YEARLY JURY HATE THREAD

[Bsimmons]

The Only Country where this Type of Music exists. So everything went right here.

Sorry, I did not notice that Serbian song was some kind of special type of music that exists only in Ex-Yugo countries.

 

[Ezio]

The juries are good for us, because if we get zero points in televoting, a country like Serbia gets 75 points for a worse song. Juries are rating an entry rather than voting for a song. Look at the ratings for Austria on escunited and wiwibloggs: Top 5 in both fan outlets according to the ratings. Yet we were dismissed and our excitement got killed. At least we are in the centre of attention now, fair at last!

 

[Bsimmons]

Like I said before other countries should work harder if they want to impress on juries who work in the music industry.

You make it sound like SWE music writers have some special kind of knowledge or music laboratory that other nations do not have and that writing an Eurovision song is actually some kind of well groomed process, secrets of which are only know to Swedes. And only music industry experts notice those and people are blind to it.

I think it is way more simple than that. So called "experts" just know in back of their mind that SWE has a reputation to come out with quality entries. So if they lack their own opinion and need to put some song up and some song down, putting SWE up is a safe way to go, because you know: "SWE always brings quality experts should notice"

 

[Sammy]

You make it sound like SWE music writers have some special kind of knowledge or music laboratory that other nations do not have and that writing an Eurovision song is actually some kind of well groomed process, secrets of which are only know to Swedes. And only music industry experts notice those and people are blind to it.

I think it is way more simple than that. So called "experts" just know in back of their mind that SWE has a reputation to come out with quality entries. So if they lack their own opinion and need to put some song up and some song down, putting SWE up is a safe way to go, because you know: "SWE always brings quality experts should notice"

like this one for example?

 

[lolita]

I don't actually see the problem here, when the favorite of the general public won. Most of you are just wasting time, basically.

 

[Krishoes]

Jury hate thread?

ITALY:

 

[midnightsun]

[MENTION=13727]Swedenvision[/MENTION]

Unfortunately most jury members don’t work in the music industry. Most of them are musicians or presenters or Former participants etc. Of course it‘s „music industry“ but not in that sense I would call this. I don’t think many of them are qualified to judge a song.

And isn’t it funny that 2013 Robin Stjernberg was also 3rd in the jury vote but only 18th in televote?
(Did you left that out „accidently“?! ;-)) Almost like this year.

Funny also how Sweden’s success with the juries began the year, Björkman started to get involved in Eurovision (producing part).

Anyway, I don’t want to be rude towards you Swedes (as I said I love Sweden and its music industry) but you have to admit, that jury love for Sweden has been bit surprisingly much the last years (for my taste, at least).

 

[Alaska49]

Jury hate thread?

ITALY:

juries have betrayed you guys SO HARD for whatever reason. they used to love whatever italy would send. it's tragic!!!!

 

[xymothe]

Every year, I calculate that how different are each jury's votes in every country. I use a formula for this, let's see an example:

Albanian jury votes to Australia:
A: 14.
B: 23.
C: 19.
D: 22.
E: 25.
Jury's average place: 20,6.

Formula: ((A-AVG)^2+(B-AVG)^2+(C-AVG)^2+(D-AVG)^2+(E-AVG)^2)/5 = 14,64

Then I calculate for all the countries, and I averaging them. The bigger number the more different jury taste. Here are the results:

1. Macedonia - 38,83 pts
2. Israel - 38,06 pts
3. San Marino - 33,29 pts
4. Latvia - 31,13 pts
5. Croatia - 31,02 pts
6. Australia - 30,01 pts
7. Ukraine - 28,21 pts

The first seven country have a great group of juries, they have different opinions, and rankings. Move on!

8. Switzerland - 25,7 pts
9. Montenegro - 25,69 pts
10. United Kingdom - 25,58 pts
11. Armenia - 24,89 pts
12. Denmark - 24,56 pts
13. Moldova - 24,11 pts

They aren't bad also, an average level for me, their votes are acceptable in terms of diversity.

14. Italy - 21,87 pts
15. Estonia - 21,22 pts
16. Hungary - 20,99 pts
17. The Netherlands - 20,25 pts
18. Bulgaria - 19,51 pts
19. Sweden - 19,25 pts
20. Lithuania - 19,23 pts
21. Iceland - 19,22 pts
22. Ireland - 18,39 pts
23. Norway - 17,74 pts
24. Slovenia - 17,32 pts

Around the average (19,62 pts), but for me, this is not enough. With just a few major differences, more minor differences, it could have been better.

25. Georgia - 16,94 pts
26. Azerbaijan - 16,79 pts
27. Belarus - 16,51 pts
28. Belgium - 16,43 pts
29. Austria - 15,82 pts
30. Spain - 15,59 pts
31. Serbia - 14,48 pts
32. Germany - 14,18 pts
33. France - 13,93 pts
34. Romania - 13,63 pts
35. Greece - 13,42 pts
36. Cyprus - 13,28 pts

Now these juries annoying me. Their list is too similar, each members favourites and bottoms are almost the same.

37. Malta - 12,39 pts
38. Finland - 11,96 pts
39. Albania - 9,45 pts
40. Poland - 9,43 pts
41. Czech Republic - 9,03 pts
42. Russia - 7,59 pts
43. Portugal - 6,87 pts

I hate these people. They are against Eurovision, their votes are shameful, same tops, same bottoms, same sh*t.

