[Nicola]

Simon - I've always liked him so it was natural that I'd vote him!

[ThaGazBoi]

I still think Sharon. But each to thier own

[Dan_]

Originally posted by CharlotteSometimes
Okay, I was expecting to be ignored for going against the grain of the thread, so didn't bother going into any detail. But I'll try to explain my points a little:

Was Brenda's performance last Saturday worthy of the superlatives he came out with? I don't think it was. I think it was average, at best. Pretty much the same as far as Journey South's performance was concerned, too. He's also told a few acts that most of their performance was out of tune in previous weeks, when they've in fact fluffed 2 or 3 notes. Yet in those same shows, he's heaped praise on acts that have missed more notes than the act he'd previously criticised. I think that's dishonest.

He wouldn't have earned himself the nickname 'Mr. Nasty' if there wasn’t some element of truth behind it. And the difference between the introductions he gave to the Conway Sisters and Journey South I found very petty. Regardless of what has happened in previous weeks, he's supposed to be their mentor, and should've at least made an effort on their behalf.

As far as thinking with his wallet is concerned, I'd agree with your point in most instances, Ruth. But he's supposed to be a judge, and therefore impartial. Not only did he let down his own act by sending them home in spite of their performance being better than Chico's, he was more interested in the following week's ratings than the quality of the performances (regardless of how little 'quality' the Conway Sisters have to offer).

I agreed with Simon I thought it was Brenda's best perfromance, just a difference of a opinion. I didn't think Journey South's performance was that good though. I think Simon's been pretty much spot on when he has said the act has been out of tune, because to me they have.

Simon was perhaps a bit petty with the introductions but I think I would find it hard to heap credit on an act that had chose to behave the way they have

I think it would have been verging on the ridiculous if The Conways had not have been voted off. 3 weeks in a row in the bottom 2 showed they just did not have the fanbase to compete with the other acts, it was just putting them out of their misery. It's the people's show and they are wasting money on voting for their fav if The Conways just kept being saved.

[lily.]

Simon

He is honest, no matter who he is talking to. I respect that.

[CharlotteSometimes]

Originally posted by BB fernzy

Simon was perhaps a bit petty with the introductions but I think I would find it hard to heap credit on an act that had chose to behave the way they have

I think it would have been verging on the ridiculous if The Conways had not have been voted off. 3 weeks in a row in the bottom 2 showed they just did not have the fanbase to compete with the other acts, it was just putting them out of their misery. It's the people's show and they are wasting money on voting for their fav if The Conways just kept being saved.

Well if recent reports are true, he's signed them and got Steps' former manager on board to handle things, too.

How many times was Chico in the bottom two? I don't see any difference whatsoever, other than that the Conway Sisters have a slight trace of talent. And it's not a waste of the fan's money at all. If people decide to vote, they know exactly how it works and that the worst act on the night isn't the most likely to go by any means - hence Chico lasting as long as he did.

[Legend]

I voted Simon. I like Sharon too and YaY! - louis has NO votes woooooo!!

Keep all these 0 votes cumin for louis! HeHe!

[Dan_]

Originally posted by CharlotteSometimes

Well if recent reports are true, he's signed them and got Steps' former manager on board to handle things, too.

How many times was Chico in the bottom two? I don't see any difference whatsoever, other than that the Conway Sisters have a slight trace of talent. And it's not a waste of the fan's money at all. If people decide to vote, they know exactly how it works and that the worst act on the night isn't the most likely to go by any means - hence Chico lasting as long as he did.

Chico was in the bottom 2 the same amount of times as The Conways but for a few weeks had not fell into the bottom 2. The Conways were in the bottom 2 for 3 weeks in a row, but kept getting saved by the judges, the public just did not want to save them, if the judges were continually going to keep The Conways it is a waste.

[CharlotteSometimes]

Well we'll only know if that's true or not if and when they make the number of votes for each week available. The point is, people vote knowing that it's quite possible that the worst act on the night may well be saved, and also that the worst act on the night may not even end up in the bottom two. If they were voting for the act that they wanted to leave, then yes, it could be seen as a waste of their money. But they aren't, they're voting for the act that they want to stay. So they're getting what they paid for, regardless of who stays or goes (unless they voted for the act that's sent home, of course).