Who is this vast majority? You can only speak for yourself. Austin was in the dance off because the "vast majority" of viewers didn't vote to keep him in.

Surely this is an issue of a vote of no confidence in the current judges.
Wouldn't it solve everything, after this year's furore, for Strictly to have new judges?
If the public confidence is shot, then what's the point in having those particular experts as the SCD judging panel?
My personal opinion - or one of them - is that judging DWTS is having a negative effect on Len and Bruno.

With that leaderboard, even with the highest number of viewer's votes he would have ended up in the DO in most cases. You do the math, or go see a lot of other posts that explained it.
Sure, no one of us can tell for sure if he had the highest votes or not, but neither you can say he didn't.

Bruno even admitted at the time he over marked Emma to keep her away from the danger zone


All the fun of taking part, none of the hanging around for the medals.

Although to this uber competitive lot - and by that I mean all the final 4 - coming second means coming nowhere.


Actually, that's possibly not actually true.

Austin potentially could have come top with the public vote and found himself in the dance off. He could have had more than the other 3 added together and it would have made not a jot of difference provided Rachel scored higher than Lisa on the remaining rankings.

I thought the prevalent theory was that the "vast majority" of the Strictly viewing public, the GBP, the millions who watch the show for entertainment, didn't vote until the final. Especially now that the CIN link is gone.

Austen was far from my fav celeb. And I would respecfully remind you that democracy got rid of public hangings and bear baiting !

Who cares how it happened. The good thing about last weekend is that Austin finally got called out for the mediocre dancer he is (at best).
I honestly do not understand the fascination with this guy

His salsa was appalling to be frank. Totally wooden and no hot passion whatsoever. It didn't help that Erin looked as lost as he did during that dance. Their AS was nothing special either (hence why they got higher scores for that salsa and had to do that again in the dance-off).
He had little to none chemistry with Erin, which showed more and more towards the end of their run.
He seemed completely exhausted and he's suppose to be this big athlete....what's that about And don't tell me he 'just had baby twins and was up all nights'. He said his wife took care of all the children while he was on his strictly journey.

I'm hoping for a Rachel/Lisa final. Tom might be the most popular but he's certainly not the most improved (Lisa) or the best dancer left (Rachel). When it comes down to popularity I think Lisa might have the edge over Rachel. There's just something about Rachel's dancing that spells 'boring' to me; regardless of how technically perfect it might be. Can't put my finger on it :sleep:
Lisa seems to be enjoying her strictly journey the most and that just comes across

We'll see.

Go Lisa & Brendan

I didn't say that I said if Tom goes it will be because he's marked into the bottom of the leaderboard (ok maybe they're should be a possibly in there).

Beside arguably I'm working on precedent here both Rachel and Lisa have been IMO over-marked in the past - Rachel's tango wasn't worth 10s and her foxtrot was a tad overwelming. Lisa's stumbles, gapping, occasional flat-footedness and other faults have been ignored by the judges too on occasion too - hubbie thought that a move she did in her waltz looked really awkward too (dunno enough to know if it's down to chreography or an awkwardness in the way she danced). There was chronic gapping in her waltz in the dance off too and if she quite rightly trumped Cherie for dancing better in the dance off then why didn't Austin get the nod if she danced worse in the dance off this time - if you can't save yourself by dancing better in the dance-off then what's the point in it?

yes Austin MAY have got the most public votes

he also MAY not have

it's just speculation!

That was funny
I think you need to review your perception of democracy.

He almost certainly had more than Lisa which is what would have counted had it not been for the dance-off that's the material point - under the old system Lisa would have gone and if the dance-off was about performing the worse dances again rather than the best then Austin would have had a fighting chance as it is he had none. Whether Austin or Tom had more support is irrevelvant - the only thing his presence in the dance off proves is that Rachel is more popular than Lisa - which bodes well for me because I'd rather see Rachel win then her.

Sorry, I simply cannot follow this argument. I'm sure the judges do have big egos but I fail to see how getting rid of Austin, whom they have regularly given good marks (presumably not "overmarking" him, unlike those two women ), should massage their egos in any way. What seems to have happened here is that four very good dancers - any one of whom had the dancing talent to win the show on the right day with the right dance - performed. Two of them danced slightly worse than the other two, perhaps because the dances they were performing suited them less. They were given lower marks than the other two. After the public had voted, the two dancers the judges had awarded least marks to were still at the bottom. Result: in the dance off, the judges kept in the dancer who had achieved the better marks in that round.
That's the show I saw. I saw no artificial inflation of lesser dancers' marks to gratify the egos of crazy judges; just as I did not consider it a judges' ego trip when they gave Austin fantastic marks in previous rounds.

