Reports of a backlash from the other contestants and a blame game have made me wonder how much of this is John's fault.

OK, he isn't the best dancer but he is still in there, we can still vote for him and, as we know, people vote for all sorts of reasons (best dancer, best looking, fancy the pro/celeb, want to annoy the judges etc), so why all the anger aimed at John ?

Do people want him to come out and say "ok, my time has come, stop voting for me" ? If he did this, but still got in, how would we feel then ?

Although I love the gossip that this scenario is creating, and I'm still slightly bemused and amused by it, I can see that it is a shame to lose some great and potential winners (which could happen). Let's face it though, as long as a decent dancer wins at the end of the day, does it matter too much and to reiterate the question in the post, is any of it John's fault ?

It can't possibily be John's fault! He has no control over this whatsoever! If you ask me, the snide comments from judges, people in the media and now the pros have bought about this situation.

I think quite a lot of votes for John are people defending him against what must be a very uncomfortable situation. Sure, he's a grown man and it's not bullying, but how unpleasant it must be to be in your sixties, being as good and charming as you can on the dancefloor, have a fantastic dance pro who understands your contstrainsts, working so well as a team....and knowing that everyone in the competiton doesn't want you to be there.

I wouldn't want that - he signed up for the competition as is, so must play by the rules & stay in until voted out.

He's been accused of playing politics with the voters, & I daresay that's true - I just can't see how it's any different from the doe-eyed blubbing we're subjected to week in week out, from celebs who would be 'heartbroken' to leave.

John could easily step down!

Why did they ask him to do it if he had no chance at all of winning?

It's the producers who've got it wrong, not John Seargent.

There was a really good article in one of the Sunday papers which said the judges have got it wrong. It's an entertainment show and people are voting for John because he's entertaining and it's entertaining to keep him in against the judges' wills!

Of course he couldn't.

He signed a contract and he's fulfilling it.

This is not John's fault - the rules are there which says no matter how low the score is from the judges if there is enough public support they will be saved.

The judges are scared there will be a repeat of series 1, where poor dancer Chris Parker was up against good dancer Natasha Kaplinsky. They were horrifed to think Chris could have won, which would have had the credibility of the show in question.

As far as the other celebrities are concerned, they should be aware the great British public always champion the underdog

Exceptionally well.

There is more than one way to earn your Strictly crust, and he has got people talking, watching and (more importantly for the BBC) voting.

He's probably paid them back his and Kristina's fee singlehandedly.

True.

I wouldn't be surprised to see him as the most successful ex contestant either.

It is partially his fault, he is playing up to it and encouraging people to vote on the basis its pissing the judges off, if he said please only vote for me on the basis of my dancing ability fair enough. But he makes no secret of the fact he wants people to vote to turn the show on its head, and he seems delighted by the power he has to do it. If he was a nice guy surely he would be considering the fact that he as a shit dancer is booting people off the show who are putting more effort in than him

No...if fault must to be allocated I'd say it's mostly the fault of people who are voting for him out of some tragically misguided sense of rebellion.

I am wondering if the Judges will insist on changes to the voting system next time round

Again ...

Exactly , give the man a break.
He probably feels dreadful about Cherie leaving but it's not his fault.

Or because - SHOCK HORROR - we actually like watching him and Kristina. Just remember people on here only make up a tiny percentage of the voting public. There are loads of people out there who wouldn't have a clue you are going on about!
These conspiracy theories make me laugh.

John doesn't do much dancing. He plods around 90 percent of the time. I'm sure many SCD fans will disagree with this but I don't believe his partner gives him enough to do. I know he's not a spring chicken age-wise - 64 - but Kristina Rihanoff tends to lead most dances, not John.

Also, he's not got that much of a generous spirit. Behind that cuddly (!) face of his, he's just as bitter as the judges:


If the judges are bitter, so is he. I don't think he should be telling the judges to resign. Sorry, folks, I don't think he's such a Mr Nice Guy at all. His nice guy image seems a bit of a facade to me. Kate Garraway and Fiona Phillips were much more generous and admitted they were no good. John Sergeant is actually quite arrogant, wants people to vote for him, doesn't give a damn more talented dancers are booted off instead of him. I don't mind people being arrogant but it tends to help if the arrogance is backed up by some actual talent!

Just what sort of competition did he sign up for?

Hearing some talk, they say its not a dance competition, just entertainment.

so what sort of competition did everyone sign up, for, with title Scritly come Dancing.?

If its an entertainment competition they should call it Strictly come Entertainment. Take out the word dance, then everyone could go out there and do there own thing to get votes

I just don't get it, js, is not even entertaining . his dances are all the same, wether latin or ballroom, same performance, same facial expression, if he's improving its not to the standard of the others.

The public vote for the who they want , for many reasons, with Dancing in the title, i say one of the reasons , should be the standard of dance, not for being endearing, or for getting up the judges noses.

What are you on about? You can't just randomly throw in 'conspiracy theory' and hope I don't notice.

Who in your fantasy is supposed to be conspiring? What tf are they conspiring to do?

If you'd bothered reading properly, you would have noticed I didn't preclude the possibility of people voting for them for other reasons. Of course you were too busy inventing conspiracy theory conspiracy theories.

I don't think he has a generous spirit. I accept is a competition, not just a reality dance show, but Sergeant has never said "vote us out, we've had our fun but it's not right for better dancers to go and we remain." He's never said that. I'm not naive to think everyone in Sergeant's position would say that but I thought he might have been a bit more generous and admitted defeat.

His wit is often self-deprecating but this is at odds with his attitude about still being on the show. He's clearly very competitive and wants to win. I'm 100 percent convinced he wants to win the show and he's prepared to take the criticism. If anything, his self-deprecation is a mask to hide his competitive streak. But the mask has slipped.

He's not witty, he's obnoxious and he's enjoying making the British public look like fools by still voting for him.

Yep.

People who have no control in their own lives make themselves feel powerful by adversely affecting a dance competition.

Pardon

JS is a delight (I know him away from SCD). He's certainly amused by what's happening but that's about the system of voting - there's little he can do about it. Indeed, if he said 'don't vote for me' there'd be an avalanche of votes because that's what the GBP is like! . He's stuck with the system, the judges are stuck with the system.

And I certainly don't consider myself a fool for voting for him (which I do). JS is rehearsing just as hard as the others. He's giving it his best shot and he's fully aware how much of his weekly performance is down to Kristina's brilliance. He brings a huge amount of entertainment to the show and I am glad he remains in it.

He's quite the opposite of Kate who's bad dancing & double act with Anton was genuinely entertaining. She was humble.

John could easily have asked his supporters to put their backing to one of the more talented dancers.

He signs up for a competition and does well in it by staying in far longer than expected. The judges are a bit nasty about him, he responds by saying he is only doing what he signed up for, is abiding by the rules and if they don't like it, then they should resign (which he knows they won't).

He is offending some people who find he is obnoxious and the British public are fools, who think he should break the terms of his contract to make them happy but at the same time reneging on what he is under contract to do and letting down his supporters.

He is not going to make everybody happy is he, so he should just continue to do what he does and wait to be voted out as per the rules of the show.

John cant win with the judges. Even when he isnt the worse performer of the night (such as saturday) they still place him at the bottom of the Leaderboard.

Cherie survived 9 weeks based on her first two performances and the public have been waiting for her to repeat the same. Instead she digressed the longer the show went on - saved only by a slower than normal ballroom the week before.

Cherie was out-performed by JS this weekend; it was right that she should go.