Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Eurovision 2024
Comments
-
MuttleyCAFC said:
I think the song that won deserved to. I have to admit, Ireland was my favourite. The staging for our one was clever and it was better than it finished but it was not a winner. I think the public vote spoils the contest as it isn't about the best song although Switzerland did still win. Sam Ryder showed we can do well but you need a voice or voices that sound good live. Not just good but there has to have a real power to it.MarcusH26 said:I think there will be some interesting meetings at BBC HQ when they debrief this year's contest. 0 points from the public is very telling. Will be interesting to see if they go for another " name" entry again next year or look for someone that's more unknown like Sam Ryder was.
I think we made the same mistakes as last year. Goodish pop songs but no impact live.
Yeah I absolutely 100% agree , the best song on the night won in the end. I think we did fall into the same trap as last year with something that's incredibly radio friendly and can be played all the time on BBC Radio without any issues but it just didn't click live. Sam is still the blueprint for how to do it as someone that had the complete package of great song , great vocal and the personality to go with it.2 -
Audio levels for ours was all over the place1
-
Thought our song was poor and poorly performed, the staging looked like a gay porn video set in a prison shower. Loved Ireland (best by far), and liked Croatia in a traditional old fashioned Eurovision bompety-bimpety-bompety-boo type way, albeit with a slight edge. Switzerland was okay. Israel was shit and being the old leftie I am, can't help feeling the far-right mobilised it's limp-wristed brigade to push them up the table... (pass the tin-foil hat). Finland was very funny and knowing.11
-
Couldn't agree more. If my wife or kids had walked into the room while i was watching that performance i would have got some very strange looks.Algarveaddick said:Thought our song was poor and poorly performed, the staging looked like a gay porn video set in a prison shower. Loved Ireland (best by far), and liked Croatia in a traditional old fashioned Eurovision bompety-bimpety-bompety-boo type way, albeit with a slight edge. Switzerland was okay. Israel was shit and being the old leftie I am, can't help feeling the far-right mobilised it's limp-wristed brigade to push them up the table... (pass the tin-foil hat). Finland was very funny and knowing.
The song was terrible and whoever the bloke was that was singing had a terrible voice.3 -
Expected better of you Perry than trotting out a tired conspiracy theoryAlgarveaddick said:Thought our song was poor and poorly performed, the staging looked like a gay porn video set in a prison shower. Loved Ireland (best by far), and liked Croatia in a traditional old fashioned Eurovision bompety-bimpety-bompety-boo type way, albeit with a slight edge. Switzerland was okay. Israel was shit and being the old leftie I am, can't help feeling the far-right mobilised it's limp-wristed brigade to push them up the table... (pass the tin-foil hat). Finland was very funny and knowing.
4 -
Absolutely spot on with that description.Algarveaddick said:Thought our song was poor and poorly performed, the staging looked like a gay porn video set in a prison shower. Loved Ireland (best by far), and liked Croatia in a traditional old fashioned Eurovision bompety-bimpety-bompety-boo type way, albeit with a slight edge. Switzerland was okay. Israel was shit and being the old leftie I am, can't help feeling the far-right mobilised it's limp-wristed brigade to push them up the table... (pass the tin-foil hat). Finland was very funny and knowing.
Me and the missus knew nothing about eurovision this year, we had not seen or heard one song. Once we saw the result we decided to watch our entry and the the winning song.
We watched about 1 minute of the UK entry and algarveaddick could not have described what we saw better, bloody awful. Then we put on the Swiss entry, a geezer prancing around in a skirt, we just looked at each other and said wtf has happened to this world.1 -
Take it you didn't hear the song then, Henners...Henry Irving said:
Expected better of you Perry than trotting out a tired conspiracy theoryAlgarveaddick said:Thought our song was poor and poorly performed, the staging looked like a gay porn video set in a prison shower. Loved Ireland (best by far), and liked Croatia in a traditional old fashioned Eurovision bompety-bimpety-bompety-boo type way, albeit with a slight edge. Switzerland was okay. Israel was shit and being the old leftie I am, can't help feeling the far-right mobilised it's limp-wristed brigade to push them up the table... (pass the tin-foil hat). Finland was very funny and knowing.
