audition, that was pure swing.

The song he sang tonight was part swing, part scat (ok fair enough), but part of it was almost pop as well; the song was too complicated, there were too many deviations from the original swing base. It seemed as though he (or the song writer) thought modernsing his image would improve his chances.

Commenting on his singing - it was little more than average. The reason was because it struggled with the song. You can't divide one from the other, to focus on the singing alone is unfair on him, there has to be a reason. What would you prefer? The judges to say he was shaky, and struggled with the rhythm and tune of the piece because of his faults or the faults of the range of song he was given?

I dont even think their equals, strike are better imo. Charlie is good but how good and may get better when hes older as must singers do but hasnt reached that stage yet, he only has potential, thats why im not usually into child singers. Whereas strike are there now in what they do and much more interesting act.

there not really a dance act, their martial arts and gymnastic act mainly but choreographed.

Agreed, it wasn't his fault and I didn't mind the song.

BTW, he's not 10.

The thing is, they almost made Charlie cry. For an 11 year old boy who's naturally confident that's hard.

I think the kid is a great singer, but based on tonights performance he did not deserve to go through. I'd rate him 4th best this evening behind the 2 deserved finalists and the Hula Hoop act that was funny and entertaining.

I cringed at his performance tonight and thought he had been royally shafted by whoever wrote that piece of steaming turd he was forced to sing. It's easy to say put him through on his singing and not the song, but the song made him sound off key in places and an average Kareoke singer.

He could have sang any one of a huge number of swing songs and walked into the final with George.

Not really, his tuning is impeccable. He could have chosen better but it wasn't a bad song. The judges just didn't like it because it was original so they didn't know it - incidentally, the same grounds (unoriginality) they criticised some of the other acts for.

Double standards? I'll let you lot decide.

In fairness, I'm still fuming they almost reduced an 11 year old boy to tears - he's pretty self-confident, it wouldn't be hard to make Andrew cry (or go off and slit his wrists - he looks like he might, sadly) but Charlie? He was definitely trying hard not to cry.

They knew what he was going to sing and that they were going to not like it, you could tell from what someone (I think Simon?) said in the pre recorded VT before the performance.

Sometimes, albeit ocassionally an original song works. A guy last year (Tony Laf?) sang his own song 'I'm Good' at his audition, and the judges loved that - but when he sang a cover version in the semis the judges didn't save him.

Personally I didn't like Charlie's song at first, but it grew on me as it went on. Also, I hate to say it as I am sure it is very famous, but I don't ever remember hearing the song he sang for his audition before, but I still thought he was fantastic.

I think they should have put him through despite the song tonight. But with only one over 18s act so far in the final, I think they just wanted more adults.

What were they meant to do? Lie and say they enjoyed it when they didn't? I thought they handled it well; made it clear they loved him but not the song. Acts (of any age) shouldn't go on the show if they can't handle criticism.

People do scat in swing. Swing comes from Jazz. Scatting occurs in Jazz and Swing.

It was swing tonight. It was in the lyrics if not in the beat.

Not that impecable, he was off key tonight.

As for the origional song angle, well although you sometimes have to here a song a few times for it to grow on you, if it's crap, it's crap. That wouldn't have been out of place in eurovision.

I like the lad, loved his audition and thought he sang an absolute classic very very well. tonight he sang an awful song ok.

I did say swing and scat were fair enough to mix together, read back to what I said.

And the beat is arguably more important than the lyrics. The beat determines how the singer sings, what pitch is used, what tone. The beat/tune was not Charlie's style tonight, and he struggled because of it.

I just mentioned the beat because it was a swing beat to determine it was a swing song.

I thought he did well and it was a shame Cheeky Monkeys of the future got through instead of him.

OK besides everything and if we kept everything true tonight in consideration they change their act for the final - who is the most talented?

Is it Cheeky Monkeys 2018 aka Strike or Charlie Green?

You cannot compare those 3 as they all have different talents.

My favourite act of the 3 is Strike because they entertained me more.

However I would have prefered Charlie in the final over the Cheeky Monkies

I am not comparing 3 but two.

I repeat.

Is it Cheeky Monkeys 2018 AKA Strike or Charlie Green?

I would say Strike they entertained me more tonight.