Televoting Results.

[Krishoes]

Lol, pathetic excuse!!!!! All these poooooooooooooooooor Il Volo...... Buuuuuuuuuh the juries want to destroy for them!!!!!!!!!! Seriously, if San Remo is that bad then why no one complain???

I was hoping for Nek's victory, if you want to know But here in Italy many people criticize the juries in Sanremo (not only this year), so it's not a problem of Il Volo. And the result of Sanremo's juries has NOTHING to do with Eurovision.

 

[pyryniemi]

About televoting: people are allowed to vote 20 times for a entry. do we actually know that most people liked the italian entry? How do we know that they italian fans weren't fanatic and voted as crazy for them?? And how do we know that the people just voted as crazy for Italy to just destroy Sweden's and Russia's chances?

Because 10 crazy ESC fans can totally make a 90pt difference in televotes

 

[SuperGirl]

Because 10 crazy ESC fans can totally make a 90pt difference in televotes

I didn't only talk about ESC fans though. Until there's one vote for one country we will never know which country the people liked most.

 

[SuperGirl]

I was hoping for Nek's victory, if you want to know But here in Italy many people criticize the juries in Sanremo (not only this year), so it's not a problem of Il Volo. And the result of Sanremo's juries has NOTHING to do with Eurovision.

Yes, it does to do with ESC. People are saying that ESC juries robbed Italy. But why are they supposed to vote for Il Volo when the italian juries didn't do that?

You are saying the juries tried to change the results. Why should they do that if not they really disliked them??

 

[Krishoes]

Yes, it does to do with ESC. People are saying that ESC juries robbed Italy. But why are they supposed to vote for Il Volo when the italian juries didn't do that?

This requires a wide explanation but nobody cares (and actually it's not useful today), the results are these and it's ok Nobody will change his/her own opinion about that...

 

[eugoose]

Wrong!!!!! The people weren't allowed to vote in ESC until 1997! Before that it was always only juries. Actually the juries has been in ESC most part of its history.

Gosh is it only young people in this forum?

So the fact that got rid of the jury system for exactly those reasons are irrelevant to you? Talk about picking and choosing facts that suits you.

 

[SuperGirl]

So the fact that got rid of the jury system for exactly those reasons are irrelevant to you? Talk about picking and choosing facts that suits you.

What reasons? The only reason is that EBU wanted money.

 

[ElRuso]

Wrong!!!!! The people weren't allowed to vote in ESC until 1997! Before that it was always only juries. Actually the juries has been in ESC most part of its history.

Gosh is it only young people in this forum?

Are you serious? There were no televoting back there because it was technically impossible to provide it. When the progress moved ahead, televoting was introduced.

 

[eugoose]

Yes, it does to do with ESC. People are saying that ESC juries robbed Italy. But why are they supposed to vote for Il Volo when the italian juries didn't do that?

You are saying the juries tried to change the results. Why should they do that if not they really disliked them??

So, let's say that that Isa won Melodifestivalen instead. By your logic, that means the jury should NEVER rate her high purely based on the fact that she bombed on her national juries.

So, if you don't do well with juries in your own national finals, say bye winning to Eurovision?

 

[SuperGirl]

Are you serious? There were no televoting back there because it was technically impossible to provide it. When the progress moved ahead, televoting was introduced.

So those ESC are meanless?

 

[ElRuso]

So those ESC are meanless?

There was no electricity for 1000000 years, are those years meaningless?

 

[tsegaye]

So, let's say that that Isa won Melodifestivalen instead. By your logic, that means the jury should NEVER rate her high purely based on the fact that she bombed on her national juries.

So, if you don't do well with juries in your own national finals, say bye winning to Eurovision?

I'm not joining this conversation because it takes too much effort hah, but I think what [MENTION=14000]SuperGirl[/MENTION] is trying to say is that it is not weird that the ESC-juries didn't like it that much when the italian jury didn't. Of course the italian jury didn't affect the ESC-juries in any way but I guess they maybe "disliked" it (the ESC-juries didn't of course dislike the italian song but you get what I'm saying) for the same reasons or something I guess

 

[SuperGirl]

So, let's say that that Isa won Melodifestivalen instead. By your logic, that means the jury should NEVER rate her high purely based on the fact that she bombed on her national juries.

