yes, quite right. Good point, good post.

I think there is a lot of truth in the "behind the scenes bitchiness" theory. Even from just watching the live show for the last 3 weeks - there have been a few camera shots that showed some of the others giving him filthy looks etc and at least one shot of him being quite close to the person that was looking daggers at him.
Also, as someone that has been in pageants in USA etc, women espcially - and since I am a woman I feel OK about saying this - can be VERY competitive and hateful to people in these popularity type competitions. I am surprised that the BBC has managed to keep a lid on it in the past - I thought Dominic Littlewood was going to spill the beans last year, but I guess he wanted to keep his day job for the Beeb.
I find all that "we are not really competitive and all love each other" that most of them talk about is a bunch of crap - most of them are D&E listers that are trying to use SCD or the other realities as a last chance for a career upgrade - so it is competitive and deadly serious to many of them. They want to either win or be able to catch notice of powers that be and if someone is in their way, better watch out!
This is just my opinion and it may not be popular one but it is what I think.

I have heard all the comments about why John decided to leave and no one seems to have said anything about the fact that the celebrities now have to do two dances. John would have found that impossible. He could barely manage one dance and from the shots of the group dance training on Sunday he didnt look at if he took part in the training and he wouldnt have managed the dance to Saturday Night Fever in a million years.
I know Kristina did everything she could with John's talents as a dancer but he had come to the end of the road. He knew he couldnt manage two dances and I am sure he felt it was better to leave rather than make a fool of himself or show Kristina up.

I only just watched this week's results show and I hadn't realised until I saw the VT that Arlene choreographed the group dance. I'm wondering if that might have contributed towards John's decision, as she's very strict and quite demanding as a choreographer so there's no way she'd have been willing to show him any patience or tolerance if he had problems coping with it.

It might not have been mentioned on this thread that John wouldn't have managed the two dances this week or the Saturday Night Fever routine, but is has been mentioned elsewhere (and totally ignored) on this board. Considering John decided at 3.00am on Wednesday morning (his own words) to quit, I find it strange he wasn't present at the group dance training which was early in the week.

It doesn't matter though because people will believe what they want to believe.

Well put all. That's the way my mind was tending. Only saw it once of course but I couldn't remember seeing either of them in the rehearsal footage.

And - lovable and witty he may be - where would he have danced in SNF? Ahead of Tom and Austin?

John was at the first Group dance rehersal as reported on the BBC site. Also, if you watched really carefully he appeared twice in the background of the footage shown on Sunday - once was when Austin was being told to get back into position which was too good a bit to cut.

"Practicing his section of the routine, John was reminded of his very own encounter with John Travolta, when they appeared on the 'Parkinson' show in the 70s."

No smoke without fire. I suspect that a lot of the article is based on truth. You've got four big egoed judges, 16 big egoed pro dancers and celebs, plus Brucie and er Tess. How can the article not be true.

The BBC need to be careful. They can not allow any one personality to become bigger than the show otherwise they are in trouble.

A thought or two here.

On Have I got news for you the Parliamentary Correspondent Quentin Letts remarked that when John was a Political Correspondent he wasn't the most liked of people.

You can believe or not but to succeed in that world you need to be both competitive and have a thick skin.

My view is therefore that John was well capable of standing up to the judges and any amount of back biting.

This may be old fashioned but could it be dear posters that the reasons he gave for leaving were actually true? After all we all agree do we not he came over as a decent bloke. If we believe other stories are we saying the Sarge was being economical with the truth.

The article comes down to people thought JS should have gone for dancing badly and JS felt guilty about being there too - can't see much of a relevation there.

Apart from that people don't like each other and some want more money - sounds like any organisation in the country
Whats this Just The Two of Us bit - thats another show and the only thing in common with ITT is two spelt differently. .......... I worry when I confuse words llike that its not a good sign......

Ah yes, the popular Quentin Letts, author of Fifty People Who Buggered Up Britain which includes the originator of Eastenders for services against culture, Jimmy Savile for harming the cause of youth by wanting to stay young for too long and John McEnroe for making the baiting of officials acceptable.

"Not the most liked" is a bit of an understatement when it comes to Letts himself. Most people seem to go with Michael White's assessment that he is, in fact, "a total c**t".

He just decided the joke had gone too far .
The stuff about the judges and bad feeling with the others is all media hype and it is time everyone realised John is his own man and was not pushed out , bullied or any such thing .

He thought he would be out in the first week or so , being the comedian he is , he enjoyed playing the game and not taking it seriously .
When it became obvious he could go a long way , he chose to back off .
I think he should have honoured the contract and stayed ,I wouldn't vote for him , but if he won fair and square , so be it . Whether it would have been good for the show or fair to the others is another point

This article is very illuminating

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle5212415.ece

And Kristina has made a large sum from the NOTW with an expose article and even more expose video and pics .
I think she has been an asset to SCD , but I am sad she chose to cash in so quickly with nude photos and this article .

It is foolish to think many of them do the show with anything other than entirely selfish reasons , but I don't care for these articles , I didn't like the Vincent and Flavia stuff last year .But that is me .

A friend of mine who doesn't watch the show very much, but is confined to a wheelchair, watches most of the news, said he thought that there was only one way for the John Sergeant issue to be dealt with. That was for him to leave the show. His point was that although it is an entertainment show, it is an entertainment show about dancing, and it makes a total mockery of the show if someone wins it who can't dance very well. He made the point that most voters for John voted because they wanted to rebel against the judges and deliberately skew the voting figures, making in near impossible for any of the other contestants to win it fair and square, however good they were at dancing.