3 -
My musings
1 - the best two songs came first and second. Very catchy tunes and engaging performances on stage
2 - our song was poor. No instantly catch hook, the staging was confusing (apparently those in the arena couldn’t even see him for the first two minutes of the performance) and the vocals were amongst the ropiest of the night. Sam Ryder showed a good tune,voice and personality can get the UK votes- let’s face it he won that year, Ukraine got the sympathy vote - so we can forget any conspiracy theory that people are against the UK
3 - Do those who qualify via semi finals have an advantage over those who get in automatically - more performances, getting songs into the publics heads
4 - FFS two married couples, singing about a battle defeating a French Emperor in a fight that Sweden were not even part of, why not more songs like Cliff Richard would sing - @golfaddick 19744 -
(3) - Nope, as the Big Five also have their songs performed across the Semi-Finals (You just cant vote for them)MrOneLung said:My musings
1 - the best two songs came first and second. Very catchy tunes and engaging performances on stage
2 - our song was poor. No instantly catch hook, the staging was confusing (apparently those in the arena couldn’t even see him for the first two minutes of the performance) and the vocals were amongst the ropiest of the night. Sam Ryder showed a good tune,voice and personality can get the UK votes- let’s face it he won that year, Ukraine got the sympathy vote - so we can forget any conspiracy theory that people are against the UK
3 - Do those who qualify via semi finals have an advantage over those who get in automatically - more performances, getting songs into the publics heads
4 - FFS two married couples, singing about a battle defeating a French Emperor in a fight that Sweden were not even part of, why not more songs like Cliff Richard would sing - @golfaddick 19741 -
Sam Ryder had a good voice live, a song that was a bit different/memorable, and a good following on TikTok etc. Made sense - if lots of people like something/someone online, lots of people might enjoy them on TV.MuttleyCAFC said:
I think the song that won deserved to. I have to admit, Ireland was my favourite. The staging for our one was clever and it was better than it finished but it was not a winner. I think the public vote spoils the contest as it isn't about the best song although Switzerland did still win. Sam Ryder showed we can do well but you need a voice or voices that sound good live. Not just good but there has to have a real power to it.MarcusH26 said:I think there will be some interesting meetings at BBC HQ when they debrief this year's contest. 0 points from the public is very telling. Will be interesting to see if they go for another " name" entry again next year or look for someone that's more unknown like Sam Ryder was.
I think we made the same mistakes as last year. Goodish pop songs but no impact live.
Then we moved away from that for the next two years by going for people who weren't great live and had very generic pop songs.
3 - Sponsored links:
-
I think it's an affront to call them "pop songs".0
-
I do find it funny how the UK almost always manages to get it wrong when they do Eurovision. They're always chasing a trend from a previous contest and they always manage to be off by a year or two, or not understand the thing they're staging and misrepresenting it. The one year they actually judged it right was the one year you could have put literally anything forward and Ukraine still would have won, which is also very funny.The UK decided to appeal to the queer market and the racy market. The idea was a gay man who owns his sexuality and isn't ashamed to show it. The problem is that trend was about 2 or 3 Eurovisions ago. This year it was about earnest individuals representing themselves honestly and big, quality songs with chaste staging. Whether you liked them or not, Switzerland, Croatia, Ireland and France had really well-written songs and great staging that suited the performer. Switzerland's song was catchy, had a bit for audience participation, a singer with a great voice and impressive staging on that dodgy roundabout. Croatia was a Rammstein song and production that had silly lyrics but didn't take the piss out of the competition. Ireland's song was very good, felt like a Chelsea Wolfe song compressed down and had unusual staging but it felt like it was what the performer was about rather than an attempt to appeal to audiences. France was big voice, big song, minimalist staging to fit with the performer. The only countries that tried to go overtly sexual were UK and Spain and they finished 18th and 22nd behind young Instagram influencers and blokes belting out ballads. Slovenia tried to go weird like Ireland but it felt forced and pretend edgy and Finland tried to take the piss and they both got ignored for it.In the end we put forward a performer with a weak voice, gave him over the top staging that didn't have anything to do with the song, went for sexualisation when the opposite is what profited this year and, most importantly of all, gave him a shite song. No doubt next year we'll try to do something that was a Tiktok trend in 2021, and two years from now we'll put forward a twee pop ballad about friendship when what people are really all about in 2025 is mathcore or something. I look forward to seeing how wrong we get it again.6
-
UK should stop taking the “contest” so seriously and bung the programme on BBC4.
