Good post that about sums up my feelings and I'm done with SCD. Like that Slapper Arlene the programme sucks.. There's nothing wrong with the other judges that re-arranging their gonads round their earholes wouldn't go some way to alleviate.

That interview with Arlene was in the NOTW last Sunday.

She reiterated her accusations on ITT last Monday.

For me at least, that makes it very unlikely she was trying to distance herself from some 'bogus interview' the press had printed the day before - if nothing else, it displays her willingness to express those vile insinuations.

Just 2 things:

1 I knew someone who was an ex boyfriend of Kelly Brook when she first went to breakfast tv. He was pestered by the red tops to tell all about his relationship, and for ages wouldn't answer his phone. Eventually it died down a bit, and so he answered it again, and it was a red top reporter, who he said threw questions at him in a really aggressive way. "What was she like, was she good in bed, is she as sexy in real life"etc etc. He was really shocked, and when he finally answered he just said "Look it was all over ages ago, it's boring. We went out together, we finished" Next day the headline was "Kelly Brook boring in bed"!!!

So, remember even if Kristina did say anything, it was unlikely the words were in the order you see them in the paper, and simply rearranged words of the reporter with a few of her added in. Like, "yes" or "no"!

2, Isn't Joh pre contracted to a contract with Oceania, begining to next Friday?? Might that not be the reason he stood down? He began the show fully expecting to be voted off in a couple of weeks, but with this coming up, decided to go for the Panamanian Cruise?

FYI...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukp...N1XXod_3Yh0-iQ


And a statement from P&O Cruises emphasised the engagement was a "long standing arrangement" and should he have remained in the contest "we would have been delighted for him to bring Kristina on board to practise during the cruise and we would have been flexible around his television commitments.

"Alternatively we could have rescheduled his appearance to a different cruise."

The statement continued: "John's decision to leave Strictly Come Dancing was in no way was influenced by his contracted work on Oceana.


(All credit due to a previous post by Olls~)

Still think I would have prefered a nice cruise in the Caribbean. lol!!! I'm not in the least critical of John, and I am quite sure PO would have moved him, although if I'd booked a cruise to Panama with JS, and then heard he was going elsewhere because of the show I might have been a bit disappointed.

Also, training and flying back from Panama or anywhere for the show might have been a bit knackering for him, and formed part of his decision. Regardless of whether PO would accomodate this.

Maybe he didn't like the dancing, and was desperate to get off the show anyway!!! Everyone always says they love it, and it's the best thing they've ever done, except Vinces partner a couple of series ago whose name I can't remember! It's just possibly that quite a lot of them are quite glad to escape!! Regardless of judging comment!

It must have been a very long time ago

Thanks for that - they deserve some emails to enlighten them.

Amongst all the nutty theories I always suspected the real reason was that it had all got too serious and he wasn't enjoying himself any more, he just didn't seem to be. I wouldn't want a contestant continuing if they were unhappy. Good luck to both of them.

Thanks a lot for the link, dome.

The Mail interview is a lot more detailed than the NoTW one!

Just a word to the wise about celeb 'interviews' in the papers and celebrity magazines:

There are quite a few 'showbiz' agencies out there who take various quotes that celebrities have said at different times (previous interviews, press conferences, things merely 'attributed' to them by sources), package them together and then sell them on to the papers and the mags as interviews.

I know because this happens to our clients on a regular basis. We see a supposed interview they've done with, say, Grazia, The Sun or Heat but we know that they've not spoken to them because we know what their diaries are and where they've been, and all interviews are set up through us except if, say, they're appearing in a Beeb programme and give an interview to the Radio Times. When we look at the interview, it is nothing but reworked quotes from various sources, some taken out of context. However it's perfectly legal and doesn't really do any harm in the grand scheme of things and some celebs even see it as a bit of extra publicity so people rarely complain unless it actually contains something litigious.

Now, I'm not saying that Kristina didn't speak to the papers, I don't actually know either way and some of the interviews they run are actually genuine. However, there is a possibility that she didn't actually say all that to, say, NOTW or The Mail specifically. The fact that two rival papers from two rival publishers have almost the exact same quotes makes me think it's a cuts job taken from a possible 'round table' with journalists that she has done at some point during the week that would have been embargoed until today, and probably some extra bits thrown in that were either said off the cuff and which have been embellished somewhat. I may be wrong but that's how it appears.

Arlene's from last week, on the other hand, reads like a genuine interview to me.

Just my 2pennies worth.

I do, however, believe that the reason John quit was that the somewhat-venemous turn that certain people's comments were taking was probably making him feel very uncomfortable, the press and public intrusion had got out of hand, especially the phone call to his wife, and it just wasn't fun for the poor guy any more. I don't think he was pushed, I think it was his decision, but I DO think it was all a large contributing factor.

