Eurovision Song Contest 2016

The Talking Bread

line console zero wrote: »

I think you are mixing your dodgy Russian accent up with your dodgey Germen accent.

give me a better impersonation!

You get the point!

The Talking Bread

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I've still got "Heroes" stuck in my head, it's gonna be another long year.

nah, with heroes, its "just for one day"...........!

Go Harvey Go

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

No idea if it has been done behind the scenes and she said no but I think Nadine Coyle would be a great choice, she was by far the best singer in Girls Allowed and looks good as well.

Well, now that we know just how bad Nicky did in the semi, she surely couldn't do much worse than him. Could she...?

I prefer Nicola, BTW.

line console zero

The message I got from the last few years of Eurovision is that the LGBT flag waving people are racist against Russians and are not afraid to display it openly.

Strazdas

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

No idea if it has been done behind the scenes and she said no but I think Nadine Coyle would be a great choice, she was by far the best singer in Girls Allowed and looks good as well.

I've a feeling we'll go back to the national final next year. 15th place in a semi final for an internally selected song and singer was absolutely disastrous.

We need to seriously up our game though. The Australians have come in and shown Eurovision the utmost respect by treating it as a proper music competition and not a joke.....that's how it should be done.

luftmensch

line console zero wrote: »

The message I got from the last few years of Eurovision is that the LGBT flag waving people are racist against Russians and are not afraid to display it openly.

Supporting gay rights is not racism. Criticising Russia's human rights abuses is not racism.

Galwayguy35

Strazdas wrote: »

I've a feeling we'll go back to the national final next year. 15th place in a semi final for an internally selected song and singer was absolutely disastrous.

We need to seriously up our game though. The Australians have come in and shown Eurovision the utmost respect by treating it as a proper music competition and not a joke.....that's how it should be done.

Exactly, either make an effort to take it seriously with a good song and preformance or don't bother entering at all.

sheep?

Looking back on it now, based on her performance, Spain did not deserve to be 22nd out of 26 imo!

Probably had too much of a handicap in following Russia. So many variables to consider in this contest.

100cent

What, exactly, are the Gay lobby's issues with the Russian regime?

Strazdas

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Exactly, either make an effort to take it seriously with a good song and preformance or don't bother entering at all.

Yes, it's all a bit haphazard and half hearted. They should be planning the selection process for next year right now, not leaving it for another six months.

We need to look at the staging too. There seemed to be zero thought or imagination put into the entry this year. They should have been looking at every angle : how to make the best use of the LED floor and wall, maybe had onscreen graphics and special effects too like other countries. There appeared to be zero consideration given to the lighting, especially as it was a song about sunlight, we ended up with a dark stage instead. No thought seems to have been given to the choreography either, indeed the original plan was for Nicky not to even walk out to the satellite stage. The whole thing looks like it was thrown together at the last moment and was distinctly bargain basement.

RedemptionZ

What's the craic with the big 5 nations still choosing to fund it, they all tend to do fairly ****e, I know Germany won but the likes of Spain and the UK don't come close to winning, what's in it for them?

The Talking Bread

RedemptionZ wrote: »

What's the craic with the big 5 nations still choosing to fund it, they all tend to do fairly ****e, I know Germany won but the likes of Spain and the UK don't come close to winning, what's in it for them?

Broadcasting money earned I imagine...........

Joe prim

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Marty seemed obsessed by the fact Georgia got through ahead of us!! It was all a bit pathetic!

God help the next Georgian that appears on Winning Streak!

Not much chance of that, most Winning Streak competitors seem to be Victorian or Edwardian.

joeysoap

line console zero wrote: »

The message I got from the last few years of Eurovision is that the LGBT flag waving people are racist against Russians and are not afraid to display it openly.

With the Eurovision app you can check on individual countries votes and when you do it shows a massive difference in jury voting and television voting. Take Ukraine jury = no votes for Russia. Tele vote = 12 votes for Russia. This happens quite often.


Interesting that the Irish Jury placed the Ukrainian, Australian and Russian songs outside their top 12, ie they gave the first three nil points. Surprise, surprise.

RedemptionZ

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Broadcasting money earned I imagine...........

Surely they're making a loss, if it were simple and guaranteed as broadcasting money earned then wouldn't other countries get involved? Russia for example.

