I didn't bring it up to say "They should get a second attempt". That's you reading into things.
Nope, I am not reading into things here. Just thinking through the consequences of the example you have brought up, something you should be willing to do yourself, too. When the table breaks right in the cypriot act, how would they go on in their choreo? "Continue on like nothing's happened", as you propose, would be impossible. Surely they would not have a plan B choreo prepared in case the table is suddenly not available anymore. So should they try on the spot to improvise a new choreo out of thin air? That would definitely decay into chaos within seconds. All they can do is finish their act without choreo and therefore without any stage performance at all, or to abort the act altogether. And you seem to agree that they could not legitimately ask for a second attempt. Now the juries would have to judge a performance half of which never happened. How are they supposed to do that? Could they base it on group reputation and public hype alone?
It's a really small problem. The "penalization" should be mininal, if any, especially since Loreen delivers one of the most flawless performances of the entire contest in terms of everything. She makes the most use of the cameras, she's among the best vocalists this year and her song is very contemporary. A single flubbed line due to a swallowed snowflake should hardly matter.
The fact remains that there was a noticable flaw in the performance. It does not matter that she dropped the line because of forgetfulness or because of a badly planned stage effect, in the end Loreen and her team
are responsible for it. The flaw would certainly not disqualify them or place them last in the field, and I agree with LakZaNokte that in spite of it Loreen can still win (and likely will, because in her case the televote will never be affected by anything smaller than a complete desaster). But just to ignore it as you suggest would be unfair to the other groups who prepared and performed better. And if
the actual performance of a group at the jury rehearsals would not matter, those rehearsals could be dropped and the juries could make their judgement by the official group videos instead. I think there is a good reason why those rehearsals have been introduced.
Regarding your praise of Loreen's merits let me just say that I also hold her in high regard because of her (by ESC standards) unusual and innovative entry. She clearly deserves credit for her courage to go into the competition with such a demanding act. But when it comes to actual performance I have some issues with it regarding her vocal qualities, how her dance moves connect to the song, and the music itself. But of course this largely depends on personal taste, and there is no arguing about that.
Thats's hardly the same thing. Dropping a microphone that isn't waterproof (and I doubt their mics aren't waterproof) into water isn't the same thing as an errant snowflake making its way into your mouth.
It actually is, and I have explained it before. The group takes responsibility for everything they introduce into their act, especially when it backfires on them and disrupts their performance. Btw. you can clearly see in the video how the twins lay down the mics before entering the fountain. I highly doubt the mics
are waterproof.
After all, snowflakes or not, I still consider Euphoria to be this year's Top 3 material due to the innovative approach, but I am concerned that the hype around it has grown to such proportions that it clouds some people's objective judgement. In any case I would expect especially the jury members
not to be affected by it. Otherwise we would not need the juries at all and could leave it to the televoters alone again, something I do not desire.