So, if you don't do well with juries in your own national finals, say bye winning to Eurovision?

Yes I think so. Especially in MF because if the international juries don't like the act then why should Europe do it? Anna Bergendahl is a good example. She was liked by swedish jury and televoting. But the international jury disliked her. I knew directly after she won MF that Sweden will fail to qualify to final. Both recent winners Loreen and Måns won BOTH juries and televoting. If italian jury don't like italian opera song then why should the ESC juries do that?

 

[eugoose]

Yes I think so. Especially in MF because if the international juries don't like the act then why should Europe do it? Anna Bergendahl is a good example. She was liked by swedish jury and televoting. But the international jury disliked her. I knew directly after she won MF that Sweden will fail to qualify to final. Both recent winners Loreen and Måns won BOTH juries and televoting. If italian jury don't like italian opera song then why should the ESC juries do that?

OK, then again, by your logic, can you explain to me, how Belarus and Romania, who both got top marks from their national juries, bombed with the juries at the Finals? (2014)

How you succeed at a national final doesn't mutually reflect how it will appear at Eurovision.

 

[SuperGirl]

I'm not joining this conversation because it takes too much effort hah, but I think what [MENTION=14000]SuperGirl[/MENTION] is trying to say is that it is not weird that the ESC-juries didn't like it that much when the italian jury didn't. Of course the italian jury didn't affect the ESC-juries in any way but I guess they maybe "disliked" it (the ESC-juries didn't of course dislike the italian song but you get what I'm saying) for the same reasons or something I guess

This is what I mean. My point is that BOTH italian and ESC juries must have some reasons to not vote for it. How can people say ESC juries robbed Italy when they know it did poorly with the italian juries? Instead they need to accept Italy's song wasn't a jury song.

 

[SuperGirl]

OK, then again, by your logic, can you explain to me, how Belarus and Romania, who both got top marks from their national juries, bombed with the juries at the Finals? (2014)

How succeed at a national final doesn't mutually reflect how it will appear at Eurovision.

You have right. In everything there's cases that don't fit the "rule". It can have to do how good the other songs are in the NF. But my point is that it's clearly that Italy wasn't a jury song when both italian juries and ESC juries gave then "bad' points.

 

[eugoose]

You have right. In everything there's cases that don't fit the "rule". It can have to do how good the other songs are in the NF. But my point is that it's clearly that Italy wasn't a jury song when both italian juries and ESC juries gave then "bad' points.

Yes, I get that point. BUT, the problem I have is how you misconstrue the data.

Italy's song was judged by an Italian jury(?). That doesn't exactly reflect an international jury does it? It's the same thing as saying, an ethnic song from Armenia could be loved by an Armenian jury, yet it could be hated entirely by the international jury. The same could happen in reverse. A song hated by the country's jury could then proceed to dominate the international jury.

If Conchita Wurst had decided to represent Belarus with 'Rise Like A Phoenix' would a Belarussian jury even rate her highly? Probably not. However, if she got to ESC, it wouldn't matter if the national jury didn't like it.

 

[SuperGirl]

Yes, I get that point. BUT, the problem I have is how you misconstrue the data.

Italy's song was judged by an Italian jury(?). That doesn't exactly reflect an international jury does it? It's the same thing as saying, an ethnic song from Armenia could be loved by an Armenian jury, yet it could be hated entirely by the international jury. The same could happen in reverse. A song hated by the country's jury could then proceed to dominate the international jury.


If Conchita Wurst had decided to represent Belarus with 'Rise Like A Phoenix' would a Belarussian jury even rate her highly? Probably not. However, if she got to ESC, it wouldn't matter if the national jury didn't like it.

Once again I totally see you point. The problem I have is that people are saying Italy was robbed by the juries. And they can't see how some juries could put it so low. Italian juries didn't like it then it would't be a surprise and hard to understand.

 

[Krishoes]

I'm reading people talking about song as a complete shit, messy things that jury can obviously not appreciate. That's hilarious.

 

[SuperGirl]

I'm reading people talking about song as a complete shit, messy things that jury can obviously not appreciate. That's hilarious.

Well people are saying the same thing about Sweden. What's different? That's less hilarous?