Mrs Angry vs Strictly’s Judges (The John Sergeant Debacle)
Now, I know John Sergeant’s decision to leave Strictly has already been debated to death, but I can’t resist putting my twopennorth in as well.
The judges should all be ashamed of themselves and should realise that this show is watched by millions of people who couldn’t give a toss what their opinion is and actually judges, it’s US who pay your wages!
Since John announced that he was going to leave, several of the judges have furiously back-pedalled. For instance, Arlene Phillips is quoted on the BBC’s news website as saying,
“I’m always sad if a contestant leaves of choice, because you are always expecting to let the public vote them in or out – but John is his own person and he has his own reasons for doing this.”
Erm, yes, and his reason is because all of you judges kept telling him he was a joke and shouldn’t be there!
A couple of weeks ago, Arlene said that John was “outstanding at dancing really badly” and Craig Revel Horwood gave John the lowest possible score – one point – and called his dancing a “disaster” and it’s been well documented that the judges campaigned to get John out.
It seems to have failed to come to your attention judges that we, the viewing public, liked John and wanted him in the competition. Was he a good dancer? No, he was appalling. Was he entertaining? Yes, most definitely and if we wanted to watch a show that was just about the technicalities of pro-dancing and pro-performing, we wouldn’t have kept John in for so long and we might have taken a look – Arlene – at the absolutely terrible Britannia High. That’s all about training pro-performers and frankly, it’s so boring I’d rather watch wood warp or paint dry and I’d most definitely rather watch John mincing around a dance floor any day.
John was fun; he showed that even someone slightly over the hill and something of a tub of lard can not only get fitter, lose weight and gain muscle tone, they can have a good time while doing so.
So next time we get a contestant who isn’t built like a racehorse, isn’t slim and buff and can’t pirouette to order, maybe you judges could bear in mind that perfection on the dance floor isn’t necessarily the only thing we the paying public want to see and that sometimes, watching someone have a go and have a good time doing so is far more important.
Chat about this on the Unreality TV Forum »



November 22nd, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Ok so license payers are prepared to sacrifice skill for entertainment value, but for how long?
As I’ve said elsewhere accepting really poor singing or really poor dancing skills for so long whilst others who are decent leave is not fair on those who have the skills to do these things. It is even worse if these people spend years training and reach certain standards they are being kicked in the teeth by the voting public and the judges on these Saturday night reality programmes.
Gosh standards of any sort are not required now, hell no need for anyone to bother training to develop a partial skill or enable the progress of a gift as it simply isn’t appreciated or loved.
Maybe there is a big diffenence between television viewer and theatre goer after all. Give a rubbish performance in theatre and the audience wants its money back.
The only excuse for some level of bad performance is comedy and then it has to be srutinised to ensure it doesn’t defame or critically damage an existing persons career. Hence the Government has stepped in to stop a BBC comedy course, because it fears that people have lost the real meaning of comedy in place of scarcasm and estremely dark wit.
Maureen
Newcastle.