[GiRTh]

Following on from the discussion in the other thread, what do you think to judges not voting when they have both acts in the bottom two.

[GiRTh]

I'm totally against it. IMO there should be a very severe penalty that renders the option as out of the question. I'd even go as far as to have the judges decision affect their other acts.

[Scream]

I agree with you it should be something that would effect another one of their acts in the next round or something but it's hard to think what they can really do...

Maybe have Louis Walsh mentor their act for the next week...that would make sure they'd vote

[Niamh.]

Yep, same ^

[Jordan.]

Yes, it just then goes to a majority so it's not a big deal

[Tom4784]

the outcome will be the same regardless, people who believe the judges have a choice in who they vote for are naive.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

the outcome will be the same regardless, people who believe the judges have a choice in who they vote for are naive.

mmm that's a point

[GiRTh]

I like the idea that if they abstain then when ever their acts are next in the bottom two their vote does not count. Thus, they cannot save their own act because they were too pussy to make a decision when they had both acts in the bottom two.

It may not affect the overall outcome but I find it frustrating when the judges are refusing to vote.

[Jack_]

If the producers are dumb enough to not go to them for their vote either third or fourth, then yes absolutely, because they can't be forced into voting in that situation and can cop out of affecting the result at all so why wouldn't they?

There is only one simple solution to this problem, you get them to vote third if it's 2-0, or last if it's 1-1. That way if they abstain they send an act home on the existing majority, or if they vote they take it to deadlock and have in essence affected the result. That is the only way that's within the existing format (which is relatively fair and understandable to the audience) that this problem can be solved

I don't like judges abstaining (or more to the point not having to affect the result), but if you're gonna go to them first or second then that's what's going to happen

[Black Dagger]

Yes, when you go to the acts mentor first and they have both acts, ofc you'll ****ing abstain, how awkward if you sent home your act and the other 3 kept the one you voted.

They should always go to that mentor last, and if the decision has already been made, fair enough, or they'll likely take it to deadlock anyway.

[Samm]

No. It will be fun and Cruel to see the judges deiced between two of there acts Simon did it with his acts

[Black Dagger]

I remember when Simon forced Demi to do it last year, because it made it sound like he was going to deadlock, but then sent home the one she saved

[Sophiee]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I like the idea that if they abstain then when ever their acts are next in the bottom two their vote does not count. Thus, they cannot save their own act because they were too pussy to make a decision when they had both acts in the bottom two.

It may not affect the overall outcome but I find it frustrating when the judges are refusing to vote.

this is a good idea actually. but they should definitely be made to vote one way or another, it comes with part of their judging role.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Black Dagger

I remember when Simon forced Demi to do it last year, because it made it sound like he was going to deadlock, but then sent home the one she saved

Just watched this, that's genius he's basically cottoned on to what I pointed out in the other thread about voting third, by making her vote third he forced her to have an outcome on the result, had she abstained that girl would have gone home but by making her vote and her hoping he'd take it to deadlock, he ****ed her over brilliant

[joeysteele]

No, I think they should still make a choice.
Hard as it may be, that is what they are there to do and for as long as Judges want to have and therefore do have any say in who stays or goes, they should make a decision no matter the scenario.

[AnnieK]

They should have to choose.

[rosebay11]

I think they should be allowed to abstain from voting if they have two in the sing-off.

[Toy Soldier]

They should either (preferably) force them to vote by making it a contractual obligation, or just make it so that if one judge has two in the bottom two, they're automatically excluded from voting. Just to spare us the whole pantomime of going to them only for them to say "oh I couldn't possibly, my wonderful acts...".


Better yet... If a judge has two in the bottom, make that judge be the ONLY one to decide. Muahaha...

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

They should either (preferably) force them to vote by making it a contractual obligation, or just make it so that if one judge has two in the bottom two, they're automatically excluded from voting. Just to spare us the whole pantomime of going to them only for them to say "oh I couldn't possibly, my wonderful acts...".


Better yet... If a judge has two in the bottom, make that judge be the ONLY one to decide. Muahaha...

That is a great idea Toy Soldier. I love that idea.

[alex_front2]

My friend who is a fireman really wants to talk to judges via skype on Xtra Factor and say "I make really tough decions in my job every day. And get paid alot less than you. So why can't you make a decision on your bottom 2 acts?" He keeps chickening out.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by alex_front2

My friend who is a fireman really wants to talk to judges via skype on Xtra Factor and say "I make really tough decions in my job every day. And get paid alot less than you. So why can't you make a decision on your bottom 2 acts?" He keeps chickening out.

It would be a really great question to ask too, the sad thing is he would likely never get selected to put it.
Very few dissenting voices get heard from the phone calls, skype and audience.

[Vicky.]

They should vote IMO. I'm sorry but no way do they not know one of their acts is better than another. Cowards way out to abstain really. I understand why they do it (would be well awkward if you were stuck with someone you tried to send home ) but they are paid enough to make 'tough' choices..I think there should be punishments for them if they refuse

[alex_front2]

Why else are they getting paid £1 -2m? All they do is 3-4 days work (Sharon is in U.S. doing a Loose Women type show in the week) including weekend live show and min 1 day mentoring.

A lot of the production is down to other forces plus XFactor actually does the likes of Gary and Nicole a favour as it keeps them in spotlight and a platform to perform and promo new single. And they won't vote? Pathetic. My fav non singing moment in X Factor is still series 2 where Simon voted out his own act the McDowell sisters (?) against Sharon's Chico. Brilliant and unexpected.