Except that there is no promotion or payrise involved here. There is nothing at stake, just a group of celebrities who each wants to prove him or herself better than the others. Yes, that's human, but not particularly praiseworthy.
At the beginning of the series James said he wanted to get beyond week 4 for the first time. He achieved that ambition and more, so I would have more respect for him if he had been a little more magnanimous in defeat.

All of this John backlash is just making me want to vote him more.

Don't they see that them behaving like this is the reason he is still there.

John is blatantly and relentlessly milking the situation for all it' worth. He knows he won't get anywhere with his dancing so is playing up 'John versus the judges' for all it's worth - and a significant number of viewers are responding. It was hyped all the way to the heavens across ITT last week and we'll doubtless have yet more of the same this week.

He doesn't need to turn to the camera and beg for votes because he is going for them by taking on the judges, "reminding" them what the competition is about. It is so cynically transparent. As for the judges' comments - let's get real: he isn't the first person who's got a load of flak from them. He is, however, the first person who's argued back in an apparently intelligent way, and that's why some people like him.

And he is clearly loving the attention - again, look at what he said on ITT last Thursday.

If John really felt bad about the effect of the his campaign - and that is how he is running it - he'd've stepped down this week BEFORE the dance-off. But he is obviously happy to sit back and watch Lisa struggle to hold it together and Cherie get kicked out. Just as he was the previous week when Rachel was in floods of tears.

John is playing the public in the best way he knows how - and let's face it, he's hung around politicians for long enough so he should know how it goes. So holding his hands up and putting it all on to the public is disingenuous to say the least - he knows exactly what he's doing ... and so should his supporters.

I don't agree - in our youthful ignorance I think we expect the more senior contestants to be kicked out in the early stages but John's stint confirms what we already know - it's not just the dancing that influences the public vote .. they vote for who they like - always have .. always will!

I think it's easy to lose sight of the fact that SCD generates money for charity and whilst I love to watch the great dancers it's calls for celebritys like John that raise alot of £££. I think its all got a bit serious actually, it's not a pro dance competition and shouldn't be viewed as such .. chill out!

Why do people persist in making out that James was a bad loser?

His comments can hardly have referred to his own fate - that was already sealed. They are about the coming weeks, where we face the prospect of Jodie, Lisa, Christine and Rachel all leaving while John stays ...

arghhhhh - it no longer raise money for Children in Need

I thought the programme was Strictly Come Dancing not Strictly Comedians Dancing. I'm fed up with people telling me its for fun and entertainment that John is kept in. It isn't. For every vote John recieves, the rest of the competitors have to have several members of the public voting to off set his number of votes. How can that be fair to the rest of us who love to see Tom, Austin, Rachel etc. I'm not made of money and my favourite show is being ruined by these stupid idiots who think its fun to vote numerous times on a comedic routine. If any of you voting for John have any sense you will stop now otherwise this show won't have future either with the celebs or the public.

I found Len's comments when making his "casting vote" a bit odd. He said that neither of the two couples should have been in the dance off - but IIRC Lisa was in the bottom two of the leader board which means she, but not Cherie, should have been there.

Having said that I am really fed up that John was not voted out this week. The joke has gone on long enough and now there is no dead wood left. The problem is that I don't think they really know how to put a stop to it. If he walks we might end up with yet another two person final .

No NO NO! I don't want John to stay in for any more, but I don't want him to withdraw. We'll end up with a stupid final again!

And John does?????????????????????? It's you having the laugh! The problem is, those who keep voting for John are sitting smugly at home and hugging themselves with glee at the expense of those of us who like to see good dancing, at the expense of amateurs who have made good progress and at teh expense of pro dancers who have put a lot of effort into good raw material. Well, voters-for-John, enjoy your small and pointless triumphs. You fail to upset the real "fans" of the show, which may be your intent. You merely spoil something entertaining. If doing so entertains you, then you are such sad people.

