about your new voting system I don't know if it's good to give 25 countries points. Maybe an extension to 12 or 15 is possible.
I do agree about is the fact that the number of jury members must be extended.
Five people can really destroy the televoting results of a country.
An example: In the grand final in 2014 Belgian televoters put Armenia in the first place (ok diaspora is certainly in) but the juries only put it 25th, so it became 11th in the overall ranking. In a jury system with 10 or even 20 members well divided (young,old,men,woman,professional, fan,...) then you would get a more accurate image of what a jury thinks...[/QUOTE]
I thought about reworking the new system and by people's comments, giving points to every country would be confusing. In terms with all the problems during the voting, it's safe to assume a computer blue screened when it tried to connect to Estonia, Portugal, and Georgia.
So I decided to reduce it from giving every country a point value to the top 15:
So I did the analysis and gave points based on the ranking system. Here are the results:
Semi-Final 1:
Current System
01.
182
02.
149
03.
105
04.
98
05.
89
06.
81
07.
77
08.
67
09.
63
10.
62
11.
41
12.
39
13.
33
14.
33
15.
28
16.
13
New System
01.
292
02.
253
03.
207
04.
196
05.
189
06.
178
07.
167
08.
154
09.
140
10.
136
11.
118
12.
117
13.
115
14.
107
15.
79
16.
72
Biggest Gains:
+4 Ranks and
+2 Ranks, Biggest Loss
&
-2 Ranks. Although Netherlands still did not qualify, it did rank much better under the new system than the old.
Semi-Final 2:
Current System
01.
217
02.
155
03.
151
04.
123
05.
92
06.
87
07.
67
08.
57
09.
57
10.
53
11.
43
12.
35
13.
33
14.
19
15.
14
16.
11
17.
4
New System
01.
335
02.
265
03.
263
04.
225
05.
195
06.
178
07.
165
08.
148
09.
137
10.
127
11.
124
12.
122
13.
120
14.
73
15.
72
16.
64
17.
34
While there is not much difference between the rankings between the current and new systems,
would have been placed 11th instead of 13th and would have missed qualification by just 4 points. Also,
was ranked much better than scored, and
got REALLY lucky with
and
voting for them and inching just above Switzerland.
Grand Final
Current System
01.
365
02.
303
03.
292
04.
217
05.
196
06.
186
07.
106
08.
102
09.
97
10.
53
11.
51
12.
49
13.
44
14.
39
15.
35
16.
34
17.
34
18.
30
19.
23
20.
19
21.
15
22.
11
23.
10
24.
5
25.
4
26.
0
27.
0
New System
01.
590
02.
516
03.
506
04.
414
05.
391
06.
374
07.
270
08.
252
09.
239
10.
159
11.
140
12.
119
13.
112
14.
109
15.
104
16.
97
17.
87
18.
84
19.
77
20.
75
21.
73
22.
59
23.
52
24.
47
25.
31
26.
28
27.
27
Unfortunately,
would still be last under the new system as they did have one of the lower averages between them and
. Countries did think better of
song because it would gain 3 ranks from 27th to 24th. However, the biggest victim of point canceling is
as under the new system, they would have gain 8 rankings from 21st to 13th!
would have done surprisingly better as he would have went up 4 ranks from 22nd to 18th.
In conclusion, this year was still really lopsided as the top 5 did get 67% of the total points available under the current system. However, if the EBU decides to overhaul the scoring system, even expanding from the top 10 to the top 15 would better reflect the average rankings and avoid point cancellations between the televoters and the jury when it comes to songs borderlined between receiving and not receiving points.
On another note, I do agree with everyone on the jury system and that it should be expanded to at least 10 to 20 people of both "music professionals" AND Eurovision fans. With the 5 person jury, if even one person ranks a song low, the whole jury ranking is thrown off and may deny an entry points because ONE person didn't like it...or possibly hates the country or singer. Who knows?
Thanks for reading all this!
