Bsimmons
Active member
- Joined
- December 16, 2016
- Posts
- 481
Correction: The Jury SHOULD be about the quality.
YEARLY JURY HATE THREAD
- Thread starter Alaska49
- Start date
- Watchers 9
Correction: The Jury SHOULD be about the quality.
midnightsun
Veteran
Well, Israel is 3rd in the jury voting so I wouldn't say juries let her down. (Not like they did with Italy, Ukraine or Denmark... *cough*)
The same goes for Cyprus.
[side note: for my personal taste both songs were ranked much too high by the juries imho, just like a bunch of other songs, but that's not the point.]
Austria is the only jury decision I comprehend. I KNEW they would choose Austria. I'm still convinced jury votes are heavily influenced by the odds. This year the odds weren't prediciting a clear winner. Being someone following a lot of stuff around Eurovision for decades (!) I noticed that juries will always go the safe way then. The most logic song to choose for them is Austria. It's a "safe song" to choose. I think I already wrote it in this thread. It was quite popular amongst the fans, a bit sophisticated because of the soul & gospel elements, not overly dramatic staging, the singer has a very good voice and it has no political message. A perfect jury song actually.
[And yeah, I know Austria was very low in the odds before the final but that was at a point when the juries had already voted and after the semi he was much more popular in the odds.]
The question is: would juries have voted for Israel, Cyprus, Germany, Sweden, Ireland etc. if these songs were at the bottom of the odds? I don't think so ;-)
I was always a fan of the juries when, at the beginning, the did what they were created for. At the beginning there were real music professionals in the juries, not singers, former ESC participants or tv hosts. And when they sticked to their own rules set by the EBU.
from eurovision.tv
But the past years juries proved they are useless. Especially since the names of the Jurors are made public I have a feeling they act like they want to please the public (audience and fans). [I could even understand this. There are countries where the wrong juror vote has consequences.]
The same goes for Cyprus.
[side note: for my personal taste both songs were ranked much too high by the juries imho, just like a bunch of other songs, but that's not the point.]
Austria is the only jury decision I comprehend. I KNEW they would choose Austria. I'm still convinced jury votes are heavily influenced by the odds. This year the odds weren't prediciting a clear winner. Being someone following a lot of stuff around Eurovision for decades (!) I noticed that juries will always go the safe way then. The most logic song to choose for them is Austria. It's a "safe song" to choose. I think I already wrote it in this thread. It was quite popular amongst the fans, a bit sophisticated because of the soul & gospel elements, not overly dramatic staging, the singer has a very good voice and it has no political message. A perfect jury song actually.
[And yeah, I know Austria was very low in the odds before the final but that was at a point when the juries had already voted and after the semi he was much more popular in the odds.]
The question is: would juries have voted for Israel, Cyprus, Germany, Sweden, Ireland etc. if these songs were at the bottom of the odds? I don't think so ;-)
I was always a fan of the juries when, at the beginning, the did what they were created for. At the beginning there were real music professionals in the juries, not singers, former ESC participants or tv hosts. And when they sticked to their own rules set by the EBU.
from eurovision.tv
But the past years juries proved they are useless. Especially since the names of the Jurors are made public I have a feeling they act like they want to please the public (audience and fans). [I could even understand this. There are countries where the wrong juror vote has consequences.]
Of Course they would. What makes you think so? Israel and Cyprus were the Songs with the Biggest Fanbases and Juries are normal People like you and I, so it makes Sense to give both Highscores. Btw. Its a bit funny, cause 2016 everyone was whining that the Juries intentionally "stole" Russias Victory and giving it 0 Points despite Russia was #1 in the Odds. But when the Juries vote according to the Odds, People are still whining
FoxOfShadows
Well-known member
- Joined
- September 19, 2013
- Posts
- 1,532
Where have they been released? I can't find them looking at the detailed results page on Eurovision.tv
midnightsun
Veteran
Of Course they would. What makes you think so? Israel and Cyprus were the Songs with the Biggest Fanbases and Juries are normal People like you and I, so it makes Sense to give both Highscores. Btw. Its a bit funny, cause 2016 everyone was whining that the Juries intentionally "stole" Russias Victory and giving it 0 Points despite Russia was #1 in the Odds. But when the Juries vote according to the Odds, People are still whining
Well, that's the point. They should be music experts. I'm none. Neither are most of those jury members. I wouldn't call a singer whose songs are produced and written by someone else a "music professional".
Concerning Russia, this is a different matter. Juries try to punish Russia whenever they can. As much as they overrate Sweden any year. Besides, Sergey didn't get ZERO points from the juries. Just less than the winner. Just like this year. Israel was only third in the jury vote. Didn't change my opinion, both Netta and Sergey were high in the odds.
Anyway, my point is clear. Everyone's entitled to have a different opinion. I just wanted to point mine out. :-)
Just my thoughts about why juries have to go, imho.
