First you call people
and
and then you're wondering again? Boy bye
As of now, Jamala only won with 2 points more than Dami
- Thread starter FilipFromSweden
- Start date
- Watchers 4
First you call people
and then you're wondering again? Boy bye
Chorizo
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 9, 2014
- Posts
- 4,346
I think this year's winner should be far less controversial than last year's because Jamala is only a few points behind Sergey in the televote (with a much smaller diaspora to support her) and only a few points behind Dami in the jury vote. Last year, the winner was only third in the televote and the margins were much bigger. Italy's diaspora is much smaller than the Russian diaspora, so Italy would have won the televote without any diaspora or neighbor votes, which is not true for Russia.
So the winner this year is closer to winning the televote than last year. If people argue that Australia should have won, this means they want a 100% jury system. It's legitimate to demand a different system but that doesn't change the winner we already have. Any new system will obviously only apply to future contests.
Clearly the system needs to be reformed. The televote is dominated by the diaspora, neighbor voting and by people voting for joke entries and special effects. Some of the jurors are corrupt and we can see that a mistake by a single juror can make the difference between 12 and 0 points. Who knows what mistakes have been made in the past before the EBU started to publish the votes. This goes back to 1956 and is not a recent problem.
I don't expect the EBU to make any changes to the official points. This would open Pandora's box. They need to make sure the jurors understand the system from now on. We need larger juries and an official to oversee the voting process and to make sure everyone voted correctly. The wrong votes weren't noticed because other jury members voted similar to her wrong votes. She put Georgia and Ukraine on top by mistake but others did that deliberately. This shows how random the jury vote is. The televote is less random because many people consistently vote for the same country no matter what song that country might present. That's not better, is it? There should be different criteria to be eligible as a juror. Being a singer is not the same as being a music professional.
So the winner this year is closer to winning the televote than last year. If people argue that Australia should have won, this means they want a 100% jury system. It's legitimate to demand a different system but that doesn't change the winner we already have. Any new system will obviously only apply to future contests.
Clearly the system needs to be reformed. The televote is dominated by the diaspora, neighbor voting and by people voting for joke entries and special effects. Some of the jurors are corrupt and we can see that a mistake by a single juror can make the difference between 12 and 0 points. Who knows what mistakes have been made in the past before the EBU started to publish the votes. This goes back to 1956 and is not a recent problem.
I don't expect the EBU to make any changes to the official points. This would open Pandora's box. They need to make sure the jurors understand the system from now on. We need larger juries and an official to oversee the voting process and to make sure everyone voted correctly. The wrong votes weren't noticed because other jury members voted similar to her wrong votes. She put Georgia and Ukraine on top by mistake but others did that deliberately. This shows how random the jury vote is. The televote is less random because many people consistently vote for the same country no matter what song that country might present. That's not better, is it? There should be different criteria to be eligible as a juror. Being a singer is not the same as being a music professional.
FilipFromSweden
Well-known member
- Joined
- March 27, 2012
- Posts
- 6,667
Isn't it very "convenient" that the alleged "story" about (if true) a complete dumb Dane jury member just pops up out of nowhere when the (according to some) wrong "entry" (=read country in some cases) just won?
So we should all just ignore her because some people think Ukraine shouldn't have won?
And we get it, you are unhappy with the winner and want the juries fav (public #4) to have won... but even with these "correlations" (based on one questionable "news" item and the San Marino theory) she still won... so what case are you really trying to make here? That she could have won by some points less than she did??
My point with this thread was '' look how things have changed, if something else pops up it could be the case that the wrong nation won last Saturday. How is the news item questionable?
The most (probably unintentionally) ironic part in this thread is that if anything this thread is trying to "prove", it just "proves" that the juries are a complete messy bunch, so while you are pushing their "winner" big time you are actually doing so with supposed claimed "facts" that just happens show that the juries are completely incompetent, biased and/-or corrupt ... so if anything this thread doesn't make the pro- jury case stronger, just the opposite
What? So just because one clumsy jury member screws up all juries are a complete messy bunch? What's up with you generalizing so much? Me pushing the jury winner big time? How? I did want Australia (or even Russia) to win and I have stated that, but I can still be objective. Once again, how is the jury incompetent, biased and corrupt? I can agree that they are, but you are defending Jamala and hear me out on this: a lot of votes including some she got from the jury was either 1. against Russia or 2. political (1 and 2 are pretty much the same)
What does Dami being 4th in the televote have anything to do with her deserving to win or not? She finished second with not many points behind. Why does it matter so much more what the televoters wanted than what the jury wanted? They share equal power for a reason.
