Well thats abit extreme.....

But Im sure we can get just as experienced judges for half the price..........maybe with more constructive feedback skills too.

You've asked a question, whilst making it clear in your OP and this one that you have an axe to grind on the issue, so yes, you're blatantly stirring.

The problem is you can't back up your position, which is, I assume, why you have simply repeated "compare to what they actually do", rather than answer my question or address my point. For the reasons I explained in my last post, "compare to what they actually do" is meaningless.

Bring a case or back up your opinion with some kind of argument, and there'll be something to discuss. Until then, you're just stirring.

EDIT: Judging by your latest posts you're actively looking for a fight rather than just being provocative for the sake of it, so good luck.

re OP
mmmm let me think a moment















NO!!!!!!!!!!

it was fairly obvious by the orginal question, so don't try and turn it into something else. Compared to what they do is not meaningless, or let me correct that, it is to you, not to me.
Last edited by CASPER1066 : 25-11-2008 at 16:45

When you compare the salaries that the presenters and judges get to that lof the professionals and the celebrities you see and unbalance which is frankly a joke.

The professionals have to put aside their time to train celebrities - some of whom have no idea what the difference is between a heel lead and a fleckle - and often dedicate nearly 15 hours a week to each dance, starting from the beginning. The celebrities in turn give up their time in order to perform. Admittedly, you can say this is for selfish reasons, such as trying to boost their own career, but it takes over their own lives for nearly a third of a year (for the winner/runner up at least).

Compare this to the judges, who already know what they're doing. They give up one day of their week - Saturday - to judge itself. Then they make appearances on ITT, talking about a world they're comfortable with - it's not like they're out of their comfort zone at all. Bruno doesn't even appear on the spin off 'live'.

Considering how much time, dedication and learning the three groups have to put in, why is it that the judges get paid the second biggest amount of cash (after the presenters...we won't even go there) to just sit and critique?

No evasion necessary, especially as you are well on the way to trolling. Good luck to you.

it was quite obvious you were not interested in discussing the orginal question and only wanted to pick a fight. So I know who the troll is.
Good luck to you also.

Exactly - you weren't asking for opinion, you were trying to promote your point of view. No problem with that, but at least have the guts to say that's what you're doing instead of trying to hide it.


It is meaningless when trying to assign value to something. Read this again: you need a context or a benchmark. If you don't understand that, then you are not in a position to answer your own question. How do you think houses are valued? Or goods for insurance purposes? Or salaries are set? For an excellent example of what I'm talking about see the latest post from Fudd, above.

well we are not children, or I certainly am not, it was fairly obvious to understand without having to break it down as Fudd did (very nicely too) not everyone needs it EXPLAINED to such a degree. As you can see by other posters, they understand the question and its open for their comments.

No your just trying to start a fight......

Because they have skills that others do not have, and they have the knowledge to judge.

And for anyone who is envious of the salaries, the answer is simple - similar to any other vocation in life, train as a dancer, then perhaps train as a dance teacher, then train as a judge, put in the hours and dedication, and see how many such TV judging roles are open to you. If you think that you can do a better job, then go ahead and show the world what you can do.

As does every other judge that is qualifed....there are hundreds of them all over. Plus Im sure the BBC could get them for half the price.

I never said I was better, I said there was a choice of others, as they change the celebs, pros why not refresh the judges. or are you saying. They are the only judges wsith these skills that can judge.....I think not, thats just stupid.

Anyone who didn't understand your question needs a basic literacy course. You've completely missed my point - which is: you asked a question in order to give yourself a platform to state your opinion. As I said in my last post, fine (apart from you're now denying that).

I asked you to back up, or at least clarify, the reasons for your opinion, and you didn't.

Indeed you still haven't, and your argument now appears to be "it was fairly obvious to understand" and "not everyone needs it EXPLAINED to such a degree".

That's not debate - that's "agree with more or you're wrong". Or more accurately in your case "agree with me or you're just trying to start a fight".

What were you saying about children?

sorry I dont agree with you,.........sorry if its too difficult for you to understand, but others have and thats fine I can converse with them. You just want a fight.


conversation ended.

But the dancers who train these celebrities have knowledge that others do not have. Besides, three of them aren't actually recognised judges on the ballroom circuit - only Len is a bona fide judge. Arlene is a choreographer, and Craig and Bruno were dancers - I must admit, I'mnot sure whether they're choreographers too.

