I always wanted Alesha to win, but I agree, an Alesha/Gethin final would've been more exciting. What they should've done when John S left the competition, they should've got someone back, maybe Kelly B to make sure we'd have a 3-way final.

I enjoyed the Alesha/Matt final - very very close but then again I never thought much of Gethin - sorry

My reaction to Austin's departure is exactly the same as when Gethin went out last year (again to the 'easier' waltz)

Best tip? - probably not to get so involved next year by ignoring ITT and to stop looking at these forums! Treat it as the majority of the GBP do and watch it as a light entertainment show.

True. Although if the judges keep going the way they're going, I might stop watching altogether. It really does depend on the celebs though.

[quote=SmileyCharlie;29348264]
Fascinating post! Do you have any info on whether Gethin was the most popular last year when he got booted?

[quote=SmileyCharlie;29348264]

This is more than just fascinating, quite explosive really.

Given that the BBC (producers I guess) were very annoyed at Austin leaving and having effectively concluded that the Glitterball will go to Tom, would they risk Tom being sent home this week??? Clearly, they are primarily concerned about votes and ratings.

There's definitely one scenario in which Tom could go.

So, this then raises the question, would they try and influence the judges (whose wages they pay) to ensure that Tom finishes at least second on the leaderboard and thereby virtually guarantee that he avoids the dance-off?? Maybe they will????

Sorry to hear Rachel is not polling enough votes, I'll just have to try and make up for it myself

Any idea on actual numbers???

Just imagine the headlines if a newspaper guy were to read this, 'PRODUCERS UNHAPPY WITH AUSTIN EXIT.............BBC NOW BACKING TOM'

Could they be doing this to make the Tour line-up as good as it can be? I mean at least with a Dance-off they can guarantee the winner and runner-up are doing the Tour??

I mean, had the public had their way only one of the final 3 would be doing the Tour?!

So what? The tour is almost sold out already, isn't it? Why would they care who's in it once the tickets are sold?

That was always one of the suspicions last year. Neither Gethin or Alesha were signed up for the tour...but Matt deA was.

No evidence, and I'm sure there were many who thought Matt deserved his place in the finals, but that view wasn't shared by many of Gethin's supporters, either at the time or indeed one year on.

Perhaps the problem with the dance off is the fact that it's all down to that one dance on the night - much as I hated seeing Austin go, all credit to Brendan; he must know his days with Lisa are numbered and he played a blinder perfecting her waltz ready for the dance off.

Because if they're planning ahead for 2009 and 2010, the 2008 tour with finalists (and preferably winners) in it will give the whole thing more kudos and credibility when people come to book next year.

[quote=SmileyCharlie;29348264]
If this is true then I'm sure the judges dance off and vote will be seriously looked at.

If that is true the only way for Tom to be in the dance-off is if Lisa comes top of the leader-board with Rachel 2nd. Otherwise he's insured a definite place in the final.
If Rachel gets more votes this saturday than Lisa, again Tom would only be in the dance off if Rachel comes 1st and Lisa 2nd.

So all-in-all he's pretty much a shoe-in for the final. But he still needs to get the most votes, because if it changes completely all of a sudden (which I doubt) the competition would be blown wide open.

[quote=Sports Fan;29353017]
The BBC does indeed pay the judges - but you need to bear in mind that 'talent' management is a difficult issue at the BBC …

Let me present an example from another genre: the star of a long-running BBC drama series is regularly known to turn up on set to shoot the first scene of a new two-parter and rubbish the script to such an extent that he will refuse to take part in any filming whatsoever. There was a reported three-week hold-up last year where the actor would not come to set until changes had been made to the script. This allegedly cost the production something in the region of £700,000. Yet, despite this, there is no question of replacing the star, as senior executives feel that the show would collapse without him. In other words, the actor in question has a significant amount of control, even though he could be easily replaced.

I can't help but wonder now if we have a similar imbalance of power going on at Strictly. I would be among the first to call for the judging panel to be overhauled - but there will be many conservative types at the BBC who will want to hang on to the current judges for as long as possible. They are an identifiable part of the show and, if Bruce is going, the suits will worry that too much change could alienate the audience. So the BBC will, mistakenly, want to hang on to the judges as long as possible. They just don't know how to manage them - and, in some instances, their egos are going way off the radar …

Next Saturday will be a crunch show - in more ways than one. If the judges have cocked it up as badly as River Man reports, we could have some interesting times ahead: either they'll come to heel and do as they're told, or their arrogance will reach new heights … and the audience's interest, and the ratings, will start to drop off.

