EurovisionSmile
Veteran
**Post deleted**
ESC - what would you improve for the future?
- Thread starter Joyride
- Start date
- Watchers 8
EurovisionSmile
Veteran
**Post deleted**
EurovisionSmile
Veteran
**Post deleted**
NemesisNick
Well-known member
If there's one thing i'd like to change about the ESC, it's change the criteria for who hosts the Contest.
At present, the standard procedure is that whoever wins hosts the ESC the following year. From my experience of watching the ESC since the 1980s, that can influence what some countries enter if they've won in the last year or so.
A prime example is Ireland.
Won in 1992, so they hosted it in 1993.
Won in 1993, so they hosted it in 1994.
Won in 1994, so they hosted it in 1995.
I first heard / saw the 1994 Irish entry "Rock 'n' Roll Kids" sung by Paul Harrington and Charlie McGettigan during the 1994 ESC. I liked it, it was a good ballad. Going by all the cheering and applause at the end it was surprisingly popular, and ended up winning with a then record breaking 226 points. Yet at the time, rumours were circulating in the media that song was chosen as a subtle attempt not to win Eurovision a third time. I accept that was only a rumour, and whether or not it was true is questionable, but anyway, it winning the 1994 ESC was an unexpected surprise against the odds. The upshot of that was RTE ended up footing the bill for hosting it a third year in succession.
Is there any reason why the EBU didn't excuse RTE from hosting the 1995 ESC, after their already having hosted the 1993 and 1994 Contests? Couldn't they have invited another highly placed country to host the 1995 ESC? The obvious alternative contender would have been Poland who came 2nd in 1994; was TVP in a financially OK position to host the 1995 Contest?
I didn't think much of the 1995 Irish entry Dreamin' by Eddie Friel; I thought it was downright dull and boring. Presumably the judges felt the same way as Ireland finished a dismal 14th with just 44 points in 1995. Since then I've often wondered if RTE deliberately chose that song as a desperate attempt to come last with nul points and get relegated for a year, thereby having no danger of winning in 1996 and not have to host the ESC until 1998 at the earliest (that is if they won the 1997 ESC following their automatic return from relegation). As it happened relegation was replaced by an audio only pre-qualifier for the 1996 ESC, which at the time even the 1995 high fliers Spain (2nd) and Sweden (3rd) had to enter to get a place in the 1996 ESC. As we all know, Ireland's "The Voice" (a rather church style song, not the sort of thing you'd expect to win Eurovision) made it through the 1996 pre-qualifier, and won the 1996 ESC!
Since then I've noticed some interesting host entries. After Sweden's 1999 win, in 2000 they entered "When Spirits Are Calling My Name" which sounded quite a poor effort compared to "Take Me To Your Heaven" in 1999. I got the impression their 2000 entry was an effort to do badly and not win 2 years running; as it happened it finished 7th in 2000. After Ukraine won in 2004, their 2005 entry "Razom Nas Bahato" sounded downright awful to me. In my opinion "Razom Nas Bahato" seemed like a boring protest chant which seemed to me like a "suicide entry", i.e. attempt to come last with nul points, and not have to host it in 2006.
In other words, from my observations the last 20 years or so, it seems some countries that have won the ESC have submitted below par or downright awful entries when hosting the ESC the following year in an effort not to win again and have to host it again.
I'd like to see countries who want to host it put their name in a hat, and host country for a particular year is announced 18-24 months ahead. For example, announce the 2014 host country before 1 October 2012, so as not to influence countries in what songs they pick between Jan - Mar 2013 for the 2013 ESC.
At present, the standard procedure is that whoever wins hosts the ESC the following year. From my experience of watching the ESC since the 1980s, that can influence what some countries enter if they've won in the last year or so.
A prime example is Ireland.
Won in 1992, so they hosted it in 1993.
Won in 1993, so they hosted it in 1994.
Won in 1994, so they hosted it in 1995.