I'm not saying that anyone on here can do a better jobn then the judges (though considering how scores often match on here to what the judge's state, maybe we can ), but there are other judge experts around. Karen, for example, is a fully fledged accepted ballroom judge. Phillip Jackson's another, who was willing to give up his time to do the red button commentary (for much less, I'm willing to bet, though obviously I cannot be sure). I believe the name Donny Burns (?) has been mentioned as well. Brendan has also been a judge previously too - on Dancing with the Stars: New Zealand. Such is SCD's popularity now, I'm sure there are willing bona fide judges out there prepared to front the panel for much less of a wage then the current crop.

I have no doubt that becoming a judge takes dedication: as does training to be at the top of any arena. But this is TV we're talking about the entertainment of a Saturday night show. The judges should not be the stars (as their pay seems to state, alongside the presenters) but the couples. Surely the pay should show this accordingly?

Wanting an intelligent discussion != wanting a fight.

Asking you to back up your opinion != wanting a fight

Explaining why your opinion needs backing up != disagreeing with your basic point.

Taking your ball and going home = schoolyard behaviour. (Likewise, only talking to people who agree with you).

As you said, you're not a child, so act your age and engage in an adult discussion.

I also fail to see how 20 years of training/experience equal .....

Comments such as.

Dancing like a stick insect on acid.
Dancing like Madonna
Your dancing stinks
You are so good at dancing badly.etc etc

or knowing when to walk away......
conversation ended......hope thats clear enough.

Those comments do make me laugh, admittedly.

To be fair, Len, Arlene and Craig do often give constructive comments after the swipe (except John's cha cha cha where even Bruno - who usually tries to dress up his insults so they're funny rather than nasty - just came out with 'your dancing stinks').

I think the judge's are asked to create a sadistic edge to the show. I've been thinking for the last couple of years the panel is becoming more and more like The X Factor's, but I think dark humour does work well in general on the British public...as long as it's balanced out with other constructive comments.

Some of your comments are true, however, if the funny quips were made in a blanket of constructive critisim and advice Im sure everyone would take it for what it is. Just now it seems to be getting more and more about the judges fighting and them trying to get one up on each other. Len telling Christine to take her knickers off, on a family show. Craig was advising him thats not acceptable, and its not. Len then takes the high moral ground and has a go at Craig.
Its getting rediculous, I think even the pros standing with the celebs look embarressed at times. I think celebs in tears with disappointment are fine, as long as they are not in tears because they feel humiliated or belittled.

Of course. That's why they pay twice the rate I guess. No other explanation.


Neither did I say or imply that.


If you review my (quoted) post (especially in the context of previous posts), you should see exactly what I was stating in very clear terms. And it was not what you just posted.

Some seem to imply that judging (especially on SCD) is easy - if it is, then it is open to anyone to get involved, and become such a judge on a TV show and prove just how easy it is.

However, I suspect that most would find it much more difficult than they had made out or envisaged.
Last edited by mossy2103 : 25-11-2008 at 17:45

That's very true. The last two weeks have seen the infighting between the judges just increase at the detriment of the couples.

They need to readdress the balance and have the competition about the dancers again, I do think the panel s becoming too over-whelming at the moment.

well the focus is all on the wrong people. The celebs or pros dont argue the point so the judges just keep spouting.
It does need to be addressed, not sure if the damaged can be fixed tho. They have lost alot of respect.

I dont think even the pro's take their advice now, coz most of its nonsense, I get the feeling they just tell their celebs to grin and take it and get off......

I just wanted John Sargeant to do a Jan Ravens:

"Hey...hey judges...at least you've got what you wanted now!!!"



But I agree, the vocal point of the show has switched, and it needs to switch back again now.

I don't think it needs to be addressed tbh. And I don't think there's been any real indication that they have lost a lot of respect..By whom?

I also think that most of the pros might disagree sometimes with the judges...but that doesn't mean it's all nonsense or that they disregard their remarks.....In fact I remember Darren in one of the training segments saying to Jessie to watch out on one of her moves, as a certian judge would pick her up on that.......Just because Brian had a bit of a pouty episode on ITT... does not a rebellion make

Be nice if they did............but....im not sure the BBC undertand it, I mean that damage limitation was embarressing to watch......