Here you are, a solution to all the conspiracy theories, all the judges' mess-ups, all the back-biting, all the smuggery.

For the final on Saturday, bring back everybody, leave the judges at home, let the dancers introduce themselves, and rely entirely on the public vote, one man, one vote. No contributor to any forum is to be allowed a vote.

I like it, all bar the last line!

LOL - nicely done sir! but like Mr. Healey her works live on

Not nearly as much as your biased attitude is :yawn:

Why should they say it was to save Tom? The only reason they had to take that decision was because the judges' scoring had made the outcome inevitable.

It's nothing to do with Tom. Had the judges not given Rachel and Lisa the same marks (vastly overmarking Lisa ................ again), Tom may still have been at the bottom on the board but with a chance of avoiding the dance off with the viewers' votes. As it stood, there was no chance of this happening and he would have (more than likely considering that the person the show is geared for winning would have been likely to end up in the bottom twowith him) unfairly voted out against a far inferior dancer who shouldn't even be in the competition at this stage.


Rachel has only been in the dance-off once that I can remember. When was the second time?

The amount of times they have saved Limp Lettuce is an embarrassment.

Good post katmobile, agree 100%

I don't think that's what the OP is saying and that is not the point the OP is making.

No matter what you think about over marking, under marking, etc. as things stood at the end of the first show on Saturday night Tom was in the dance off and almost certainly on his way home given he would be competing against either a 39 or a 40 performance.

Those are the facts.

The OP is saying why doesn't anyone acknowledge this and actually say to Tom something like "How lucky are you that the saga on Saturday happened?". Then it would be out in the open and that's what the OP mean by the elephant in the corner.

Rachel was in the dance off in week 8 against Heather and Week 11 against Christine.
Last edited by BuddyBontheNet : 17-12-2008 at 11:31

She was in the dance against Heather and then Christine, she obviously deserved to get through both times, it's debatable whether Lisa danced better in all three dance off's IMO.

I'd go for somewhat lucky instead of how amazingly bloody lucky; the scenario where Lisa and Rachel ended up in the dance off (it would have happened if Rachel IS the least popular [assuming she topped the leaderboard and that Tom was the most popular]) was avoided too, so everyone was lucky albeit to a different degree.

Exactly - you could say they have all arrived in the final with some level of controversy following them. It is certainly different from any other final that's for sure.

The problem with the show (the 4th elephant) is also one of the show's most popular features: the public vote. I've always felt the vote was more about populatirty that dancing ability and it, more than the judges scores, is responsible for skewed results. remember Chris what's-his-name in series 1. A hopeless dancer but forced by the public to return week after week and made it to the final. I flet sorry for him - does anyone know if he enjoyed having to return?

I'm in the camp that feels the show is entertainment but based on a dance contest and that dance performance should outrank plain popularity else why have the dancing at all.

But what could replace the vote?

I don't think anything should replace the public vote, no bad dancer ever wins. Even though I thought Colin was better than Darren I didn't think he was bad just not the best.

I don't see anything wrong with the public vote at least it gives the viewers the opportunity to have some decision on the overall outcome. Voting is not as black and white as you see it. I'm sure the celebs popularity is a factor but many members on this forum vote solely for the dance, some may vote for the pro and others a combination of all three. Past winners prove that a combination of popularity and dance ability have been the deciding factor.

I guess the fact he's been on the SCD tour suggests that he wasn't shang-hi'd on a weekly basis.

And also suggests that the public popularity is seen as a good way to get bums on seats.

If anything, 'Batman' is the best justification for the public vote I can think of.

Just had a glance at Chris' wiki entry and it seems that things have more than picked up after his personal problems; I'm glad he sees his time on SCD as something worth reliving on the tour.

How is anyone else able to get in the room with so many elephants lolloping around?

Elephants don't lollop - that's rabbits.

Elephants gallump.

Whoops!

I am desperately trying to think of a witty response, but it escapes me at the moment although I think it is something to do with monkeys and maybe giraffes!

I'm still only tripping over Nellie

Just had another thought - what if they breed?

Read the title of the thread - the elephants are in the corner - just as well there are only 4 or the room will need alterations!

Agreed - and I thought Zoe was better than both of them!

based on gestation periods it's lucky we're dealing with galumphers and not lollopers.