It’s a farce - in every sense.100 countries worldwide voted by phone and we scored zero, while Israel scored 300+ ?????
The “winner” is all about where in the world the TV luvvies want to junket next time.The BBC left a crucial snooker match mid-frame to show a repeat of Richard Osman’s house of games, yet they clear the peak schedule for geo-political nonsense.I know people get enjoyment from it, and that is great, but don’t give it any prominence on mainstream TV.Rant over.5 -
I agree about the UK song's staging: no-one wants to be reminded of some of the grim places they might have had illicit assignations.Algarveaddick said:Thought our song was poor and poorly performed, the staging looked like a gay porn video set in a prison shower. Loved Ireland (best by far), and liked Croatia in a traditional old fashioned Eurovision bompety-bimpety-bompety-boo type way, albeit with a slight edge. Switzerland was okay. Israel was shit and being the old leftie I am, can't help feeling the far-right mobilised it's limp-wristed brigade to push them up the table... (pass the tin-foil hat). Finland was very funny and knowing.
Ireland's song was very entertaining.
I thought Croatia was a brilliant Eurovision song (which, to be clear, does not mean it's a brilliant song).
I have no recollection as to the Finland song whatsoever; but the performance was hillairous.
But, with regards to the Israel entry, I don't think there's any evidence of what you're suggesting. Most viewers casting their vote did so because they just considered it a "brilliant song", performed by a "brilliant talent"...
https://x.com/darrengrimes_/status/1789391390826180872
8 -
Yeah, I am totally with you. Why on Earth should the most popular event on British television (it came third behind two, once-only televisions programmes last year: the concluding episode of Happy Valley and the coronation of Charles III) be shown on mainstream TV?Valiantphil said:UK should stop taking the “contest” so seriously and bung the programme on BBC4.
It’s a farce - in every sense.100 countries worldwide voted by phone and we scored zero, while Israel scored 300+ ?????
The “winner” is all about where in the world the TV luvvies want to junket next time.The BBC left a crucial snooker match mid-frame to show a repeat of Richard Osman’s house of games, yet they clear the peak schedule for geo-political nonsense.I know people get enjoyment from it, and that is great, but don’t give it any prominence on mainstream TV.Rant over.8 -
Average audience was 7.6m which, over the course of the year, will be as more than all the top Saturday night programmes bar the likes of major sporting events. The average audience for last year's World Snooker matches was 600k with a peak of 3.6m for the final.Valiantphil said:UK should stop taking the “contest” so seriously and bung the programme on BBC4.
It’s a farce - in every sense.100 countries worldwide voted by phone and we scored zero, while Israel scored 300+ ?????
The “winner” is all about where in the world the TV luvvies want to junket next time.The BBC left a crucial snooker match mid-frame to show a repeat of Richard Osman’s house of games, yet they clear the peak schedule for geo-political nonsense.I know people get enjoyment from it, and that is great, but don’t give it any prominence on mainstream TV.Rant over.1 -
Brilliant Chizz!Chizz said:
I agree about the UK song's staging: no-one wants to be reminded of some of the grim places they might have had illicit assignations.Algarveaddick said:Thought our song was poor and poorly performed, the staging looked like a gay porn video set in a prison shower. Loved Ireland (best by far), and liked Croatia in a traditional old fashioned Eurovision bompety-bimpety-bompety-boo type way, albeit with a slight edge. Switzerland was okay. Israel was shit and being the old leftie I am, can't help feeling the far-right mobilised it's limp-wristed brigade to push them up the table... (pass the tin-foil hat). Finland was very funny and knowing.
Ireland's song was very entertaining.
