YEARLY JURY HATE THREAD

[Jukica]

I was expecting that Austria would be high with juries, but I thought that it would be like 4th - 6th I also expected Czech Republic to do a bit better with juries

I also don't understand Ukraine last with juries

 

[Vektor]

Everybody is missing a crucial point: without the jury voting the voting procedure wouldn't have been as suspenseful in the last few years. Also, a dated, bland song, like Russia 2016 would have won the contest, so the televoters aren't always right.

 

[A-lister]

As I predicted Austria won the jury votes, but Sweden?

Also as I predicted they killed Greece's qualification and seeing what they did with for instance Italy... it's clear that the juries continue their path to create a safe-radio-Pop in English haven out of Eurovision, it's so sad really.

I can't say that all they did was wrong, but it was even clearer this year that they don't correlate with the people and that their taste continue to be overall far more conservative and "anglo-saxic"/western-oriented than what Europe wants. I wonder when will these juries start to respect the concept of Eurovision finally!?

 

[Neo]

Exactly. The usual crap vote from the juries. Anything that sounds or looks American Billboard is voted up, anything that sounds or looks European is voted down.

Then there's the tactical, political and neighbourly voting which is frankly scandalous, nothing less.

I really don't understand how they get away with it, but I guess now it's all about the voting format suspense they produce more than fairness or whatever they were put there for.

 

[Storm]

Personally, I find the juries hilarious. Makes the voting much more exciting and the discussions way more interesting

 

[A-lister]

Exactly. The usual crap vote from the juries. Anything that sounds or looks American Billboard is voted up, anything that sounds or looks European is voted down.

Then there's the tactical, political and neighbourly voting which is frankly scandalous, nothing less.

I really don't understand how they get away with it, but I guess now it's all about the voting format suspense they produce more than fairness or whatever they were put there for.

I pointed this out since 2009

This should be a contest to reflect EUROPEAN music, yet the more wannabe "American" and "safe" you are, the more support you get from the juries

And oh, they weren't really that good to be unbiased and non-political either.

AGAIN, televoters prove they are generally more open minded than the juries.

 

[Mii11]

I just find it all really weird. I mean, Israel won the jury vote in semi 1 but Austria won it in the final. Czech Republic is above Cyprus in the jury vote in semi 1 but they were ranked much higher in the final. Jury voting seems like a mess.

 

[aef]

I just find it all really weird. I mean, Israel won the jury vote in semi 1 but Austria won it in the final. Czech Republic is above Cyprus in the jury vote in semi 1 but they were ranked much higher in the final. Jury voting seems like a mess.

The difference between and wasn't that high in neither the semi nor the final... Maybe some countries that ranked quit low or didn't even give them any points came from semi 2... And vice verse with

But I'm also quite worried by the difference between the jury result for in the semi and then in the final! I mean what happened ?

 

[eerik]

I very much prefer jury results over televoting and combined result. Juries are great!

 

[midnightsun]

The juries have to go! Björkman has to go!

Probably everyone is influenced by pushing Sweden to the max.

1. Cyprus (a song written by a Swede, amongst others) gets the best spots to perform

2. Malta (again, like in the last years) is pushed by the juries (the song is written by a Swede)

3. Sweden is pushed by the juries - again. No matter what song they send. It's overrated and I don't say this because I don't like the song anyway. If they go for contemporary songs (and that's what users here claim, Sweden was "the most modern" song) why didn't they choose Czech Republic instead? It's a similar song but much more complex and fresh (music professionals should value that). Even Israel and Cyprus were more contemporary in that regard).

(4. Just a speculation of mine: long telephone voting yesterday...obviously they were astonished by the few telephone votes that were coming in for Sweden and maybe waited as long as possible for some more... how else could they justify the jury voting for Sweden when it is not loved by the public?! ;-) *just a little conspiracy theory... not to be taken that seriously*).

Also, I hate how they push certain countries every year... Sweden, Malta and obviously also Australia, no matter what song they send. If you look closer for what juries have voted for yesterday, you will see, they gave their points to many songs that were ranked quite high in the odds. Someone wrote that wasn't true, but it was. Surprisingly, the telephone vote was the other way round. (Except for Israel, Cyprus and Germany which did well in both jury and telephone voting so it's imo just fair that Israel won even though I don't like the song much). I wrote it different times so I won't repeat it but imo juries choose safe songs of which they think are loved by the public (thus looking at the odds beforehand) and not quality music. This must not happen!

The only jury descision I can somehow acknowledge is Austria. It's one of those "safe songs" - a solid mediocre pop song, sung by someone with a great voice, it's a bit sophisticated because it got that soul/gospel in it.

 

[Alaska49]

You oughta know no results of that kind is published to anyone until after the final

they obviously aren't published, but come on. those things can leak to the people that are right there. it clearly happened in 2014 and showed in some jury votes like azerbaijan's.

I mean it's your right to hate the song but such comments are just 100% subjective, unfair crap.

I believe being subjective is the entire point of a discussion board. get your useless patriotism out of my face and understand that subjective negative opinions on austria's suspicious and entirely undeserved jury victory are not a personal attack on you or your country. i will post whatever the hell i want about it.

 

[aef]

I believe being subjective is the entire point of a discussion board. get your useless patriotism out of my face and understand that subjective negative opinions on austria's suspicious and entirely undeserved jury victory are not a personal attack on you or your country. i will post whatever the hell i want about it.