I first heard / saw the 1994 Irish entry "Rock 'n' Roll Kids" sung by Paul Harrington and Charlie McGettigan during the 1994 ESC. I liked it, it was a good ballad. Going by all the cheering and applause at the end it was surprisingly popular, and ended up winning with a then record breaking 226 points. Yet at the time, rumours were circulating in the media that song was chosen as a subtle attempt not to win Eurovision a third time. I accept that was only a rumour, and whether or not it was true is questionable, but anyway, it winning the 1994 ESC was an unexpected surprise against the odds. The upshot of that was RTE ended up footing the bill for hosting it a third year in succession.
Is there any reason why the EBU didn't excuse RTE from hosting the 1995 ESC, after their already having hosted the 1993 and 1994 Contests? Couldn't they have invited another highly placed country to host the 1995 ESC? The obvious alternative contender would have been Poland who came 2nd in 1994; was TVP in a financially OK position to host the 1995 Contest?
I didn't think much of the 1995 Irish entry Dreamin' by Eddie Friel; I thought it was downright dull and boring. Presumably the judges felt the same way as Ireland finished a dismal 14th with just 44 points in 1995. Since then I've often wondered if RTE deliberately chose that song as a desperate attempt to come last with nul points and get relegated for a year, thereby having no danger of winning in 1996 and not have to host the ESC until 1998 at the earliest (that is if they won the 1997 ESC following their automatic return from relegation). As it happened relegation was replaced by an audio only pre-qualifier for the 1996 ESC, which at the time even the 1995 high fliers Spain (2nd) and Sweden (3rd) had to enter to get a place in the 1996 ESC. As we all know, Ireland's "The Voice" (a rather church style song, not the sort of thing you'd expect to win Eurovision) made it through the 1996 pre-qualifier, and won the 1996 ESC!
Since then I've noticed some interesting host entries. After Sweden's 1999 win, in 2000 they entered "When Spirits Are Calling My Name" which sounded quite a poor effort compared to "Take Me To Your Heaven" in 1999. I got the impression their 2000 entry was an effort to do badly and not win 2 years running; as it happened it finished 7th in 2000. After Ukraine won in 2004, their 2005 entry "Razom Nas Bahato" sounded downright awful to me. In my opinion "Razom Nas Bahato" seemed like a boring protest chant which seemed to me like a "suicide entry", i.e. attempt to come last with nul points, and not have to host it in 2006.
In other words, from my observations the last 20 years or so, it seems some countries that have won the ESC have submitted below par or downright awful entries when hosting the ESC the following year in an effort not to win again and have to host it again.
I'd like to see countries who want to host it put their name in a hat, and host country for a particular year is announced 18-24 months ahead. For example, announce the 2014 host country before 1 October 2012, so as not to influence countries in what songs they pick between Jan - Mar 2013 for the 2013 ESC.
The most ridiculous thing was Monaco taking part in ESC... I mean... why would a country want to take part and presumably win, if they don't have even one venue to host it?! And, of course, the only time they won, they couldn't host it next year.
Guess that like Andorra, they just wanted to be represented in this popular show. A not so expensive way to promote their country to a huge part of the European population.
Monaco was worse, I mean, look at the entrants - most of them were French! The funniest thing was that the winner (1971) haven't even been to Monaco prior to the contest :?
Ah didn't know that about the winner
Actually, I've never considered Monaco as a real state like Andorra. Not sure why. What about San Marino? I don't think they have a venue to host neither, and yet they had big chances to win with Valentina this year
Ah didn't know that about the winner
Actually, I've never considered Monaco as a real state like Andorra. Not sure why. What about San Marino? I don't think they have a venue to host neither, and yet they had big chances to win with Valentina this year
Andorra is more of a real state than Monaco, that's for sure. What is there anyway? The prince's palace, a casino and a few hotels?
And how many citizens of Monaco actually WORK in Monaco? I bet most of them go to France to work
Andorra is more of a real state than Monaco, that's for sure. What is there anyway? The prince's palace, a casino and a few hotels?
And how many citizens of Monaco actually WORK in Monaco? I bet most of them go to France to work
You're right. The big interest in Monaco being independant is that it was a tax heaven. :? And what is the pride of reigning over a block of houses?
Mickey
Well-known member
You don't have to host the contest if you win. You merely get invited to do so. There are plenty of examples of countries choosing not to host (admittedly not since Israel declined in 1980 and Netherlands took over).