I thought Croatia was a brilliant Eurovision song (which, to be clear, does not mean it's a brilliant song).
I have no recollection as to the Finland song whatsoever; but the performance was hillairous.
But, with regards to the Israel entry, I don't think there's any evidence of what you're suggesting. Most viewers casting their vote did so because they just considered it a "brilliant song", performed by a "brilliant talent"...
https://x.com/darrengrimes_/status/1789391390826180872 1 -
Great.Addick Addict said:
Average audience was 7.6m which, over the course of the year, will be as more than all the top Saturday night programmes bar the likes of major sporting events. The average audience for last year's World Snooker matches was 600k with a peak of 3.6m for the final.Valiantphil said:UK should stop taking the “contest” so seriously and bung the programme on BBC4.
It’s a farce - in every sense.100 countries worldwide voted by phone and we scored zero, while Israel scored 300+ ?????
The “winner” is all about where in the world the TV luvvies want to junket next time.The BBC left a crucial snooker match mid-frame to show a repeat of Richard Osman’s house of games, yet they clear the peak schedule for geo-political nonsense.I know people get enjoyment from it, and that is great, but don’t give it any prominence on mainstream TV.Rant over.They can watch it on BBC4.My point is we should reduce its prominence here - not ban it. People enjoy it, and that’s great, but it’s not just about a good entry.We had a good entry with Sam Ryder but the Ruskie naughtiness decided the winner before the show had even started.1 -
I think both sides of the argument have a bit of truth. We do have to do more to get votes and it is bollocks to say otherwise. But if we do get the song and performer right, we can still win it. It is an event and entertaining. We put a tenner in each, picked our top five and the highest total points won the pot. Our son as he usually does. This year we decided to ignore Isreal in the game as it was obviously going to get more points than the song warranted. I think with Isreal, if people could vote on the song they least liked it would have come bottom which wouldn't have been fair. The show is great but it would be even greater if people would just vote for what they think is the best song.1
-
Yes. This makes so much sense. The BBC should always try to get fewer viewers on their biggest programmes. And, as far as lots of people enjoying it goes, how dare they?Valiantphil said:
Great.Addick Addict said:
Average audience was 7.6m which, over the course of the year, will be as more than all the top Saturday night programmes bar the likes of major sporting events. The average audience for last year's World Snooker matches was 600k with a peak of 3.6m for the final.Valiantphil said:UK should stop taking the “contest” so seriously and bung the programme on BBC4.
It’s a farce - in every sense.100 countries worldwide voted by phone and we scored zero, while Israel scored 300+ ?????
The “winner” is all about where in the world the TV luvvies want to junket next time.The BBC left a crucial snooker match mid-frame to show a repeat of Richard Osman’s house of games, yet they clear the peak schedule for geo-political nonsense.I know people get enjoyment from it, and that is great, but don’t give it any prominence on mainstream TV.Rant over.They can watch it on BBC4.My point is we should reduce its prominence here - not ban it. People enjoy it, and that’s great, but it’s not just about a good entry.We had a good entry with Sam Ryder but the Ruskie naughtiness decided the winner before the show had even started.
What was particularly egregious is that the people who didn't want to watch it didn't have any other options on BBC last night. Wait, what..?5 - Sponsored links:
-
Zzzzzzzzzzz.🙄2
-
LOB1
-
Please don’t lose sight of the emphasis on “prominence” in my posts, and also take note of the 2 occasions I have said - people like it , and that’s great.Chizz said:
Yes. This makes so much sense. The BBC should always try to get fewer viewers on their biggest programmes. And, as far as lots of people enjoying it goes, how dare they?Valiantphil said:
Great.Addick Addict said:
Average audience was 7.6m which, over the course of the year, will be as more than all the top Saturday night programmes bar the likes of major sporting events. The average audience for last year's World Snooker matches was 600k with a peak of 3.6m for the final.Valiantphil said:UK should stop taking the “contest” so seriously and bung the programme on BBC4.
It’s a farce - in every sense.100 countries worldwide voted by phone and we scored zero, while Israel scored 300+ ?????