Obviously having a discussion with people like you doesn't make sense anyway... And no, it's not all about being subjective and writing whatever you want - a certain level of logic, reasonability and decency is an important need for having a vital and entertaining forum like this one! Your comments are often full of conspiracy theories and insults....

And believe me or not, I'm not patriotic no matter what song we have... But I certainly will always argue against people like you with pointless comments...

 

[GermanBango]

Maybe an argument in favor of the juries:
I compared the top 5 of each country according to voting patterns with their actual televoting and jury top 5 and the result is quite interesting, I'd say. Actually shows who votes more predictably.
Green = Same place as in the pattern top 5
Orange = In the pattern top 5 but on a different place
Red = Not in the pattern top 5

So basically one could've predicted 17 (!!!) televoting winners just by looking at some "random" website.
Source: http://eschome.net/

 

[aef]

All in all I really don't get the huge jury hate... I mean it wouldn't make much sense if they voted for the exact same stuff as the televoters?!

My only problem is that there should be a transparent guideline for their way of voting... I mean now some people say the should vote for the most original entry, some say for the most modern, radio-friendly song or the best vocal performance, others see the most memorable song+staging package as the most important point in the jury voting...

I mean the official statement is that juries take all those aspects into account but I don't know... Maybe it would make sense if every juror had to give a professional comment for every song of their personal top 10... Then we could see why it was ranked so high! Just something short like "Best vocal performance. The composure ist very modern, I'm liking the chorus the most...." whatever... It doesn't have to that detailed, just something short but reasonable...

 

[Bsimmons]

All in all I really don't get the huge jury hate... I mean it wouldn't make much sense if they voted for the exact same stuff as the televoters?!

My only problem is that there should be a transparent guideline for their way of voting... I mean now some people say the should vote for the most original entry, some say for the most modern, radio-friendly song or the best vocal performance, others see the most memorable song+staging package as the most important point in the jury voting...

I mean the official statement is that juries take all those aspects into account but I don't know... Maybe it would make sense if every juror had to give a professional comment for every song of their personal top 10... Then we could see why it was ranked so high! Just something short like "Best vocal performance. The composure ist very modern, I'm liking the chorus the most...." whatever... It doesn't have to that detailed, just something short but reasonable...

Well ... my question is rather how it is possible to have so big differences within different juries. For example EST Jury gave ISR song bottom ranking of the final (22, 24, 7, 24, 25) and then there were countless number of countries where Jury gave ISR song top rating. THIS is what I need to be explained. In my mind Jury no matter the country or nation they represent should look at the same things (told them by EBU) and as they should all be "experts" they should pretty much come to the similar conclusion with minor differences.

Also, like I already asked here. How is it that ISR Jury gave CYP 0 points and CYP Jury gave ISR 0 points (similar shit happened last year too between favorites). Explain me this.

My logical conclusion here is that Jury IS NOT UNBIASED ... and we dont need 5 biased idiots from each country to have 50% of power in the outcome.

 

[Swedenvision]

Enough of this nonsense!

Sweden don´t have any power over the juries or EBU and we are not favored by them, stop this!

The juries seems to look at the whole package, by that I mean the following:
- Quality and the whole production of the song
- Can the song be a radiohit and also work outisde ESC
- Stage performance (creativity)

Our entrys often fulfills this demands exceptionally and that is why scores very high with the juries each year.
We can also see that countries that have been helped by Sweden when it comes to songs and stage performances all have scored way higher with juries and that is not becuase Sweden has bought the EBU, the reson is that the quality simply is higher.

Other countries maybe should stop complaining and work harder if they want to impress the juries!

I think the juries is good for the future of ESC, mostley (not always) they award songs of high quality, and we need that in this contest.

The televotes more often sticks to the fun/ joke acts and the songs that is the most audince friendly.
As someone said televotes seems to vote more with feelings and juries of quality.

Might have looked and sound way too expensive and polished and in the end it might have been a little cold for the viewers at home? Personally i loved the whole performance, and I think Benjamin deserved at least top 10 with televotes, but we all think different.

SVT need to analyze this a bit, 7th place is still good of course and we keep or good results, but the low televote points is not acceptable for with it standards this days.

 

[mauve]

I think the juries is good for the future of ESC, mostley (not always) they award songs of high quality, and we need that in this contest.

The televotes more often sticks to the fun/ joke acts and the songs that is the most audince friendly.
As someone said televotes seems to vote more with feelings and juries of quality..

Don't agree. I had the feeling that the Jury voted very radio-friendly and that has nothing to do with quality. And when I see a good song like Italy rated so low by the Jury and a Pop song like Sweden so high, I start to doubt. Sometimes, the televoters are more unbiased than the Jury.

 

[Sammy]

If juries and public would always agree, we wouldn't need jury votes. I think they are very important to the competition because they do see and value sometimes things the public does not take in account. Not always, there are flaws, certainly, but I'm very happy with the system being.

 

[Bsimmons]

Somehow forum members from AUT and SWE are very happy with Jury work and either see no problems or only minor problems with Jury voting at best.

This has nothing to do with the voting yesterday, right?

 

[Sammy]

Somehow forum members from AUT and SWE are very happy with Jury work and either see no problems or only minor problems with Jury voting at best.

This has nothing to do with the voting yesterday, right?

No, this was my opinion ever since the jury vote was reintroduced. Of course you are sad when your entry is not appreciated by juries, but even when Zoe was so low in their votes, I could understand why.