Originally Posted by thenetworkbabe:
“And then giving a dud solution that just tells you that O level was much harder.........”
“And then giving a dud solution that just tells you that O level was much harder.........”
good post
News of the World: Strictly fiasco...
2 of 3
Originally Posted by MARTYM8:
“20 years ago it would have been maths standards for 6 year olds not 16 year olds.
3+2 = 5 (Lisa - probably or Rachel)
3+1 = 4 (Rachel - probably or Lisa)
1+3 = 4 (Tom)
5 is greater than 4 i.e. no way Tom could avoid the dance off even if he came top in the public vote!”
“20 years ago it would have been maths standards for 6 year olds not 16 year olds.
3+2 = 5 (Lisa - probably or Rachel)
3+1 = 4 (Rachel - probably or Lisa)
1+3 = 4 (Tom)
5 is greater than 4 i.e. no way Tom could avoid the dance off even if he came top in the public vote!”
Its a two part problem though. The maths is as you say. In one sense the maths doesn't matter as the worst dancer probably should be in the dance off. The problem and reason why you can't do that is a legal, organisational, english one though and not a maths one and bound up with whats within the rules and whats moral.
If they didn't say vote to save Tom they would be Ok legally but there's nothing else to say that gets around it - vote to show how much you apprciated Tom would look a bit slick. They can't even say don't bother to vote for Tom as that too distorts the votes for who faces him in the dance off. They also have a moral duy to stop the innumerate spending their money pointlessly. Their only way out is to break the tie which they ready do have a rule for in the dance-off - a 4 judge vote who is top or bringing in past performance might do.
Its probably different people. Someone designs the voting system but doesn't identify the problems. The maths is applied. someone notices the problems. The high ups get involved but only too late to find a rule to cover it. If you like conspiracy theories someones tied vote to get teh best two dancers to the final gets the worst dancer to the final when the other implications become obvious - otherwise its just not joined up thought through thinking. .
Originally Posted by boddism:
“Good article!
EXCEPT- I detect BBC spin already....
Brucie, Tess and the judges are absolutely furious. They can’t believe that such an idiotic mistake has been made
..... erm- its the judges fault in the first place!!
”
“Good article!
EXCEPT- I detect BBC spin already....
Brucie, Tess and the judges are absolutely furious. They can’t believe that such an idiotic mistake has been made
..... erm- its the judges fault in the first place!!
”
Exactly.
Even the NOTW are spinning it to look like it was them that tipped them off. Obviously us viewers are far too thick to realise.
Originally Posted by thenetworkbabe:
“The BBC insider still reveals that they still can't think it through. Giving the girls 2 points would have just made it inevitable for Tom to go through only on the public vote despite dancing worst - its the same problem - making it impossible for him to go instead of making it impossible for him to stay. He gets 3 points from the public and one from the judges and the girls with 1 plus 2 and 2 plus 2 end in the dance off. t A vote for Rachel or Lisa would have had no point that way. Nor would the dancing.
The answer would be to find a way to break any tie (ask the judges who performed better) or to ensure that there were 4 people as intended in the SF .”
“The BBC insider still reveals that they still can't think it through. Giving the girls 2 points would have just made it inevitable for Tom to go through only on the public vote despite dancing worst - its the same problem - making it impossible for him to go instead of making it impossible for him to stay. He gets 3 points from the public and one from the judges and the girls with 1 plus 2 and 2 plus 2 end in the dance off. t A vote for Rachel or Lisa would have had no point that way. Nor would the dancing.
The answer would be to find a way to break any tie (ask the judges who performed better) or to ensure that there were 4 people as intended in the SF .”
That's not true, if Lisa or Rachel topped the vote, they would have escaped the dance off. It's less likely, but it's possible.
Tom had no possibilty of escaping the dance off with the points as they were.
And surely at the semi-final it shoud be the public's choice, whether you agree with their decision or not. I don't think it would have been particularly fair if Tom had stayed in on the 2 points for the girls, 1 point for Tom scenario, but he's never been in the bottom 2 with the public before now.
By the time they are down to four or five couples, the public should decide not the judges.
The judges have created most of the problems with this show from the start.
The judges have created most of the problems with this show from the start.
Radio 5 have had it on very bulletin.
Very tongue in cheek , Rachel Burden on 5 Live wondered if the BBC offices would be raided by the Serious Fraud squad
They also interviewed Kelly Baker who choreographed the ATs last night and was there and she said no one knew anything about it at all until the results were announced .
She said it was the right decision and had JS not left all 3 ( or another 3 I suppose ) would have been in the final anyway .