I also think the episode, not to mention the way the judges have been in general of late, has damaged the spirit of Strictly this year, certainly for me anyway. I just hope that it doesn't put off people who may not be great dancers from competing in the future, that they get a decent lot of celebs next year who actually have some spark and personality, and that the show can get back to what it used to be - a really good fun Saturday night show about celebs learning how to dance. I feel it's lost a lot of that this year and it's a great shame.

Today's Mail on Sunday

From the Mail one: "One newspaper commentator described him as a dancing pig in Cuban heels – that was just nasty for the sake of it."

Which one? Which one? Could it have been someone in the ... Mail?

I read in the newspaper that the contestants of Strictly were told by the BBC NOT to talk to the media about this whole sorry saga. I was amazed to read Kristina's interview with the News of the World newspaper today. If true, I doubt if the producers will want her back on Strictly next year. I find the whole thing rather appallling and what happened to the original concept of an entertainment show for CHARITY!! This year nothing is going to charity, the judges think it is a professional dance competition and THEY are the show, the constant fighting of the judges during the show is embarrassing awful. Last night was dreadful to watch with Len and Craig at loggerheads with each other. It is time for a major change in the judges panel. The only one who seems to be under control is AMAZINGLY Bruno!! When the judges and some of the pro dancers turned up on other programmes encouraging the viewers NOT to vote for John I thought the whole situation was out of control.

Judge Arlene called John a dancing pig in cuban heels That is where the comment comes from. Arlene who now of course will tell us all how sad she is that John has left the competition, backtracking like mad in case the producers decide she has gone too far and remove her from next year's Strictly.

Brilliant post, puts it in a nutshell!! Well done.

Wasn't that just the celebs remaining in though (I think that's what I read anyway, can't remember where). Heather, Mark & Andrew have all spoken to the press this week, and Anton's been putting his pennies worth in here there and everywhere so I don't think it applies to everyone.

I wouldn't believe anything printed in this rag even if I was tortured to say I did!

This stems from something they did to a friend and myself many years ago which was about as far from the truth as you could possibly get (in actual fact, it was a downright LIE. Pity litigation wasn't then what it is now. Else I would have damned well sued them!).

That and also what Flashgirl and davferman said!

Where did Arlene say that?

As much as I don't usually believe a lot printed in the tabloids, you have remember that not all of it comes from thin air. They have to make stories or a big deal out of something, and some of the things she stated in this interviews does match up from all the things we've been speculating, like what goes on backstage with the judges, for instance, and Kristina's sad reaction week to the whole thing does correspond in some way with the tone of the interview.

I just don't understand though why just because Kristina is doing this, in the NOTW, which is a crap newspaper, is so wrong when others have beeen the first to sell their stories the minute this issue became big news this week. I mean, if I were her, I would probably do the same thing, making sure people know what really goes on. Of course, John would never do this, but I think Kristina is the kind of person to do this, seeing her reaction on telly.

It wasn't actually. It was Ann Leslie of the Daily Mail who is one of John's friends!

It may have escaped some, that two "no hopers" Julian Clary, made the semis and Chris Parker made the final.

The format in the last three series went more or less "to plan," with the "no hopers" going out once the audience had become "hooked"
What the BBC miscalculated this time was the cost of a call now only 15p or whatever, is far less than it has ever been, allowing many people to vote just to annoy the judges.
If they'd had to be paying nearer 50p each time, they might not have been so keen.

Yep the John scenario happens every year and is not particular to him. Last year it was Kate & Kenny.

Northern Ireland troubles escalated from Bloody Sunday. One Para British commander overplayed his hand to demonstrate to all that there shall be no catholic no-go areas beyond the authority of the British Army. Bloody Sunday led to 20 years of slaughter on both sides and decimation of their economy.

In SCD6 4 judges went OTT, then viewers and forum posters countered with matching if not fiercer vehemence in defence of their candidate and freedom of choice. The judges, then Brucie, then James further escalated their onslaughts, leading to where we are now. SCD will never be the same again. Next Saturday's viewing figures will confirm whether SCD has shot itself in both feet.

Since James's intervention escalation dominated this forum, with many supporters evidently dedicating themselves fulltime scampering from one barricade to another to lob verbal molotov cocktails against equally hostile opponents.

Credit crunch mass unemployment is arriving soon, likely to flatten both sides.

I must admit, I was slightly taken aback that Kristina had chosen to speak to the NOTW, but the interview was positive, complimentary of John, honest and without any salaciousness or OTT-ness. She just expressed her opinions and repeated what a majority of BBC journalists have said on TV and radio. I wouldn't be too suprised if the judges were the ones to be given their marching orders.

As for Kristina being asked back, well she was asked to do the tour, so I have a feeling that the BBC are aware of just how popular she is.

There's a video clip on the NOTW which confirms that she did speak to them although none of what is printed is included.

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/vide...oId=2160_82592