At least Rachel got her wish and got some work in the shape of the Tour.

In honesty, I don't know why they'd bother trying to get the Tour people to finish as high up as possible, maybe so fewer people complained after the show and went on to buy the DVD. Also people who watched the show and didn't go to the Tour would think oh look it's the winner and runner-up from last year, I'll buy the DVD. Who knows?! Just something really doesn't feel right.

[quote=Servalan;29355343]
I'm happy with the judging panel. By and large, I think they have ranked the couples in the correct order, each week. This week Austin was the weakest dancer and he went.

I would not want them brought to heel as you put it. I certainly don't want BBC producers dictating who does and does not progress from week to week just so as to try and maximise viewers and votes.

River Man didn't "report" it. The quotes got mixed up somewhere above.

And what was claimed in the post was that the judges supposedly messed up by not marking in the way that would let SCD bring in the most votes and viewers.

If the judges had actually marked that way -- thinking of vote and viewing stats rather than dance quality -- it would be a scandal, their professional reputations would be in tatters, SCD would be in trouble, and higher management in the BBC would not be pleased.

Bizarrely, the post still led to the judges being dissed, rather than praised.

Servalan's complaint in some earlier posts was that the producers were telling the judges what to do.

Now the "problem" seems to be that the judges aren't doing what the producers want.

I was merely responding to the new information from the recent post, which gave quite a different spin on what previously appeared to be the case.

That alright?

How do you know the tour is almost sold out? I remember this was said last year and it turned out to be nonsense in several venues. I myself went to O2, which a few weeks before was not selling tickets, but on the night had large blocks of seats free. The ugly truth is, that for marketing purposes [to do with deals with agencies who are able to inflate prices as a result], venues are often said to be 'sold out' or 'almost sold out' well in advance of the performances when they are no such thing. There is a clear marketing purpose both for ticket sales this year and promotion of the brand in future years to have winners and finalists doing the tour.

Still dubious I'm afraid Charlie.
I followed IDA closely and you only said after the final that there was a surge in voting for Jodie. Not before.
I also find it hard to believe she picked up the majority of Sam's votes.
The natural place for her votes were surely for the other teenager in the final, Jessie.
I'd be very surprised if Jodie wasn't leading the public vote from very early on and just held on in the final with ALW and CM both clearly pushing Jessie as hard as they could.

I accept you've given inside info about job offers, but that's very different to how the voting is going.
That's incredibly sensitive information and it's very very rare for that to leak.

Also when you say "Apparently this season is all wrapped up now and baring him dropping out Tom has won.", that's clearly not the case.
If he's bottom this week, which looks quite possible given the dances he's doing, he could still be in the dance-off and voted out even if he tops the public vote, which I'm sure he will.

If you're right and the Beeb are annoyed that they won't have a competitive final then one way of ensuring one is having Rachel and Lisa fighting it out.
That would be too close to call, as you say yourself.

A Tom v Lisa or Rachel final is a non event. Tom wins.

Just to add the vote only usually leaks when those at the top want it too.
I believe that was the case this week with the X factor leak.

Would someone risk their job by telling friends, who later post it on forums, such sensitive information?

Riverman, what gave SmileyCharlie's report of the voting in that final was how it rang true with my own experience of watching it. My favourite had already left, I really didn't care who won at that stage but you will remember how every time Cameron and Andrew got the chance they praised Jessie and dissed Jodie.

I was really pissed off at them and picked up the phone and voted like crazy for Jodie, I know I wasn't the only one.

If you can find the original discussion thread for this SmileyCharlie said that up until the point that Sam left in the first show, Jessie was ahead in the voting, then every time CM and ALW opened their gobs there was a surge in Jodie's votes with her finally overtaking Jessie.

There was a general consensus that if those two had kept their mouths shut they could have got their girl through but people weren't prepared to have her forced down their throats like that.

You make some interesting points River Man. This is quite sensitive information.

Quite possible for some journo to get hold of this, add their own twist, and publish something that could be problematic for the show.

If there's any hint of the BBC/Producers wanting to fix the result, it would be very detrimental to the show and the BBC (especially after the recent 'scandals').

There's so much shite posted on these forums it's difficult to know who and what to believe???

well if this is all true its very very upsetting, however if the judges were happy to get rid of Austin last week I am sure they will not think twice about doing the same to Tom this week, and at least that way it would ensure a final that could be tight on votes.

it wouldnt be tight, Rachel will probably get double the amounts of votes Lisa will purely because the judges will puch it that way and there wil be so many new viewers