Dr.MickKiller

I don't think we have a chance of doing well until our record is broken. Can-Linn with Kasey Smith was a kick ass song and didn't qualify although it came 2nd in the public vote and last in the judges vote?

mansize

Go Harvey Go wrote: »

Well, now that we know just how bad Nicky did in the semi, she surely couldn't do much worse than him. Could she...?

I prefer Nicola, BTW.

The pale ginger one? Ok...

Go Harvey Go

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Exactly, either make an effort to take it seriously with a good song and preformance or don't bother entering at all.

This has been said before, and shall be said again: it's very easy to suggest that RTE should not bother entering if they're not prepared to make the effort.

Unfortunately, they do want to participate, and this is something we have to respect. And to be fair to them, they probably feel that pulling out would come across as throwing the proverbial toys out of the proverbial pram.

Viewing figures would probably head south, too.

Go Harvey Go

Dr.MickKiller wrote: »

I don't think we have a chance of doing well until our record is broken. Can-Linn with Kasey Smith was a kick ass song and didn't qualify although it came 2nd in the public vote and last in the judges vote?

Excessive Irish iconography and ill-fitting hair extensions on Kasey cost them badly.

blackcard

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

A lot of people lumped on to Australia only for some crazy voting system to rob them of victory.
Bookies won

The cumulative scoring system was exactly the same as previous years

The Talking Bread

RedemptionZ wrote: »

Surely they're making a loss, if it were simple and guaranteed as broadcasting money earned then wouldn't other countries get involved? Russia for example.

hmm, I'm not sure are the broadcasters from the other countries public bodies like BBC actually so now I get your point re BBC.

Heres a piece on it.

BBC bosses have been accused of wasting taxpayers' money after spending £310,000 on entering another disastrous Eurovision Song Contest.
76-year-old veteran singer Engelbert Humperdinck gained a paltry 12 points and came in second last.
The BBC admitted today the failure cost them the equivalent of £45,000 an hour or 2,130 TV licences at £145.50 a pop,
Out of 42 countries taking part, only Ireland, Latvia, Belgium and Estonia awarded Humperdinck's Love Will Set You Free any points.
Some critics are also shocked that the nations involved had to each pay hundreds of thousands to enter.
'The BBC paid £310,000 for the entry into the Eurovision Song Contest in 2012,' a corporation spokesman said.
'It is worth noting that as other broadcasters contribute to the Eurovision Song Contest the BBC is able to deliver a massive, live spectacle for a small fraction of the overall cost.
'The contest provides BBC viewers with over seven hours of programming across BBC One and BBC Three, making it extremely cost effective for a prime time entertainment programme.'

The cash is not believed to include the thousands more the corporation spent on hotel and spending money for its staff, Humperdinck and his entourage.
After Engelbert crashed to failure humiliated music fans flooded the web with calls for the BBC to quit the contest.

Hundreds of viewers bombarded the BBC's Eurovision website, with many calling on the UK to withdraw from the 'biased' contest.
One said: 'It doesn't matter who we have represent us things will always be the same and that's political PULL OUT AND DON'T BOTHER WASTING ANYMORE TIME OR MONEY!'
Another said: 'Once again the voting has been political, when will we in the UK learn we are not liked and no matter what song or who sings it we will not get anywhere.
'It is time for the UK to pull out of this biased contest so we are not humiliated year after year.'

Go Harvey Go

Well, the Beeb still wants to take part too - especially with the automatic qualification for the final.

RedemptionZ

The Talking Bread wrote: »

hmm, I'm not sure are the broadcasters from the other countries public bodies like BBC actually so now I get your point re BBC.

Heres a piece on it.

BBC bosses have been accused of wasting taxpayers' money after spending £310,000 on entering another disastrous Eurovision Song Contest.
76-year-old veteran singer Engelbert Humperdinck gained a paltry 12 points and came in second last.
The BBC admitted today the failure cost them the equivalent of £45,000 an hour or 2,130 TV licences at £145.50 a pop,
Out of 42 countries taking part, only Ireland, Latvia, Belgium and Estonia awarded Humperdinck's Love Will Set You Free any points.
Some critics are also shocked that the nations involved had to each pay hundreds of thousands to enter.
'The BBC paid £310,000 for the entry into the Eurovision Song Contest in 2012,' a corporation spokesman said.
'It is worth noting that as other broadcasters contribute to the Eurovision Song Contest the BBC is able to deliver a massive, live spectacle for a small fraction of the overall cost.
'The contest provides BBC viewers with over seven hours of programming across BBC One and BBC Three, making it extremely cost effective for a prime time entertainment programme.'