Dami won the jury vote
But summing up the thread it only proves that Jamala won (regardless of how we count), the juries are a mess and you are unsatisfied with the winner and prefer the public #4 to have won (even worse than last year when public's #3 won)
Again, I don't think you should count out the jury votes as '' meaningless '' or whatever you are doing. And I am unsatisfied with the winner, because in a Eurovision with so many good songs a damn political one with an artist who represents nothing but politics (I mean jesus christ, you must've seen how some approached her in the winner's press conference!) ends up winning and probably thanks to Russia vs. Ukraine
Oh my god, this might be the most butthurt thread I have ever seen on this forum. Why is it so difficult for you to accept that a song you didn't like is the legitimate winner of the contest? Any other conclusion other than Jamala winning legitimately is simply delusion.
lavieenrose
Albania Superstar
One of my favorite things is searching nostalgically through threads, and I found this lovely gem!
GermanBango
Well-known member
RainyWoods
Croak-kay
lavieenrose
Albania Superstar
got the most points and won but I do get Filips point, many in here were crying rivers last year when we won despite won the televote while we won the jury.But this year when the actual winner don´t came 1st in any of the televoting or jury vote, the reactions are far from last year, isn´t that a bit strange?
Alaska49
Well-known member
- Joined
- April 18, 2013
- Posts
- 2,895
as for the "jamala won on the back of anti-russian votes": jamala got snubbed by 17 juries, not a far cry from sergey being snubbed by 21 of them. if anything, the calculation of how results would have been under last year's system, with dami winning, show that jamala was almost as much a victim of politics as sergey was; the russia vs ukraine "jury war" would have destroyed both. so, if anything, the juries being so massively in favour of dami was arguably the true political move, a rejection of two eastern european entries and an overcompensation of the "no politics on this contest!!!!!" agenda.
and this is assuming juries even voted as politically as we believe. dami and jamala's performances were stellar and it makes perfect sense that juries rewarded those two, it's very consistent with previous jury results. sergey also put on quite the show and overcame some of the prejudice that would inevitably come with his big visual+schlager combination and got in the good graces of enough juries (and not just neighbour ones) to get close to winning the contest. there is always the possibility that we, as diehard fans are prone to do, are overthinking the whole thing.
and this is assuming juries even voted as politically as we believe. dami and jamala's performances were stellar and it makes perfect sense that juries rewarded those two, it's very consistent with previous jury results. sergey also put on quite the show and overcame some of the prejudice that would inevitably come with his big visual+schlager combination and got in the good graces of enough juries (and not just neighbour ones) to get close to winning the contest. there is always the possibility that we, as diehard fans are prone to do, are overthinking the whole thing.
FilipFromSweden
Well-known member
- Joined
- March 27, 2012
- Posts
- 6,667
What does me defending a voting app have anything to do with this?!
Alaska49
Well-known member
- Joined
- April 18, 2013
- Posts
- 2,895
um there are way more people whining about jamala right now lol. it's just that when you take russian and polish fans out of the picture, like in this board, it seems like she's getting more of a pass in comparison to the rest of the internet, but really she's getting more reactions than mans even here. which is ridiculous, btw: it's not like any of this is mans's or jamala's or dami's fault, anyway.
But this year when the actual winner don´t came 1st in any of the televoting or jury vote, the reactions are far from last year, isn´t that a bit strange?
but as someone who absolutely adored il volo and started to post here just to denounce the voting system that screwed them over: i was way more offended with the way the system works than with their not winning in itself. i loved and still love mans, i staunchly defended him during that absurd homophobia witch hunt against him, and before the detailed jury/televote results were released i was 100% satisfied with his victory. seeing juries having a clear power that the televotes didn't is what offended me. my argument then was that the juries voted a certain way because they knew they had power over the televote, and this might have cost il volo the victory, because if juries didn't have that power they might have possibly been kinder to them. however, if this year's system was used and they really still loved mans that much more than il volo, i would have calmly accepted il volo getting second/third place.
(ps: i'm pretty sure i spent most of my posts last year complaining about the hatchet jury job done to albania, serbia, armenia and poland, though. they had like 30 jury points distributed among them or something and had many of their televote 12/10/8s completely cancelled. absolutely ridiculous. and i don't even like monika's song.)
A-lister
Veteran
- Joined
- December 28, 2009
- Posts
- 32,825
I take that story with a grain of salt, ignore or not, it still wouldn't change the outcome.