The “winner” is all about where in the world the TV luvvies want to junket next time.The BBC left a crucial snooker match mid-frame to show a repeat of Richard Osman’s house of games, yet they clear the peak schedule for geo-political nonsense.I know people get enjoyment from it, and that is great, but don’t give it any prominence on mainstream TV.Rant over.They can watch it on BBC4.My point is we should reduce its prominence here - not ban it. People enjoy it, and that’s great, but it’s not just about a good entry.We had a good entry with Sam Ryder but the Ruskie naughtiness decided the winner before the show had even started.
What was particularly egregious is that the people who didn't want to watch it didn't have any other options on BBC last night. Wait, what..?I’m not saying ban it etc - just saying UK should not take it so seriously. Planning for Olly started in secret in Sept - FFS, what a waste of effort.2 -
5 -
I think the reason the Olly planning and announcement was started so early this year was the BBC didn't help themselves with allowing the press speculation to get out of hand about Rina Sawayama being the 2023 representative and then it ultimately ended up being Mae Muller. Didn't mind them using the grand final of Strictly Come Dancing to announce Olly as the Eurovision entry , thought that was pretty smart management.0
-
I am really annoyed that some utter shite has been unfairly voted as better than some other shite.7
-
It's among the best-viewed programmes in the UK every year. It's among the best-viewed programmes in the world. It's featured in headline news around the world for days. Why on earth should it be given less prominence?Valiantphil said:
Please don’t lose sight of the emphasis on “prominence” in my posts, and also take note of the 2 occasions I have said - people like it , and that’s great.Chizz said:
Yes. This makes so much sense. The BBC should always try to get fewer viewers on their biggest programmes. And, as far as lots of people enjoying it goes, how dare they?Valiantphil said:
Great.Addick Addict said:
Average audience was 7.6m which, over the course of the year, will be as more than all the top Saturday night programmes bar the likes of major sporting events. The average audience for last year's World Snooker matches was 600k with a peak of 3.6m for the final.Valiantphil said:UK should stop taking the “contest” so seriously and bung the programme on BBC4.
It’s a farce - in every sense.100 countries worldwide voted by phone and we scored zero, while Israel scored 300+ ?????
The “winner” is all about where in the world the TV luvvies want to junket next time.The BBC left a crucial snooker match mid-frame to show a repeat of Richard Osman’s house of games, yet they clear the peak schedule for geo-political nonsense.I know people get enjoyment from it, and that is great, but don’t give it any prominence on mainstream TV.Rant over.They can watch it on BBC4.My point is we should reduce its prominence here - not ban it. People enjoy it, and that’s great, but it’s not just about a good entry.We had a good entry with Sam Ryder but the Ruskie naughtiness decided the winner before the show had even started.
What was particularly egregious is that the people who didn't want to watch it didn't have any other options on BBC last night. Wait, what..?I’m not saying ban it etc - just saying UK should not take it so seriously. Planning for Olly started in secret in Sept - FFS, what a waste of effort.2 -
I absolutely detest most of the nonsense on the BBC prime time Saturday night.
Strictly is all I will watch when it’s on.
Can’t believe a hospital drama is shown over and over again for years, awful nonsense.
But people love it obviously as it’s still there.
One night a year (I don’t watch the semi finals, think it’s daft tbh) to sit back & have a wee giggle at the performance from our European neighbours.
It’s not like you only have 3 channels anymore.
Turn over, watch something else.
Let them at it.10 -
Advance planning for the event entrants may be overated, but if it stops them forgetting to wear any underpants, then I'm all for it. Several performers I saw were guilty of wardrobe malfunctions of some sort, and that Slovenian (Raiven I think) wore what appeared to be a semi transparent figure hugging catsuit. Whatever next? Just body paint next year with a gloss Finnish?
0 -
Bring it onswordfish said:Advance planning for the event entrants may be overated, but if it stops them forgetting to wear any underpants, then I'm all for it. Several performers I saw were guilty of wardrobe malfunctions of some sort, and that Slovenian (Raiven I think) wore what appeared to be a semi transparent figure hugging catsuit. Whatever next? Just body paint next year with a gloss Finnish? 1
