Which bookies?

Which spokesman?

Are the words enclosed in quotes in newsprint? On the internet? In one person's fantasy? Posted as disinformation?

It was an article in a newspaper, which I am still trying to find again, if I can't come across it, I will get the latest odds from the bookies for you, I did not realize that there would be a Spanish Inquasition about this, you must be a bigger John Sergeant fan than I am, thanks for your interest though.

Just because someone is a new poster, please do not assume that they have missed anything that was posted here this series.

It is quite possible that they have been lurking here reading for the entire series, because of all the nastiness on the BBC board, and reading the regular spoiler thread for the results on a Sunday.

The final may have been the most watched Strictly ever, but the rest of the series wasn't, for the first time it lagged well behind the x-factor (according to the newspapers, I haven't checked actual figures), and the powers that be will not be liking that, so it's entirely possible that People Power™ might just bring back someone so popular with the masses to up the ratings.

This series of Strictly was very very dull in comparison to last year, in fact I was one of the many people who tuned out after the JS fiasco (more reminiscent of Big Brother than a decent entertainment programme), and didn't watch again until the last part of the final, apart from selected dances on You Tube and the bbc site to cut out the boring bits.

I'm not at all sure that poster's money is safe, when they said that he wouldn't appear at all, I think it's highly likely that he might appear as a special guest in some capacity if not a contestant.

A quest for information please.
The explicit text between quotation marks suggests a transcription typed the day before yesterday at 15:39 --


Text from newsprint?
Text from another PC window?
Can the source be named if it cannot be found?

STRICTLY Come Dancing champion Camilla Dallerup is sensationally quitting the show, we can reveal.

Camilla, 34, insisted she’s had enough after performing on six series of the scandal-hit programme—and has no regrets after a voting blunder nearly scotched their chances of making the final.

She said: “I think some people will be surprised at my decision but I feel now is the right time to go. I have to follow my dreams.”

In an exclusive interview with the News of the World, blonde beauty Camilla also:

DEMANDED a shake-up of the voting system—stripping the four judges of any power

CRITICISED the judging panel for being too CRUEL

HIT back at critics who sniped at her and Holby City star Tom for making the final

REVEALED she would return to the show—but only as a JUDGE, and

SPOKE movingly about her heartbreak over ex-fiancé Brendan Cole’s reported affair with Natasha Kaplinsky in the first series.

Ironically, dancing sensation Camilla decided to quit the BBC1 show the night BEFORE the shambolic semi-final.

Full Story http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/show...ad-enough.html

Source - Link from my thread & News of the World.

Dear Soulmate,

I have to admit I have not placed my bet yet, hopefully I will be going down to the bookies later this afternoon or in the morning, to place £5 on John Sergeant to win Strictly Come Dancing 2009 at 100/1.

They must be expecting quite a response as the maximum bet they will take at these odds, is £10, and it is important to note, that there are no stake refunds if good old John is not confirmed as a participant in the show.

I will get back to you as soon as my bet has been placed and accepted.

A quest for honest information please.
The explicit text between quotation marks suggests a transcription typed the day before yesterday at 15:39 --

'that the odds are quite long at the moment at 100/1, because there has been no official decision yet to bring back John, however these odds are predicted to swing dramatically to make John the odds on favourite to win, if his participation in the show is confirmed.'

Text from newsprint?
Text from another PC window?
Can the source be named if it cannot be found?
Does the source exist?

Dear Soulmate,

I am going down to the bookies at about 4pm, to place £5 on John Sergeant to win Strictly Come Dancing 2009 at 100/1, as quoted in the paper, I will keep you posted.

Why anyone would think that JS would take part again is beyond me. He pulled out, not because of the judges, but because it was all too much for him. The week he went, he was supposed to be doing two dances AND taking part in the group dance which he was having huge problems with and couldn't pick up the routine. And of course, the fact that he could go off on a cruise for two weeks on the Friday of the week he pulled out might have had some bearing on his decision.

If you want to waste your money AJ, then do so, but please stop posting on every thread about the man - it's all very boring now.

Each to their own.