The show is a good one usually and entertaining from a dancing point of view without delving into the realms of the macabre. It is not earth-shattering compared with many things going on in the world today. Measure your pettiness against that and, if you have an ounce of self-respect and honour, hang your heads in shame.

John Sergeant, hang your head in shame if you have any trace of integrity, honesty or honour. But what am I saying? Hohn has made his living amongst politicians and such words are not in their vocabularies. In the unlikely event that you read this, John, stop hiding behind your vaunted competition rules, feign an injury if you must to save face, but give better dancers a chance. I invoke the spirit of Oliver Cromwell: "You have danced (sat) too long for any good you have been doing lately.....Depart, I say: and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!

BBC, above all you should be ashamed of inviting along a celebriity (and not just John Sergeant, there have been others in the past) who is patently incapable of learning to dance. This was obvious from the start to anyone with a fuctioning braincell. What next? A slug which munches contendedly on a lettuce leaf while Karen moves gracefully around the dance floor? A Chimpanzee which capers about as Darren puts his all into a jive? Try it, there are fools enough to vote for these things. Certainly this year, there are many people who just will not watch this sort of farce any longer - myself included after last night.

Judges! Think carefully about agreeing to judge any future series without a reasonable system of eliminating the poor and the downright bad.

A good show gone to the dogs.

The only person who can put a stop to it is John Sargent himself! If he started saying things like " look please don't vote me back in, others are much better and deserve their place etc etc" then people might actually start taking some notice.

I also think the annually increasing number of couples doesn't help .


BBC Radio 5 Live had two women on who are running a Facebook and other campaigns for John to win .

This is all great for the BBC, free publicity , presumably increased viewers , controversy and we all knwo how much reality TV loves a controversy

No they wouldn't Puffle, and why should he .

I thought they gave the biggest hint they could this Saturday , they looked to be ready to go to me .

I could be funny and point he's been walking since week one and the public have lapped it up.

Some people don't seem to have a sense of humour.

If John is not meant to be there it's the producers who should be walking for choosing him in the first place?

Some people are taking the so called 'competition' far too seriously. John has been brave, he's knuckled down and got on with the job in hand with good humour.

Asked to do 2 lifts, he did it without complaint.

He's shown you don't have to be a slim pretty young thing or a muscle toned athelete to have a go at dancing.

Bring on John Prescott next year!!

It doesn't generate money for charity this year.

Ok, don't shout I obviously didn't know that but it doesn't change my opinion - it's not a pro dance comp, so if it's not for charity is it's only purpose is to revive the odd flagging career??

Um, Christopher Parker anyone? Christopher Parker, young enough to be John's grandson, but who had no sense of rhythm.
Kenny Logan? The same Kenny Logan who moved round the floor (certainly can't say 'danced') with James' wife Ola last year way past his sell-by-date?
Quentin Wilson? Dennis Taylor? Kate Garraway? Fiona Phillips?
As many other people have already said, John agreed to become the BBC's token 'older overweight unfit bloke who makes up the right mix for the programme'. I doubt that he expected to last beyond even the first dance. The fact that he has is because some of the public have fallen in love with him/Kristina/the choreography/all or none of these. The same as some of the public have fallen in love with any of the other contestants and their partners.
Ask supporters of the other contestants why they are supporting them, and in the majority of cases you will get the same sort of answer 'I like Joe/Fred/Mary/Freda'. I suspect the number of people who vote each week based purely on the best dance on the night is quite small. Even then 'best dance' is still subjective. I wasn't blown away by Rachel and Vincent's rumba. Don't know whether it was the music or what - but it just didn't do it for me.
The simple truth is that SCD will NEVER be a DANCE competition while
(a) the BBC continue to provide a cross-section of people of various ages, weight, fitness levels, previous experience, and ability to take part. And those people have other commitments which means that they can't all have the same number of training hours
(b) the BBC fail to provide the public with the chance to see the whole of the dancers in one shot, not just their feet for one second, their upper body for another two seconds, long distance for 4 seconds, feet, full body, face, all in lightning succession.
(c) the majority of the judges have no qualifications in judging ballroom and latin dance competitions.
(d) the judges currently appointed fail to provide constructive criticism of a dance. 'You jumped across the floor as if you were dancing on hot coals - and jumping all the way to the final' or 'D.U. double L' tells Joe Public very little about the dance.
(e) the current judges clearly have their favourites, and overmark/undermark accordingly.
(f) the public have absolutely no idea what each judge is looking for in a dance, nor on what basis they are awarding marks in a particular week. (e.g. are they basing it on supposed ability in that week? Performance? Or purely the dance itself, on the night? The latter being quite difficult to do I would have thought if everyone is doing a different dance. Certainly makes it much harder for the GBP. )
(g) Bruce and Tess keep telling us to vote for our favourites.

