Cheating in Eurovision voting

[BrokenPocketwatch]

@Centrix: I agree that the new system is, by far, not the best and should be changed. [EDIT] Juries were, presumably, also brought back to give entries performing in undesirable slots, entries which would need more then one listening in order to be liked (the so-called "growers") and entries which, while rather good, would be overlooked by the televoters for one reason or another (ex: performing before/after and very popular song, or a song which is just simply very memorable and would "outshine" any other entry for one reason or another [be it a very good staging, or it being like Ucrain's 2007 entry {now that's one impossible to forget entry xD}], under the current system these songs are a lot more likely to be overlooked even if the jury gives them a lot of points.

@Andreea: I don't really know how much of a difference it would result in place/point-vise from the current system... Having an international jury still seems like it could be rather messy (to me) though...

 

[Andreea]

@Centrix: I agree that the new system is, by far, not the best and should be changed.

@Andreea: I don't really know how much of a difference it would result in place/point-vise from the current system... Having an international jury still seems like it could be rather messy (to me) though...

I would rather like that each member of the jury come on stage and tell how he voted.
I want to see their faces and hear their voices
We'll have an international jury's vote and after that each country will tell the televoting result.

 

[Galandar]

I would rather like that each member of the jury come on stage and tell how he voted.
I want to see their face and hear their voice
We'll have a jury's vote and then each country will tell the televoting result.

 

[BrokenPocketwatch]

@Andreea: I think that would take far too long @.@... Not to mention that said jury members might receive hate-mail from the more obsessed fans if they didn't vote for an entry said fan(s) liked a lot >.>...

 

[Andreea]

@Andreea: I think that would take far too long @.@... Not to mention that said jury members might receive hate-mail from the more obsessed fans if they didn't vote for an entry said fan(s) liked a lot >.>...

Only if they cheat
It would not take so long; all 26 on stage and it's enough if each say "I gave have 12 points to ..." .They have to be there and assume their votes and the critics.


this is the system in Romanian Eurovision national selection . They reveal televote's result and then jury'vote (each member say how he voted).

 

[lucian-crusher]

Only if they cheat
It would not take so long; all 26 on stage and it's enough if each say "I gave have 12 points to ..." .They have to be there and assume their votes and the critics.


this is the system in Romanian Eurovision national selection . They reveal televote's result and then jury'vote (each member say how he voted).

Do you not remember the mesagess and the reactions that Stefan Naftanalia received after he gave 0 points to Luminita Anghel this year?

 

[Andreea]

Do you not remember the mesagess and the reactions that Stefan Naftanalia received after he gave 0 points to Luminita Anghel this year?

of course I remember, that;s why I want the same system in Eurovison.
Only Naftalina gaved 0 points, the others 10 or 12
if they are "specialists" than it;s impossibile to have such a difference, only if someone cheat.

 

[BrokenPocketwatch]

Only if they cheat
It would not take so long; all 26 on stage and it's enough if each say "I gave have 12 points to ..." .They have to be there and assume their votes and the critics.


this is the system in Romanian Eurovision national selection . They reveal televote's result and then jury'vote (each member say how he voted).

And how would anyone be able to tell that said jury member cheated instead of them simply not liking the song...?

And I think it takes far too long, actually, they could just let the jury members be the country representative/spokesperson then and have them announce both votes, theirs and the country's televote, after that both votes would be placed in 2 different score-boards and, at the end, combined.

[EDIT] So you want this system in place only to give some people a hard-time for no good reason other then their taste being different then that of the other members of the jury...? That's rather silly, not to mention unnecessary.

This is music we're discussing, not a sport (where the rules of how and for what points are given are very clear [ex: the first person to cross the finish line is the winner, the person who misses the ball the most loses, etc.), but something which is completely subjective >.>.

 

[Andreea]

So you want this system in place only to give some people a hard-time for no good reason other then their taste being different then that of the other members of the jury...? That's rather silly, not to mention unnecessary.
.

I think it's more transparent. ESC lacks transparency. But if they choose not to change the system, then it would be better if they tell us jury's vote and public's vote during the final, not after a week, a month... or never.

 

[BrokenPocketwatch]

There's no need to have the jury members announce the votes themselves though, like I said, some fans could harass them personally if they just so happened to not like a song said fan(s) liked a lot. I agree that both sets of votes should be revealed, even if EBU reverts back to the system from 2010-2012 or makes a new one, in the voting but naming people isn't necessary.

 

[CC92]

I think it would be enough if the jurors' detailed votes and explanations were published in the internet the day after the final. And yes to one big jury announcing their overall results and each country to announce their public votes invidually. The current procedure combining the jury and televotes on a national basis is intransparent, illogical and just makes no sense.

 

[Andreea]

There's no need to have the jury members announce the votes themselves though, like I said, some fans could harass them personally if they just so happened to not like a song said fan(s) liked a lot.

You are exaggerating assuming their votes in front of the audience it's an act of respect.

 

[CC92]

There's no need to have the jury members announce the votes themselves though, like I said, some fans could harass them personally if they just so happened to not like a song said fan(s) liked a lot.

But that's the natural price for giving yourself more power than others. No one forces them to participate in the jury system. They could also just televote as the the plebs do.

 

[A-lister]

But that's the natural price for giving yourself more power than others. No one forces them to participate in the jury system. They could also just televote as the the plebs do.

Well, Sarah Dawn Finer (atleast one of the times) and Eric Saade were both in the Swedish juries the years they also acted as spokespersons

But yeah, I totally agree with what you said there!

However, juries' names must be kept under lock prior announcing results, otherwise bribing is possible (and is probably happening already).

 

[GWTW1939]

What difference does it make if juries are under lock prior to contest and revealing them after when most jury members appear to be on their countries juries almost every year? It seems to be the same people over and over since ESC appears to be a small community of insiders. Eurovision really need to expand then and since most will never see it as credible it will always be the same people.

 

[A-lister]

What difference does it make if juries are under lock prior to contest and revealing them after when most jury members appear to be on their countries juries almost every year? It seems to be the same people over and over since ESC appears to be a small community of insiders. Eurovision really need to expand then and since most will never see it as credible it will always be the same people.

Really? If it's the same juries every year, then it's a HUGE problem for the legitimacy of their votes.

I'd say just kick out the juries once and for, I don't see them bringing much good anyways

 

[Trece]

i think in jury should be no less then 100 members, at all less corruption (would be harder to buy jury)

 

[GWTW1939]

I don't think that many people would be interested and you would probably have to dig to the bottom of the barrel to get 100 and you know what would happen? We would get over 100 people in a jury like the UK one or people from trashy magazines and talk shows that know nothing about ESC and are ignorant about other countries. Do we really want that, I say just scrap them like A-lister says!

 

[A-lister]

I'll say, let ESCUnited become the new official ESC board, and A-lister the new Executive... and ESC will be awesome

 

[Galandar]

Btw I have one offtop question: I remember Georgian entry was praised for some time but they failed to get even a TOP10 position. I wonder was it because of televoting of the juries did their job? In addition, why there is no single Georgian member in this forum? So far I have not met any Georgian ESC fans at this or any other ESC-related resources :?