She was asked about who was the best and should win and said she would be PC like Austin , but said Rachel was technically the best she thought there had been on SCD and could do I think she said gentle and smooth , Tom was the showman and Lisa could do it all and was the complete package and she really loved to dance .
Very tongue in cheek , Rachel Burden on 5 Live wondered if the BBC offices would be raided by the Serious Fraud squad
They also interviewed Kelly Baker who choreographed the ATs last night and was there and she said no one knew anything about it at all until the results were announced .
She said it was the right decision and had JS not left all 3 ( or another 3 I suppose ) would have been in the final anyway .
She was asked about who was the best and should win and said she would be PC like Austin , but said Rachel was technically the best she thought there had been on SCD and could do I think she said gentle and smooth , Tom was the showman and Lisa could do it all and was the complete package and she really loved to dance .
Just been reading about this. Maybe it's a bit early and I've missed something, but wasn't it always going to be the case that whoever was bottom with the judges would be in the dance off? Is that the point?
I got the impression that this was all an 'on the night' fiasco because Rachel and Lisa tied 1st place. Wouldn't the only way this could have been avoided is if 2nd place was tied? Therefore it could be 2+1, 2+2, 2+3 and 3+1. 3+2, 3+3.
So as others have said, they should have worked this out ahead of time and put in a tie breaker.
How was this avoided last year? Wasn't there only 3 in the semi's?
I got the impression that this was all an 'on the night' fiasco because Rachel and Lisa tied 1st place. Wouldn't the only way this could have been avoided is if 2nd place was tied? Therefore it could be 2+1, 2+2, 2+3 and 3+1. 3+2, 3+3.
So as others have said, they should have worked this out ahead of time and put in a tie breaker.
How was this avoided last year? Wasn't there only 3 in the semi's?
Originally Posted by BBTIME:
“Just been reading about this. Maybe it's a bit early and I've missed something, but wasn't it always going to be the case that whoever was bottom with the judges would be in the dance off? Is that the point?
I got the impression that this was all an 'on the night' fiasco because Rachel and Lisa tied 1st place. Wouldn't the only way this could have been avoided is if 2nd place was tied? Therefore it could be 2+1, 2+2, 2+3 and 3+1. 3+2, 3+3.
So as others have said, they should have worked this out ahead of time and put in a tie breaker.
How was this avoided last year? Wasn't there only 3 in the semi's?”
“Just been reading about this. Maybe it's a bit early and I've missed something, but wasn't it always going to be the case that whoever was bottom with the judges would be in the dance off? Is that the point?
I got the impression that this was all an 'on the night' fiasco because Rachel and Lisa tied 1st place. Wouldn't the only way this could have been avoided is if 2nd place was tied? Therefore it could be 2+1, 2+2, 2+3 and 3+1. 3+2, 3+3.
So as others have said, they should have worked this out ahead of time and put in a tie breaker.
How was this avoided last year? Wasn't there only 3 in the semi's?”
omg the voting system has been explained a million times on other threads. i don't understand the maths in this one at all, please explain
Originally Posted by Fudd:
“Bit unfair saying no one explained what happened. Tess said as soon as the Results show came on that the line's had been frozen because the bottom couple couldn't be saved from the dance off.”
“Bit unfair saying no one explained what happened. Tess said as soon as the Results show came on that the line's had been frozen because the bottom couple couldn't be saved from the dance off.”
Did she ?
Originally Posted by BBTIME:
“ Maybe it's a bit early and I've missed something, but wasn't it always going to be the case that whoever was bottom with the judges would be in the dance off?”
“ Maybe it's a bit early and I've missed something, but wasn't it always going to be the case that whoever was bottom with the judges would be in the dance off?”
No - with 3 in the semis, if the public vote is the reverse of the judges' vote then the person who is bottom of the leaderboard will go through without the dance off. The only way for this not to happen is if the top 2 are tied, as happened last night.
Reversing the final 3 leaderboard has already happened on the show - in the series 3 final, the judges had Zoe in first place, Colin in 2nd place and Darren in 3rd place. The public vote was, from highest to lowest: Darren - Colin - Zoe, which meant that Zoe was out in 3rd place.
Quote:
“So as others have said, they should have worked this out ahead of time and put in a tie breaker.”
“So as others have said, they should have worked this out ahead of time and put in a tie breaker.”
Exactly. The Eurovision dance contest did it - when there was a tie I think whoever scored higher with the head judge got the higher points, or something like that.
Quote:
“How was this avoided last year? Wasn't there only 3 in the semi's?”
“How was this avoided last year? Wasn't there only 3 in the semi's?”
There were only 3 in the semis but there was no tie.