true that. I think someone said elsewhere that Kate Garroway did reach a point where she said she was embarrassed that she was going through and other better people were going home. Plus as she said afterwards, all the work she put in to be taken seriously as a journalis and presenter was being undone because all she was famous for was bad dancing

trouble is though I think John has kind of lost control of it all as well. Initially I think the "them and us" thing with the judges was done as a spur of the moment thing and a way of putting a good spin on the comments/scores. Now it's taken on a life of it's own. I honestly think that even if JS came out today and said "please don't vote for me, I hate this" people would go "aha he's been bribed/coerced into saying it" - and vote for him anyway. Bit of Frankestein's monster really

Yep, which has always been the case for any celeb style show.

They have never done it solely for charity, the fat pay cheque and a possible career revival is what they queue up for.

Why should he

Would you want Brendan to do that if he had a crap dancer getting through every week

Kate sustained yet another injury which is why she felt it was time to go.

Excellent post, you have summed it up nicely

This is a totally different situation. Jobs are permanent, but John is affecting the competition by one week only !

He has not taken the place of Don, Andrew, Heather & Cherie (or whoever they class as being better than him). He can only 'take the place' of one person, who would likley leave next week anyway.

I understand James' outburst, but what he seems to have failed to realise is that if John had gone instead of Cherie, Cherie would still have gone next week (or if not, another one of the so called 'good' dancers). John's only effect is that dancers are leaving one week earlier than they 'should'. It's not exactly the crime of the century is it ? He's not really affecting the competion element that much, provided he doesn't get to the final.

There is something at stake for the pro dancers, when you consider Nicole being dropped. Strictly is a good living for them, so it must be frustrating and worrying to James that two years running his wife gets lumbered with a no-hoper and he gets a possible contender knocked out early.

But I genuinely enjoy John and Krystina's routine each week. I do not vote for them because I feel sorry for them,or to be awkward, or unreasonable or to annoy the judges. I have voted for them because I love the charm pf the dance and they move me in a way that many other technically excellent routines do not. You may not agree with me and that's fine but I have voted for the dance and couple I most enjoy watching. I didn't realise that made me sad, but perhaps you are right and I am. Sad maybe, but I am also sincere in enjoying John and Krystina's performances.
.

Honestly, this argument is just silly. How paranoid are you - do you think John edits It Takes Two?


Eh?! For a start all the contestants beg for votes, and Tess also reminds us that each couple "needs your votes". Second, intelligence (or "apparent" intelligence) is a bad thing? Of course the world would be a much more interesting place were it populated with minor celebs whose every bland utterance contains the words "amazing", "journey" and "please vote for us" in various tedious combinations.



What a load of tosh. I'm not picking on you particularly by dissecting your post, but really - how dare you spout such bile about John just because you don't like him? "Obviously happy"? I didn't see any evidence of that. I did see that Rachel and Lisa should get a bit more perspective though.

Thank goodness this forum is far from representative of the millions who watch this show.