The cash is not believed to include the thousands more the corporation spent on hotel and spending money for its staff, Humperdinck and his entourage.
After Engelbert crashed to failure humiliated music fans flooded the web with calls for the BBC to quit the contest.

Hundreds of viewers bombarded the BBC's Eurovision website, with many calling on the UK to withdraw from the 'biased' contest.
One said: 'It doesn't matter who we have represent us things will always be the same and that's political PULL OUT AND DON'T BOTHER WASTING ANYMORE TIME OR MONEY!'
Another said: 'Once again the voting has been political, when will we in the UK learn we are not liked and no matter what song or who sings it we will not get anywhere.
'It is time for the UK to pull out of this biased contest so we are not humiliated year after year.'

Yeah I mean there must be something in it for them, Spain and Italy are hardly economic powerhouses at the moment and they're still going for it. With such consistently mediocre performances from most of them though you'd have to wonder how long they'll continue. Unless as you say they are making some sort of profit, directly or indirectly.

snubbleste

'The BBC paid £310,000 for the entry into the Eurovision Song Contest in 2012,' a corporation spokesman said.

:eek:
Are we spending €400k sending a team to the Eurovision? That's almost as mush as we pay Joe Duffy
Someone FoI rté on that

line console zero

luftmensch wrote: »

line console zero wrote: »

The message I got from the last few years of Eurovision is that the LGBT flag waving people are racist against Russians and are not afraid to display it openly.

Supporting gay rights is not racism. Criticising Russia's human rights abuses is not racism.

I never said either of them were. Booing contestants and not voting for them because of their ethnicity. That's racism.

Strazdas

Strazdas wrote: »

Molly had great taste last night by the way. She had Latvia, Sweden, Spain, Bulgaria and Belgium as her top 5

No disrespect to Molly but anyone who had Spain in their top 20 last night (let alone top 5) has questionable taste at best!

The Talking Bread

snubbleste wrote: »

:eek:
Are we spending €400k sending a team to the Eurovision? That's almost as mush as we pay Joe Duffy
Someone FoI rté on that

no, read the article.

Capt'n Midnight

sheep? wrote: »

Looking back on it now, based on her performance, Spain did not deserve to be 22nd out of 26 imo!

Probably had too much of a handicap in following Russia. So many variables to consider in this contest.

That's nothing. Last year Cyprus had a soft ballad with a stationary singer and the gimmick of going from black and white to colour.


Too bad it came just after Mans was giving it loads and hitting all the marks with the interactive 3D thing.

luftmensch

line console zero wrote: »

I never said either of them were. Booing contestants and not voting for them because of their ethnicity. That's racism.

I agree, but the Russian contestants aren't being booed on account of their ethnicity, but rather due to their governments stance on homosexuality, and last year their military intervention in Ukraine. At least I have no reason to suggest otherwise. Some people may not vote for Russia out of racism, but I doubt these people are representative of the LGBT community.

WheatenBriar

snubbleste wrote: »

:eek:
Are we spending €400k sending a team to the Eurovision? That's almost as mush as we pay Joe Duffy
Someone FoI rté on that

No
The BBC are a co sponsor of Eurovision,a big part of that is a contribution and in return,the U.K. Contestant doesn't have to go through the semi final stages,they are automatically in the Saturday night final
It betrays the sham of a 'contest' it is tbh

mansize

https://twitter.com/nickybyrne/status/731889007668416512


Wouldn't buy it in the 99c bin

Dr.MickKiller

Deleted User wrote: »

No disrespect to Molly but anyone who had Spain in their top 20 last night (let alone top 5) has questionable taste at best!

I think that's me. I always thought my taste in music was pretty good.

mansize

Bought the Ukraine song- it's quite a good tune

mansize

https://twitter.com/bbceurovision/status/731578791387009024

Welsh Megaman

So, now that the dust has settled...

How do we feel about the new voting system?

mansize

Love it!

PandaX9

luftmensch wrote: »

I agree, but the Russian contestants aren't being booed on account of their ethnicity, but rather due to their governments stance on homosexuality, and last year their military intervention in Ukraine. At least I have no reason to suggest otherwise. Some people may not vote for Russia out of racism, but I doubt these people are representative of the LGBT community.