:
I agree, they were so hell bent on getting the final they wanted with their overmarking , perfect scores for les than perfect dances, it backfired on them (shame) It couldn't happen to four nicer people
Originally Posted by dome:
“By the time they are down to four or five couples, the public should decide not the judges.
The judges have created most of the problems with this show from the start.”
“By the time they are down to four or five couples, the public should decide not the judges.
The judges have created most of the problems with this show from the start.”
I agree, they were so hell bent on getting the final they wanted with their overmarking , perfect scores for les than perfect dances, it backfired on them (shame) It couldn't happen to four nicer people
It's an admission of a staggering level of incompetence by the SCD producer(s).
It's so bad, I thought it was more likely to be a setup of the kind more commonly seen on other channels.
Since they seem to have such a problem with maths, maybe they should hire this chimpanzee? It can count up to nine though, so maybe it's overqualified.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JkNV0rSndJ0&fmt=18
It's so bad, I thought it was more likely to be a setup of the kind more commonly seen on other channels.
Since they seem to have such a problem with maths, maybe they should hire this chimpanzee? It can count up to nine though, so maybe it's overqualified.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JkNV0rSndJ0&fmt=18
Originally Posted by Seymour:
“:
I agree, they were so hell bent on getting the final they wanted with their overmarking , perfect scores for les than perfect dances, it backfired on them (shame) It couldn't happen to four nicer people”
“:
I agree, they were so hell bent on getting the final they wanted with their overmarking , perfect scores for les than perfect dances, it backfired on them (shame) It couldn't happen to four nicer people
”
Certainly did. Backfired in a spectacular way too with it being the first results show of the series to be broadcast live. Serves them right.
I don't mind if the News of the World got their explanation from here. At least they have produced a reasonable article explaining the reason for the rollover. Given most people don't read these forums, at least it will have enlightened some of those who were puzzled.
There's quite a few comments (below the article) here on the Daily Mail webpage but the paper doesn't seem to have as much info as the News of the World.... they've obviously not looked on this website!! !
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...tly-twist.html
!http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...tly-twist.html
Has anyone thought that the BBC engineered this situation weeks ago in order to get a 3 person final?
Originally Posted by yenston:
“Has anyone thought that the BBC engineered this situation weeks ago in order to get a 3 person final?”
“Has anyone thought that the BBC engineered this situation weeks ago in order to get a 3 person final?”
No. It was a fiasco last night. They clearly had not thought things through with the judges effectively holding all the voting power.
Originally Posted by fatskia:
“It's an admission of a staggering level of incompetence by the SCD producer(s).
It's so bad, I thought it was more likely to be a setup of the kind more commonly seen on other channels.
Since they seem to have such a problem with maths, maybe they should hire this chimpanzee? It can count up to nine though, so maybe it's overqualified.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JkNV0rSndJ0&fmt=18”
“It's an admission of a staggering level of incompetence by the SCD producer(s).
It's so bad, I thought it was more likely to be a setup of the kind more commonly seen on other channels.
Since they seem to have such a problem with maths, maybe they should hire this chimpanzee? It can count up to nine though, so maybe it's overqualified.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JkNV0rSndJ0&fmt=18”
I think I love you. Thanks, I needed a laugh right about now.
Originally Posted by fatskia:
“It's an admission of a staggering level of incompetence by the SCD producer(s).
It's so bad, I thought it was more likely to be a setup of the kind more commonly seen on other channels.
Since they seem to have such a problem with maths, maybe they should hire this chimpanzee? It can count up to nine though, so maybe it's overqualified.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JkNV0rSndJ0&fmt=18”
“It's an admission of a staggering level of incompetence by the SCD producer(s).
It's so bad, I thought it was more likely to be a setup of the kind more commonly seen on other channels.
Since they seem to have such a problem with maths, maybe they should hire this chimpanzee? It can count up to nine though, so maybe it's overqualified.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JkNV0rSndJ0&fmt=18”
There may even be a vacancy on the judging panel next year. Couldnt make a worse job of it than the present lot.
GCSE maths !!!!!! adding up numbers between 1 and 3 GCSE who the heck are they kidding, an average 5 year old can add up simple numbers like those, but seemingly the BBC and the people who voted for Tom regardless cannot.
Originally Posted by georgeshair:
“I love the way NOTW claim credit for contacting the BBC and getting it sorted out!”
“I love the way NOTW claim credit for contacting the BBC and getting it sorted out!
”
They always get their best scoops from reading these boards.
Originally Posted by Analogue_TV:
“Screws of the world sums it up well...
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/show...n-tangoed.html”
“Screws of the world sums it up well...
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/show...n-tangoed.html”
....yes, as it does for soooo many news items.
2 of 3
