[Callum]

No, she did not. Granted she wasn't particularly great but she was certainly better than the wooden Reggie Yates (what was the point of him even being there?) and there were much worse elements to the show that contributed to it's gradual decline. Holly was fine, and blaming her for the failure of the whole show is just laughable.

[rinkydinkpanther]

Originally Posted by Callum

No, she did not. Granted she wasn't particularly great but she was certainly better than the wooden Reggie Yates (what was the point of him even being there?) and there were much worse elements to the show that contributed to it's gradual decline. Holly was fine, and blaming her for the failure of the whole show is just laughable.

what were the viewing figures before she fronted the show? answer 10 million+
what were the figures after? less than 6 million

how much was she paid from tax payers money? millions...how much was she worth?
how much air time did reggie get fronting the show comapred to holly? a lot less
what was the show like when the singers were allowed to simply talk to the coaches and interact without interruption?
what was it like after she was fronting and interrupted every interview?
how often did judges not get a chance to give an opinion before she fronted the show and after? compare the 2.

mock as much as you like , be a sheep , be free of all original thought and play to the audience....I choose to form my own opionions regardless of others, thats what made me a millionaire...

before her taking over it was great , afterwards it was awful lost 5 million viewers and millions of £'s too...do the maths