If if if, you know how irrational this comes across as right? We can always create hypothetical "if" scenarios, but that doesn't prove anything and the few examples you gave wouldn't change the outcome (as in the winner) so again not sure what you are trying to prove here? So Ukraine potentially could have won but with a less margin to the runner up? Is that supposed to be some sort of revelation?
Well, if the juries are made up by such "clumsy" people and by alleged "politicized anti-Russians" that ranked Russia lower and Ukraine higher on purpose, then surely we can agree on that they are both incompetent, biased and corrupt no? However if that's the case, then your fav Australia could ironically be seen as an even less legitimate winner if picked by such a bunch of people.
Well, I believe in public power rather than the power of few, especially if the few are made up by the type of people just discussed.
Yes, they share equal power for a reason and that system chose Ukraine as a winner, not Australia (which you even pointed out here), yet you complain about the outcome of that very system!? This response made absolutely no sense.
You could obviously see that I just wrote the wrong word?
Well, you accuse them of voting anti-Russian and political, yet we can't count them out as "meaningless"? Now I'm not sure if you even read your own comments here but they are very contradictional.
And again you just proved that this all comes down to your own taste and perception of the winner, conspiracy theories and general bitterness over the outcome resulting in that your fav "only" came second (ironically pushed by the very same people you on one hand say are legit when it correlates with your own taste, on the other accuse of being politicized when it doesn't correlates with your own taste)... my oh my
FilipFromSweden
Well-known member
- Joined
- March 27, 2012
- Posts
- 6,667
Your recaps of your post annoys me, don't put words in my mouth
You just proved A-lister that you we're offended I pointed out your grammar error aswell as you are against any research of mistakes in the voting
I'm not blaming all jury. Many jury groups gave Jamala the cold shoulder and praised Australia. I think the jury is great and I love the jury, doesn't mean I don't think there are certain things wrong with it that should be changed. This goes for pretty much Eurovision as a whole with the diaspora voting etc. I don't really get the idea where you think I praise the juries so much, where did I say that? All I did was defend them against your generalizing and dirt throwing. According to you, I like the juries because I wanted Australia to win. That is not the case, the juries supported my favorite entry aswell as me not liking the win of Ukraine. There is a difference
just find it mate
You just proved A-lister that you we're offended I pointed out your grammar error aswell as you are against any research of mistakes in the voting
I'm not blaming all jury. Many jury groups gave Jamala the cold shoulder and praised Australia. I think the jury is great and I love the jury, doesn't mean I don't think there are certain things wrong with it that should be changed. This goes for pretty much Eurovision as a whole with the diaspora voting etc. I don't really get the idea where you think I praise the juries so much, where did I say that? All I did was defend them against your generalizing and dirt throwing. According to you, I like the juries because I wanted Australia to win. That is not the case, the juries supported my favorite entry aswell as me not liking the win of Ukraine. There is a difference
just find it mate
A-lister
Veteran
- Joined
- December 28, 2009
- Posts
- 32,825
Your recaps of your post annoys me, don't put words in my mouth
You just proved A-lister that you we're offended I pointed out your grammar error aswell as you are against any research of mistakes in the voting
I'm not blaming all jury. Many jury groups gave Jamala the cold shoulder and praised Australia. I think the jury is great and I love the jury, doesn't mean I don't think there are certain things wrong with it that should be changed. This goes for pretty much Eurovision as a whole with the diaspora voting etc. I don't really get the idea where you think I praise the juries so much, where did I say that? All I did was defend them against your generalizing and dirt throwing. According to you, I like the juries because I wanted Australia to win. That is not the case, the juries supported my favorite entry aswell as me not liking the win of Ukraine. There is a difference
just find it mate
Huh grammar mistake?
I'm not even sure what you're talking about anymore, this whole thread is filled with contradictions.
I'm not even sure if you are sure yourself which makes it even harder for others to truly grasp what sort of "point" you're trying to make, it's confusing to say the least
Chorizo
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 9, 2014
- Posts
- 4,346
You must be the most rational Russian person I've seen all week
That's because he's not a Russian.
That's because he's not a Russian.
Yeah, sorry. Hate to break it to you but I'm British...
GermanBango
Well-known member
No seriously, this thread has no reason to exist. It's just something that was made to spit on Jamala and the juries because people like FilipFromSweden or MHIY just revealed themselves to be big drama queens.
won and nothing can be done about it.
Also, diaspora votes OF FCKEN COURSE exists, it even exists for each country, the immigrants wanting to be loyal to their native land. This has nothing to do with Jamala's win.
won and nothing can be done about it.Also, diaspora votes OF FCKEN COURSE exists, it even exists for each country, the immigrants wanting to be loyal to their native land. This has nothing to do with Jamala's win.