I think most voted because he dances like most of us would !

I stand corrected.

We don't always see situations and people as they are, but as we are. You may be right, but so might I. Kristina herself speaks highly of John and seems to have no problem with him.

I don't claim to know the man personally. Do you?

No, but I knew of his reputation for being difficult & unpopular with his colleagues in the media and the field of politics in the before he started on SCD.

I think Kristina was fantastic with John and she is now one of my favourite pros, but frankly think she had little choice to support his decision in public. Given that she said she would have loved to have been in the final and that she initially tried to talk him out of it, her support is clearly & understandably tinged by her own disappointment. I do think they had a great relationship with lots of mutual respect and they will stay firm friends. She is media savvy and quite rightly making the most of raising her profile here in the UK over what has happened.

My main point is I don't think the reasons (apart from the phone call to his wife) John gave for leaving were genuine and he had his own reasons, such as his realisation he could never manage two dances a week. I think he just found it too hard physically and had had enough. He used the reasons he gave as a way of quitting the show whilst trying to keep the moral high ground.

All I am expressing is my opinion which I am as entitled to as you are yours.

I have never heard anything about him being difficult at all .

Try reading the article I posted and it may give a few new insights .

He treated the show as entertainment , as a comedy, a joke in a way . He played the game well, he didn't take it seriously and learning he could win due to his popularity made him see the joke had gone too far .
Him winning would have been wrong , though he would have won fair and square , and it may well have meant the end of SCD .Who would bother to try hard to learn if John won and really coudln't dance well ?who would sign up ?
Julian was little better really , but it caused less of a fuss ( except with me when Aled went out )

John is a very able , intelligent man , who doesn't so suffer fools gladly., I think Claudia is the same and both are Cambridge graduates .
He is also a comedian , as the article shows , and I really think him winning woud not have been the right punch line

Well, I have so which of us is right? The answer is neither as I don't know him personally and by the sound of things neither do you. We both only know him by what we have read about him and seen of him on TV, although my view has been confirmed to some extent by a poster on this board who does know John personally - but then again that's just one other person's perception.

I had already read the article before you posted it and it is a lovely reminiscence piece, but often comedians are difficult people when not 'performing' and the public sometimes make the mistake of thinking someone's comedic persona is that person's 'normal' persona. It doesn't make them any less loved by their family and friends, but neither does it automatically mean they are a popular person with whom to work with. I agree John doesn't suffer fools gladly - far from it and that fits with my understanding of his pre-SCD reputation and may very well have contributed to his success as a political journalist. I'm not sure though what being intelligent and being a Cambridge graduate has to do with anything.

At the end of the day like many, I don't support his actions and like many, you do and that's fine by me.

A number of things arise Buddy B :
I do not think he did the right thing , and I have said that , if not here then elsewhere.
I do not think he was hounded out by anyone , I believe he genuinely thought it the wrong end to a fine joke and so he quit. I believe his reasons.

I think he should have honoured his contract and stayed and as much as I would not like to have seen him win , if he had done , it would have been fair and square , exactly according to the rules and with no help from the judges .
As it is , the show will have a 2 person final yet again .

Conversely , had he stayed I wonder if it mayhhave changed eth antire of the show for good , who would sign up for a show in which they have to attain some level of expertise in dance , if someone who really cannot dance well could win .

I mentioned his background in the context of my commenting about him not suffering fools gladly and
Claudia the same , using their similar academic background to maybe cast some light on his actions . who knows ?
I have obviously ,missed the subject of discussion - his leaving Conference -- I was enroute to London that day for a Cricket benefit event with Mark Ramprakash , though I did see SCD ; Arlene and Lilia were ogoing to the same event .

I am sorry if I have thrown a spanner in the works here

No problem - let's forget about it - who cares about JS! You mean you went to the benefit ball for Mark Ramprakash? You lucky thing!! I was hoping for some photos somewhere to see who was there! What it a good night? Did anybody dance (I mean like SCD dancing)? Just PM'd you!

Well it's all over now.

I believe John thought he was doing the honourable thing both for himself and wife and for the show. I wish he hadn't gone but respect him for doing what he considered to be right - and let's face it, a lot of people were clamouring for just that so he has pleased some.

As for his being "unpopular", what journo is popular with colleagues at the time? It's a highly competitive field (I do know something about it). However the Sunday Times article by someone who knew him quite well was amusing and insightful.

What I do sincerely believe John would not have wanted is for any of us to pour hate on others involved in the show. Many of us were fed up with some ....... high profile SCD people ..... but there has been a fair bit of hate directed towards them on some threads and that really can't be right. It makes us worse than them! They have, hopefully, learned their lesson.

The show is still good and the other celebs need our support now.

unfortunately, not EVERYTHING the daily mail prints is a load of rubbish, in fact their journalists have pretty impeccable sources (you should see some of the things the papers don't print)

Personally I have a feeling that a lot of it is true - exaggerated maybe - but I certainly pick up on non-verbals and there is a lot of tension, despite all the gushing and pretending to love each other

anyone who has worked in television knows that a show like this will NOT be all sweetness and light away from the cameras and anyone who believes it is is deluded...