 

[Bsimmons]

Every year, I calculate that how different are each jury's votes in every country. I use a formula for this, let's see an example:

OK, but why you think big difference within the jury is good and small difference is bad?

If the song is shit and all members of the Jury give it the last place it makes them good experts not bad and vice versa.

Purpose of the Jury is to "get it right", not to represent diversity.

 

[xymothe]

OK, but why you think big difference within the jury is good and small difference is bad?

If the song is shit and all members of the Jury give it the last place it makes them good experts not bad and vice versa.

Purpose of the Jury is to "get it right", not to represent diversity.

Because Eurovision isn't about that The Big Brother tells you which song is "good" or which one is "bad". And I want different lists from jury, yeah! Not a completely crazy way, but I want to see, that they don't vote via a discussion. The bigger difference between represents me that they are different people with different taste of music, and not nodding robots, with the same damn opinion.

 

[Alaska49]

OK, but why you think big difference within the jury is good and small difference is bad?

If the song is shit and all members of the Jury give it the last place it makes them good experts not bad and vice versa.

Purpose of the Jury is to "get it right", not to represent diversity.

i get what you are saying but this is why there is a problem with the very concept of juries. it is impossible to be entirely objective on whether a song is good or bad, so it is very suspicious when juries largely agree on their subjective opinions and it implies non-musical reasons are being used. if there was a way to be objective you would be right but there isn't.

 

[nofuxCZ]

Stolen from Reddit

 

[Himan]

Well, I have the feeling it doesn't really matter where you from. I mean juries don't politically react different on Sweden or Denmark, Spain or Italy and so on.

 

[Realest]

The Favourite Songs of all 215 Professional Jurymembers:

Sweden 33
Austria 25
Cyprus 22
Germany 20
Israel 18
Estonia 11
Moldova 10
France 10
Italy 9
Albania 8
Lithuania 7
Serbia 7
Denmark 6
Netherlands 5
Bulgaria 5
Australia 5
Czech Rep 3
UK 3
Portugal 3
Hungary 2
Slovenia 2
Spain 1
Finland 0
Norway 0
Ireland 0
Ukraine 0

 

[Bsimmons]

i get what you are saying but this is why there is a problem with the very concept of juries. it is impossible to be entirely objective on whether a song is good or bad, so it is very suspicious when juries largely agree on their subjective opinions and it implies non-musical reasons are being used. if there was a way to be objective you would be right but there isn't.

Well, I still think there are clearly some songs which are good and clearly some songs which are bad - objectively. And if some Jury member rates it differently it does not make him/her "valuable person with a different different taste who can think on his/her own", but just a moron

 

[lavieenrose]

I think it's worth mention and consideration that there was a big difference between the way the jury treated televote favorites (Israel & Cyprus both came top 5 in the jury vote) and the way televoters treated jury favorites (Sweden missed the top 20, and Austria missed the top 10), a similar dynamic to last year but the opposite of 2016 (see: Australia & Poland). I wonder how the reception to juries/the results in general would be different if the televoters had Sweden & Austria in their top 5 but Israel and/or Cyprus were way down their lists.

Also

what might have happened is that juries heard of austria's good televote result in semi 1 and went "if i vote for this, it might win over israel and cyprus" in the final. which is still trash but at least not that trash.

I completely disagree. That is a level of strategic cynicism that someone in an institutional position within Eurovision should not have. "I just liked Austria better and I think other people will too" feels so much more palatable to me.

 

[Chorizo]

was pushed too much by the juries but the juries ranked Sweden more appropriately than the televoters. Sweden had one of the best entries this year. Just because it flopped with the televoters doesn't mean that the jury points were undeserved. The juries just used different criteria. That's their job. If they voted like the televoters, we wouldn't need them at all.

is my biggest problem. Many juries supported it for political reasons. It shouldn't have been in the top 5.

didn't deserve to be punished for being sexy by juries eager to make a political statement by voting for Israel.

deserved more points from the juries.

was out of the top 10. They might have given a few more points to it than it deserved but the result looks pretty fine.

didn't deserve that many points just because of the staging.

and deserved more points.

I don't get the hate for on this forum. The juries were right about it. It suffered in the televote because of the early draw. In the semi final, the televoters gave it the same amount of points as Israel.

 

[Chorizo]

The juries did a terrible job this year. Not only did they rob some good songs, but what is more disgustig that it seems to be a put-up-job to push Sweden and Australia, like every year.
It also shows that juries just vote for what is high in the odds. They are completely useless. Please get rid off them!
They always chose safe songs that are in the top 10 odds. This is very biased - something juries should NOT do!

Austria was never in the top 10 and around 20th before the final.

 

[Chorizo]

people trying to excuse the austrian result because it didn't do as badly with the televote as expected is bullshit

like... how does someone go from not coming CLOSE to winning jury in the semi to winning jury in the final with a notable margin? a song that, while performing better than expected, is middle of the road, represents no evolution, no message and no vision for the future of the contest? it doesn't even sound that current or that crisply produced (which does justify sweden's jury result, as always). juries are getting more stupid by the year and need to disappear yesterday. if you don't want 100% televote then fine but like FIND ANOTHER WAY because this is crap.

(with that said, juries don't vote based on odds that much. austria and germany nowhere to be seen in the odds for almost the entire process and sweden was low top 10 only.)

Israel isn't middle-of-the-road but rather a road accident. The message it conveys is that insincere virtue signaling can get you lots of votes from the juries while crazy shit on stage, like the chicken dance and clucking, can win you the televote. What great evolution and message for the future of the contest.