Dear Soulmate,

I placed a £5 bet at 4.15pm, which was accepted at odds of 100/1, for John Sergeant to win Strictly Come Dancing 2009, the same odds as it said in the paper. if you fancy a flutter the maximum stake is £10. If you want to pop round tommorow I will be able to give you a cup of tea, and show you the betting slip.

Every bookie in Britain will die laughing laying 100/1 or 1000/1 John re-entering and winning SCD7 after withdrawing from SCD6.

The question is about your posting at 15:39 on 03JAN2009 of explicit text within quotation marks -- purporting to be a quote.

This question has been asked 5 times in this thread by several persons -- what is the source of your explicit quote? I shall be most surprised if Digital Spy management answerable to the law for the contents of postings are not concerned about direct quotes published in their name.

Force Ten, It was very clear from watching the show that Dear old John was forced off the show by the repeated cruel comments from the judges. For some reason many people seem to have selective memory recall about these incidents as if they never happened.

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

Not again.

You may have a go at me but not my dear friend FT.

As I have asked many times without direct reply, please list the "cruel comments" that John received and compare them to the comments other dancers had.

Was John called "a stick insect on acid" for example?

And was Mark Foster (a swimmer) so distraught that he was "bullied"? And the political/war journalist who was told "let's face it you can't dance" is the one we should all feel sorry for??

AJ pleae tell me about this directly and not some "fey" comments to people who agree with you.

I have no idea what show you were watching, but it's quite clear to me that it wasn't Strictly Come Dancing! As Quizmike says, EVERY contestant gets cruel comments at some point or another. JS is an old fraud and used the supposed comments to retire from a show that he thought he would have left weeks before. He couldn't cope with the physical demands of the show, his wife was giving him a hard time about all the publicity and he wanted to go away on holiday on a cruise ship where he was being paid to give a few well chosen bon mots. I know people will say that the cruise line would have rearranged the cruise for him, but there is no way he would have coped with the physicality of the show on the Saturday after he walked out. TWO dances with Kristina, plus a very tough group routine choreographed by Arlene. It had already been reported (and I don't have the source!) that he couldn't cope with the choreography for the group dance. He quite obviously talked it over with his wife and Kristina and decided to call it a day. A somewhat cowardly decision in my opinion, but people like yourself would have continued to vote him through regardless of what he did on the dance floor - even if he had just stood still and let Kristina gyrate around him (oh, that's what he was already doing!).

You may say it's an entertainment show, and yes you are right, but it is ALSO a dance competition and John Sergeant cannot dance.

If you want to waste your money betting on something that won't happen in a million years, then that is your privilege, but I really wish that you would stop promoting John Sergeant at every opportunity on this forum. You obviously get some sort of perverse pleasure from winding everyone up, but personally, I intend to ignore you in future and I suggest that everyone else does the same.

Even Camilla said, its not a dance competition.

It's a bit like talking to Rainman!

... erm, I do not mean this to be a serious dig, AJ, just amusement at your persistence!

I agree, I really think this is the only way to stop this bizarre pollution of the boards! It seemed quite amusing to begin with but it really has gone beyond a joke now. I wonder whether JS is considering having panic buttons installed in his home?

If the invite comes, good old John will be back like a shot.

Surely JS appearing two years running is highy unlikely.

Kelly withdrew last year, and the best offer she got was an appearance on the Christmas Special, not even being able to dance with her original partner.

I would have thought the line up for this years SCD would be closely scrutinised in order to prevent, as far as possible, a repeat of the fiasco that surrounded JS, his continuing appearances in the show, and his eventual departure.

I have him on my ignore list which helps a lot.

Kelly had to withdraw because of the very sad loss of her father, this years fans favourite John, was forced off the show by the repeated cruel comments from the judges, and it is this that has brought the shows reputation into disrepute.

Bringing back John next year with new judges, or alternating guest judges, would not only guarantee record viewing figures, but would also restore the reputation of the show in the eyes of the voting public.

Camilla's suggestion of herself returning as a judge next year, would also inject some glamour into the panel.

With the publics votes deciding all the way through, the show would be right back on track and go from strength to strength.

Give good old Brucie his much deserved Knighthood, and it would be the perfect light entertainment show, which is what it was supposed to be all along.

No, not Rainman, it's Chicken Licken!

I think the OP got lost on the way to the thread for lazy journalists...

I think the OP is a JS stalker...