I think you are also underestimating how hard it is to win ESC. The year before they won, Ukraine sent what I consider their worst ESC entry. Were they also trying not to win in 2003? Just because they struck gold in 2004, it doesn't mean that was the only time they put in an effort.
The Voice is not something you would expect to win now, but what about in the mid 1990s? Compare it to the winner from 1995.
You seem to be assuming that was an internal selection, when the Swedish entry, like all other Swedish entries, had to win Melodifestivalen to enter ESC. It was the Swedish people's favourite. Your personal opinion that it was poor is also somewhat undermined by it's top ten finish.
That's exactly what it was. The song was originally a protest song from that year's Orange Revolution in Ukraine. It wasn't really about winning, but not because of the cost of staging Eurovision. It was there more as a celebration of the revolution than anything else.
I think you are also underestimating how hard it is to win ESC. The year before they won, Ukraine sent what I consider their worst ESC entry. Were they also trying not to win in 2003? Just because they struck gold in 2004, it doesn't mean that was the only time they put in an effort.
You're right. The big interest in Monaco being independant is that it was a tax heaven. :? And what is the pride of reigning over a block of houses?
Is there even border control between France and Monaco?
Do you know this joke?
Two teenagers from Monaco meet
- Hey Jacques, my parents still don't allow me to drink alcohol, and even if I went to the other side of the country, they would find me! But now I found a perfect way to drink without them seeing.
- Oh yeah? What are you doing?
- Simple, I just go abroad to drink
Is there even border control between France and Monaco?
Do you know this joke?
Two teenagers from Monaco meet
- Hey Jacques, my parents still don't allow me to drink alcohol, and even if I went to the other side of the country, they would find me! But now I found a perfect way to drink without them seeing.
- Oh yeah? What are you doing?
- Simple, I just go abroad to drink
Haha
good joke! So true!I don't think there is a border between France and Monaco, I guess that you can go to Monaco and leave it without even noticing you were elsewhere
Haha
I don't think there is a border between France and Monaco, I guess that you can go to Monaco and leave it without even noticing you were elsewhere
This reminds me... sometime ago there was an article about Swiss troups marching into Liechtenstein without noticing
The whole Liechtenstein prince's guard army (about 100 people
) was moblized.The Swiss troops got lost during morning excercises
and stepped to Liechtenstein without even knowingThis reminds me... sometime ago there was an article about Swiss troups marching into Liechtenstein without noticing
The whole Liechtenstein prince's guard army (about 100 people
The Swiss troops got lost during morning excercises
Oh my! That's priceless!
Don't know what's the funniest information... The Swiss Troop that got lost in Liechtenstein or the size of the Liechtenstein army! I hope that those Swiss were aware of the existence of Liechtenstein then
Oh my! That's priceless!
Don't know what's the funniest information... The Swiss Troop that got lost in Liechtenstein or the size of the Liechtenstein army! I hope that those Swiss were aware of the existence of Liechtenstein then
Technically, it was the prince's guards, because Liechtenstein doesn't have an official army
But then again, who would want to attack Liechtenstein and for what reason? And yes, maybe they weren't aware of their existence... just like most people in the world are not aware
Technically, it was the prince's guards, because Liechtenstein doesn't have an official army
And yes, maybe they weren't aware of their existence... just like most people in the world are not aware
Sorry, yes it's the prince's guards! It must have been an awkward situation.
That's right, when you think that most western people don't even know where is/what is Slovakia or FYR Macedonia... so Liechtenstein...
That's maybe why they want to take part in Eurovision, not to be bothered by the Swiss anymore!I didn't answer to the original topic because there are so many things to improve. For now, I'd say that in the green room, each delegation should be randomly shown during the finalists anouncement, because cameras tend to focus on the country that will qualify in the next envelope, so it kills the suspense.
The removal of the "vote boxes" during the performances is really enjoyable, that's a good move.
As to the language issue, I know it's impossible but I'd suggest that mother tongues be used in the semi finals (thus almost all countries would have sung in their languages), THEN in the final, the finalists can choose either their own language or switch to English.
As to the final voting, as some people say, it's both too fast and too long, quite boring also, but I don't see a better way to present the final outcome.