The JURY Recepy for Eurovision success ... good or bad?

[A-lister]

- Sing in English
- Don't be too modern (try to always bee in the mid-of-the-road)
- Don't send an entry actually representing the musical culture of your country! (I know it sounds funny, considering entries in ESC should represent their countries, but yeah... please don't!)
- Import your entry from Sweden (Buying your entry from abroad, totally unattached your country's own music scene, it's almost a must these days!)
- Preferably send a ballad (and please preferably as safe as it gets ok?)
- Be middle-of-the-road ... (safe and harmful!, fit for western adult contemporary radio around the year 2000)...

What you SHOULDN'T do!

- Don't send an ethnic sounding entry! (Don't you DARE show that you have your own type of music culture to Europe!! National diversity is a threat to American/Swedish-styled pop's world domination!)
- Preferably don't sing in your native language (Well, you'll do this on your own risk!... better if you country erase your native language and replace it with English once an for all!)
- Prepare yourself for jury slaughter if your entry is too fresh sounding and different (Again... the public might appreciate it, but you need the votes of the juries aswell! ... so please be safe! Cheesy is also good )

^
Is this really what ESC should be about?

Discuss... !

And yes, there's a sarcastic tone in this thread! But really, should ESC be about importing your entry from Sweden and send in-the-middle-of-the-road pop or ballads in English only? Should sending an ethnic entry or trying to be a bit experimental and in-touch with music trends be a big no-no?

The juries seem to think so... what do YOU think? Is it time to change the ESC rules finally? Should juries still be in? Should their role or powers be changed? Is there a point in this contest where countries gets punished for trying to stick to the concept, while other countries gets praised when playing it safe with imported safe entries unattached to their countries?

 

[JTL90]

- Sing in English

In 2012 Serbia was second, Albania third, Spain fifth and Estonia sixth in jury voting, so juries can also appreciate foreign language songs.

And no, I don't want that juries go away, because every year since 2009 my favourite songs has benefited from them (Kaas, Dice, Gualazzi, Nishliu/Lepland and Anouk), but I prefer the 2009-2012 system.

 

[Celia]

I agree about juries liking ballads a bit too much and sometimes being hard on ethnic sounds (Finland 2010, Bulgaria 2013) but I'd say 50% juries - 50% televote is the fairest and most balanced system. It could be improved, I guess, but 100% televoting gave us awful results, so overall I'm glad they're back.

 

[Impressive]

This is so weird Ireland is 23rd in jury and 14th in televoting - Result is last place.
Italy is 8th in jury and 11th in televoting - Result 7th
Math is not my style at all :?

 

[CC92]

I agree about juries liking ballads a bit too much and sometimes being hard on ethnic sounds (Finland 2010, Bulgaria 2013) but I'd say 50% juries - 50% televote is the fairest and most balanced system. It could be improved, I guess, but 100% televoting gave us awful results, so overall I'm glad they're back.

That's merely your taste however. I think that the 'jury' votes, in general and compared to the so-called plebs' vote, are way beyond tacky and silly.

 

[Celia]

That's merely your taste however. I think that the 'jury' votes, in general and compared to the so-called plebs' vote, are way beyond tacky and silly.

Of course it's my opinion. Nevertheless, whether one liked it or not, entries like Patricia Kaas's ending up 18th would have been a disgrace. If juries left this would be flooded again with circuses and tacky bizarre performances (IMO again) I don't always agree with juries, but I'd rather keep them than let them go.

 

[cegs5]

This is so weird Ireland is 23rd in jury and 14th in televoting - Result is last place.
Italy is 8th in jury and 11th in televoting - Result 7th
Math is not my style at all :?

Is not weird at all.

 

[pyryniemi]

Seems like jury only appreciates non-english songs when they aren't up tempo :/

 

[CC92]

That's merely your taste however. I think that the 'jury' votes, in general and compared to the so-called plebs' vote, are way beyond tacky and silly.

Of course it's my opinion. Nevertheless, whether one liked it or not, entries like Patricia Kaas's ending up 18th would have been a disgrace. If juries left this would be flooded again with circuses and tacky bizarre performances (IMO again) I don't always agree with juries, but I'd rather keep them than let them go.

Daniel Diges' 20th place did not prove any more expert knowledge on the 'jury' side though. I agree that 2009 deserved a higher ranking, but people, particularly in Western Europe, preferred other songs. It was a very strong year after all. What I do is focussing on the overall picture, and in my opinion they have mainly done sh*t to the contest (e.g. killing the more innovative and ethnic songs), I'm sorry to say.
And I also gladly take a few 'bizarre' (and therefore at least somewhat memorable) performances over dull snoozefests, tacky cheese ballads and American trash music any day. Apparently the public tends to agree with me. At the end they are the ones whom the show is made for and who (indirectly) also finance it. You could still hold this contest without the 'jury' members but it would not work when you had no viewers watching at home.

 

[Celia]

Daniel Diges' 20th place did not prove any more expert knowledge on the 'jury' side though. I agree that 2009 deserved a higher ranking, but people, particularly in Western Europe, preferred other songs. It was a very strong year after all. What I do is focussing on the overall picture, and in my opinion they have mainly done sh*t to the contest (e.g. killing the more innovative and ethnic songs), I'm sorry to say.
And I also gladly take a few 'bizarre' (and therefore at least somewhat memorable) performances over dull snoozefests, tacky cheese ballads and American trash music any day. Apparently the public tends to agree with me. In the end they are the ones whom the show is made for and who (indirectly) also finance it. You could still hold this contest without the 'jury' members but it would not work when you had no viewers watching at home.