Well the incorrectness of this has already been explained to you, but it has also been proven that Rachel and Lisa are not popular with the public from the amount of times they have appeared in the dance off from good positions. Clearly they don't have the public backing.

a) But not in my opinion. However, neither of our opinions are important as we are not the show's judges, merely members of the public with access to a telephone.

b) Who said Austin was better in the dance off, though? Did the judges say they thought Austin danced the dance off better? In the show I watched they all agreed (including Len) that Lisa's dance off was better

I would say that Austin had more public votes than Lisa, but that doesn't necessarily mean he topped the public votes. I think Tom probably did that and has been doing for some weeks. It's between Rachel and Lisa to see who's getting the lowest votes and it's quite possible for Rachel to have had the least votes and still escaped the dance off.

No really bothered who is in the final I was bored last week because I'd guessed the result before the prog started and now feel the final has been manipulated. This started way back in this run of progs so will not be watching the final. I've been a fan since it first strated but cannot be bothred now.

There was a lot of gapping in the waltz in the dance-off which wasn't there in the main show ergo it was worse than in the main show maybe it wasn't enough of a decrease in quality to justify retaining Austin but it was a decrease in quality whereas an increase in quality had been enough to save Lisa previously that's all I'm saying - it made so that the quality danced in the dance-off was irrevelvant which renders it all a bit pointless and unfair since Lisa was almost certainly have gone under the old system without the dance-off. All Lisa had to be to save herself was do her good ballroom dance and not fall over whilst it was not the not so good jive which had landed her the dance-off to start with which is why if there is a dance-off in the two stage it should be done on the weakest rather than the strongest performances IMO because it's should be how you fair at both displines rather than your strongest one.

BTW - this isn't an opinion I formed this year as I felt it was unfair last year that Kenny danced the one disapline he was good at in the dance-off against Leticia whilst it was obvious she deserved to stay as her latin was better than his.

I certainly agree that it would make it more interesting if the contestants danced their weakest dance in the dance off. I'm not sure whether this would have altered the outcome or not in Austin's case - perhaps it would have. However these aren't the rules they've been working to this year and it was right to be consistent. A good suggestion for next year, though.

To be fair, Austin and Erin (particularly) put a lot into the dance off and, it could be said, actually left a part of themselves on the dance floor.

Just how much more effort did the judges want!

I must have missed that, Mindyann. She didn't lose any, er, protective chest padding did she?

Hair extensions. Two of them. *cringe* Poor Erin.

Excellent post !
I would just like to add a few comments regarding the dance-offs.
I think it is absurd to eliminate a contestant on the basis of one dance. It becomes even more absurd when you witness the dance-off that took place on Staurday.
Lisa performed a comparatively easy Waltz routine..she did it well, no question about that. Austin had to tackle a Salsa, a difficult dance with much more demanding choreography.
Most contestants can manage to "nail" a Waltz. With one-to-one coaching for 20+ hours, most people on here could probaby learn to dance an acceptable Waltz..as I said in another thread, how many truly awful Waltzes have you seen on SCD ? How many people here could manage a Salsa of acceptable standard given the same amount of coaching ?..very few.
Therefore, Austin didn't lose because he danced "badly"..he danced two perfectly acceptable dances, they were just not outstanding. Lisa won because she made a good job of a fairly easy routine. I was not a supporter of Austin, but I do feel he was unfortunate on Saturday. Over the weeks he was consistently a better dancer than Lisa, it must feel like he has been the victim of a dodgy, last minute penalty decision.

you are absolutely right - but dodgy penalty decisions stand (as they should)

that is life isn't it - West Ham would have won the FA cup in 2006 if the ref hadn't added an extra minute onto the end, but he did so we didn't

Austin was unfortunate to get the salsa but his AS should have knocked us all out of the park!

Yes Dolly, but haven't you heard - that's all Erin's fault!

Are you a Hammers fan ?..my commiserations.
At least you have one of my favourite footballers of all time as your manager..so I wish you well.