Which is ironic given that both this years finalist and his songwriter have been accused of being closet gays for decades and both of them are very popular amongst Russian gays. Dima Bilan, too.

I don't remember the jury's votes ever having been factored in to the final results like that. I always remembered it as everyone starting at 0 and then doing that thing were they go to all the countries in order to get the televote figures and the whole "deux points" showmanship and that was that. Regarding the jury's votes; has it always been a thing or is it new? Was it done before or after the televoting figures or was it always included with the televoting figures as one?

Go Harvey Go

Welsh Megaman wrote: »

So, now that the dust has settled...

How do we feel about the new voting system?

It's very interesting, no question about that.

But perhaps the televote scores should have been given first. Jamala would have still won, of course - but it wouldn't have felt like Dami had been robbed, or at least not as much.

hmmm

The problem with the new system is that it will be very obvious that countries with a big diaspora (Russia, Poland and Turkey) will get a huge vote irrespective of what they enter. Unless the EBU can figure out a way to manage this I can see problems down the line.

Galwayguy35

Welsh Megaman wrote: »

So, now that the dust has settled...

How do we feel about the new voting system?

I like it, adds a bit of suspense to the voting.

jaykay74

Welsh Megaman wrote: »

So, now that the dust has settled...

How do we feel about the new voting system?

You spend 30 minutes racking up points in increments of 1 to 12 points then for 2 minutes a handful of countries get 200+ points. Makes the drawn out jury points handover process seem a bit pointless/tiresome. You used to get a feel for how its going during the voting, now that is redundant to a large extent.

Aineoil

Russia got no votes from 21 juries, including Ireland.

https://wiwibloggs.com/2016/05/15/zero-points-21-juries-filip-kirkorov-call/142019/

It was a very good song imho, so this voting "style" is strange.

hmmm

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I like it, adds a bit of suspense to the voting.

On the other hand it took suspense away from the jury bit.

I think one potential way to improve that is not to display the 1-10 votes, and instead ask the person in the various countries to reveal their votes all at once.

Caoimhgh1n

I think the voting would be better if they called out the points from the public first, and then add the jury votes at the end.

mansize

Aineoil wrote: »

Russia got no votes from 21 juries, including Ireland.

https://wiwibloggs.com/2016/05/15/zero-points-21-juries-filip-kirkorov-call/142019/

It was a very good song imho, so this voting "style" is strange.

I didn't think as a song it was that good

RedemptionZ

The new voting made it pretty intense at the end absolutely no doubt about that. However it certainly made the first part of the voting seem a little irrelevant. Australia ahead by so much only to be taken over like that. Would have worked a lot better imo if there weren't such glaring disparities between the two like Poland jumping up from last place to close to the top of leaderboard. I suppose you'll never get a perfect system.

JuanJose

RedemptionZ wrote: »

Yeah I mean there must be something in it for them, Spain and Italy are hardly economic powerhouses at the moment and they're still going for it. With such consistently mediocre performances from most of them though you'd have to wonder how long they'll continue. Unless as you say they are making some sort of profit, directly or indirectly.

Well, I can tell you that Spain's RTVE certainly aren't reinvesting any money made from Eurovision back into their programming, that's for sure!

In fact, a quick google threw up a similar article to that above (outlining the BBC costs) in a Spanish publication indicating that Spain's entry into Eurovision 2015 cost EUR356,000, not including "travel, expenses & other costs".

Costly business, this Eurothingy.

luftmensch

I wonder how much Greece paid this year, given that they're bloody skint.

Aineoil

mansize wrote: »

I didn't think as a song it was that good

Ok fair enough, musical taste is a personal thing and while I liked the Russian song it wasn't my favourite. My favourite song on the night was the Bugarian song. In the run up to the competition I really liked the French song, but on the night I didn't think he preformed that well (just my opinion).

Looking at what the Irish jury voted for looked fair. They picked good songs.They had Belgium as number one..and it's a very good song.

I'd prefer if the jury vote and the televote weren't separated. We didn't really need to know how the juries had voted until after the competition had ended.

The Talking Bread

luftmensch wrote: »

I wonder how much Greece paid this year, given that they're bloody skint.

i'd imagine whatever broadcaster in the country who shows the event pays the Eurovision "contribution". So it isn't a charitable donation, moreso an investment which they are repaid and more by the commercial benefits of showing the event on their station (ie advertising etc).