What I'd like EBU to do is supervise and make sure juries are composed by people from all ages (I'd rather put mostly youth though) and different musical styles. Pop singers, rock singers, ethnic singers...that way other types of music would have more chances. But, as for the rest, I think juries are helpful when it comes to preventing diaspora voting for instance.

 

[JackBauer]

I think the EBU should go back to 50/50, allow a free televoting and block every phone after three votes.

Anyway what the point of jury if they can't help France, UK, Moldova (songs they liked this year) to receive a little more points ?

 

[A-lister]

Is not weird at all.

Oh, you mean it's totally normal that a song that ended up LAST (#26) in both televoting and jury voting (), would end up higher combined than a song that ended up #14 in televoting and #23 in jury voting ()???

The results are manipulated like voting results in former communist Europe, I mean they don't even take the time to make the manipulations look slightly valid...

 

[A-lister]

And no, I don't want that juries go away, because every year since 2009 my favourite songs has benefited from them (Kaas, Dice, Gualazzi, Nishliu/Lepland and Anouk), but I prefer the 2009-2012 system.

But that's just your personal taste, and for your info Italy ended up at a respectable #11 based on televotes alone after being sore losers for more than a decade, Albania ended up within the top. 10 in 2012 and Estonia wasn't far away either (based on televotes alone), Anouk ended up in the top. 10 aswell with televotes alone (actually her jury votes weren't that much better).

I agree about juries liking ballads a bit too much and sometimes being hard on ethnic sounds (Finland 2010, Bulgaria 2013) but I'd say 50% juries - 50% televote is the fairest and most balanced system. It could be improved, I guess, but 100% televoting gave us awful results, so overall I'm glad they're back.

I don't think 100% televoting gave us "awful results," all in all televoters have proven to be far more open-minded and in-touch than juries have. Don't even get me started on the juries HATE for everything exploring European national diversity...

If juries left this would be flooded again with circuses and tacky bizarre performances (IMO again) I don't always agree with juries, but I'd rather keep them than let them go.

You mean flooded with great shows and acts actually putting some effort to entertain us? Oh how AWFUL that would be that not everyone will show up lazy and bored like Anouk did and that we'd get a more balance between uptempo and ballads/midtempo again, and not like now 70% of the latter

 

[A-lister]

I think the EBU should go back to 50/50, allow a free televoting and block every phone after three votes.

Ehm, we aldready have 50/50, you mean the juries should get even more powers?

 

[cegs5]

Oh, you mean it's totally normal that a song that ended up LAST (#26) in both televoting and jury voting (), would end up higher combined than a song that ended up #14 in televoting and #23 in jury voting ()???

The results are manipulated like voting results in former communist Europe, I mean they don't even take the time to make the manipulations look slightly valid...

Well, I'm not gping to give a math lessons... but I'll just give a simple example, based in combined results.

If "A" is ranked in every single country in 11th place, that song will get 0 points, and the last place (26th) although its average will be 11,00
If "B" is ranked in 37 sountries in 26th place (last place) but one country ranked it in 10th place, then It will get 1 point and will not became last, will be 25th although its average place will be 25,58 wihich is worst than "A" but still will manage to be ranked higher.

I don't see the manipulation, only maths. If it's fair or unfair that's another subject. That's why I said that it's not weird (based in the current rules and voting system)

 

[A-lister]

Well, I'm not gping to give a math lessons... but I'll just give a simple example.

If "A" is ranked in every single country in 11th place, that song will get 0 points, and the last place (26th) although its average will be 11,00
If "B" is ranked in 37 sountries in 26th place (last place) but one country ranked it in 10th place, then It will get 1 point and will not became last, will be 25th although its average place will be 25,58

I don't see the manipulation, only maths. If it's fair or unfair that's another subject. That's why I said that it's not weird (based in the current rules and voting system)

My maths are good enough thank you very much to realize that Spain should have ended up last...

 

[cegs5]

My maths are good enough thank you very much to realize that Spain should have ended up last...

So, then you should check your reading skills because It seems you don't get it 1

 

[A-lister]

So, then you should check your reading skills because It seems you don't get it 1

My maths skills are good enough to see that a country that ended up dead last, even in some mean-system, in both votings would also end up last generally. If you combine them, Spain would still get last... a country that ended up higher in both couldn't possibly be lower.

 

[cegs5]

My maths skills are good enough to see that a country that ended up dead last, even in some mean-system, in both votings would also end up last generally. If you combine them, Spain would still get last... a country that ended up higher in both couldn't possibly be lower.

You should read carefully my example, so you can realize that even being last in both split rankings, Spain could end up in higher position than Ireland.
In that particulary case, It's because Spain got higher points in the two countries where was ranked in top 10, although Ireland was ranked higher in more countries, achieved only few points in the three countries where was top 10...

Eurovision.tv even warn it in its article: For example; Ireland has an average jury rank of 16,21 and an average televoting rank of 14,62 in the Grand Final, but only made it into the top-10 in three countries. Consequently, Ireland finished 26th in the Grand Final - lower than twelve countries ranked higher by televoters and three countries ranked higher by juries, who all received more points by ending up in the top-10 in individual countries.

As I said, I don't see anything weird or manipulation. Maths.

 

[Steffan]

Stop making drama when there is no need for drama! >,>