LalehForWD
Active member
LOL there's, of course, an obvious correlation between odds ranking and jury votes. What else would be possible?
My Final Statement about Juries being brainwashed by the Betting-Odds:
ESC 2011
ESC 2012
ESC 2014
ESC 2015
ESC 2016
ESC 2017
midnightsun
Veteran
Well, you just proved it. Since Björkman is involved in the producing process (2013) juries are influenced by the odds. (Why did you leave out 2013, by the way?) That's all I'm saying since... I guess the beginning of any jury discussion this year! 
Björkman wants to have a modern music festival like all those stupid casting shows. And I'm sure he has the power to influence some juries to vote for special countries... like let's say, Sweden, Malta (whose songs have been written by Swedes the last years), Cyprus (also a song written bei a Swede) etc.
Björkman wants to have a modern music festival like all those stupid casting shows. And I'm sure he has the power to influence some juries to vote for special countries... like let's say, Sweden, Malta (whose songs have been written by Swedes the last years), Cyprus (also a song written bei a Swede) etc.Well, you just proved it. Since Björkman is involved in the producing process (2013) juries are influenced by the odds. (Why did you leave out 2013, by the way?) That's all I'm saying since... I guess the beginning of any jury discussion this year!
We dont have the Juryresults of 2013 and the Averageranking is not aussagekräftig (dont know the english word sry).
And btw. you complained that Israel was 3rd with the Juries while being 2nd with the Odds and Cyprus was 5th with the Juries while being 1st with the Odds. What would be an reasonable Juryresult according to you? I still dont get your Point.
midnightsun
Veteran
I didn't. It was logical that many songs in the top odds were also in the top odds of the juries. I don't compain about anything but juries voting too safely (= voting for songs popular in the odds).
Austria?
I just wrote that I can totally comprehend the jury winner!
Don't worry. Maybe I'm not able to properly express in English what I wanted to explain. Anyway.
You don't need to try so hard refuting any theory of mine because I don't insist on its truth, it's just MY OPINION!
Anyway, thanks for bringing up all the statistics, very interesting.
Alaska49
Well-known member
- Joined
- April 18, 2013
- Posts
- 2,895
good for you. he was still tenth and nowhere near deserving of a victory because he would never have the points. lithuania didn't even fall particularly hard either. nobody but you gives a shit if block voting makes serbia go from 19th to 12th or whatever the fuck.
Well, my Ideal Voting would be a 100% Televoting were many or all Countries get Points so that Countries like Serbia and Albania can get punished for having several Bottom3-Positions in Non-Diasporacountries. Of Course its just my Opinion, but since Eurovision is a Competition, every Position (including the Table-Midfield) should matter.
And Regarding the Juries... I didnt know, that the Juries must foresee the Televoting and stop Giving Austria too much Points. And lets not forget that each National Jury votes independently from each other and that f.e. the Bulgarians couldnt know, that the Icelandics/Israelis/Polishs/Lithuanians/Estonians etc..gave their 12 Points to Austria as well, which might lead to an overration in the Summary compared to the Televoting.
FilipFromSweden
Well-known member
- Joined
- March 27, 2012
- Posts
- 6,667
Please don’t answer my questions with questions, I at least have the respect to answer yours. Popularity doesn’t equal quality, but I still enknowledge that a piece of art fills a function when it appeals to a mass (or even a small group). I’m not saying anything subjective about the Israelian entry, but if it was 3rd in the jury vote and 1st in the televote out of 43 entries, why should I state it has zero quality? Because only my opinion is essential?
Swedenvision
Active member
Well, you just proved it. Since Björkman is involved in the producing process (2013) juries are influenced by the odds. (Why did you leave out 2013, by the way?) That's all I'm saying since... I guess the beginning of any jury discussion this year!
Yes Sweden and Björkman clearly has the power over jury members, also the fact that it is different jury members every year makes it even more impressive!
You think way too much of us...
Just realize the fact that juries appreciate songs that have a high quality when it comes to production and sound, as well as the whole stage performance and the fact that the song might do well in the charts after the contest.
Even if you don´t like Dance You Off you have to agree that it fulfills all those criterias, that was also the case in 2017 with Robin Bengtsson, 2015 with Måns, 2014 with Sanna.
2016 with Frans however not so much, and we only was 9th with juries.
MonkeyJaw
Member
- Joined
- March 10, 2014
- Posts
- 60
I smell sour grapes.
ZoboCamel
Well-known member
may I just remind you of the basic logical law when talking about correlations? Correlation is not causality....
Yes! I was just about to say exactly the same thing
There's undeniably a correlation between results and the odds, but odds are specifically trying from the outset to reflect the final results as accurately as possible. And what's more likely: a) a prediction metric being vaguely predictive, or b) 215 jurors from around Europe secretly conspiring to copy the odds rather than just rank a few songs, with the final purpose of this being...?