![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
eurovision 2011 the result
May. 15th, 2011 03:31 pmso Lachlan was right. about two months ago, Lachlan and I were discussing who could afford to host eurovision in an attempt to gauge who would win, and that's when Azerbaijan first popped up on the radar... and it is amazing what you can buy with all that oil money, so next year we are going to Baku after a rather average song bought a Eurovision win.
I am not saying Eurovision wins are bought, but lets face it, Romania should have won last year and the only reason Germany won was because most of Europe were wanting handouts from the Krauts and you have got to give a little to get a little I guess. but no one knows vote buying like Spain...
all of the results this year were interesting though. France who were the firm favourite for the last month before the event finished 16th. Ireland who were considered second by the bookmakers near the end finished 8th and Italy who were nowhere near the popular entries finished Second. where did that come from?
The only result that wasn't a surprise was that Switzerland finished last in the final, though their qualification from semi final 1 was a surprise and didn't the surprises in the semis set up an interesting final.
Malta, Armenia and Belgium were all 1 point from qualifying for the semis and Greece won semi final one... how? the song was rubbish, ok the singer was cute, but the song needed to remove all the rap to be decent and seeing the rap was over 50% of the song... and how did Portugal not finish dead last I guess the camel toe made come Poland last.
San Marino had one of the best singers in their semi and only managed to get 16th and Norway, who wear a favourite early one despite the repetitive song, only managed to finish 17th. Nothing against the countries that did qualify from Semi one, based on their performance on the night, most deserved to do well, except Greece.
Semi final twos results were closer to what was expected... except Sweden who should not have qualified and again I am mystified as to how they finished first. On paper this was the stronger final though and so many of the songs could have qualifies. Israel finished a disappointing 15th and I am surprised that Belgium and Slovakia didn't qualify
something notable though is how the change of the televoting has effected the dispersion of votes. last year Euroivision started voting from the start of the first song in an effort to make the voting more even. Prior to that it was found that being one of the first 6 countries or last 6 countries gave you an advantage when it came to the voting. The middle countries were left at a disadvantage. This year in the first semi, none of the first 5 performers qualified. In the second semi (where i think the voting was a bit better overall) Bosnia, who performed first, finished 5th. in the final. Bosnia however do have bloc voting on their side and did have a performer who is hugely popular throughout all of the former Yugoslav countries it is beginning to appear that being in the first third of the draw is a disadvantage. To combat this we could start voting from half way through the event. another suggestion is allowing 5 minutes to vote for each song, so you can vote from the start of the song until the end of the next song to vote. This could cause issues with some of the underdeveloped phone networks though and if there is a phone network, then we have to fall back onto the jury, and we don't want that
televoting is more transparent than a jury and a jury is more corruptible than a phone network, this is part of the reason why Eurovision turned to televoting. we didn't want to see 1968 again, but who is to say there hasn't been benefits for votes since then. the accusations have flown about but no one has given proof.
televoting is more transparent than a jury and a jury is more corruptible than a phone network, this is part of the reason why Eurovision turned to televoting. we didn't want to see 1968 again, but who is to say there hasn't been benefits for votes since then. the accusations have flown about but no one has given proof.
now we are back to partial juries, because too many western European countries have complained about the eastern bloc voting. I have said that this is the worst of both worlds. we will have to endure this corruptible system though for at least another year before the EBU can decide for sure that it is not working and get rid of the flawed system.
the other change i have cried for for the last few years is changing the selection from the semis so that the top 5 songs from each final can go through from televoting then 10 go through from the jury made up of any combination from both the semis. anything below the top 5 wont win anyway, it is found that an act has to qualify atleast second from their semi to win. the combined juries are just there to make sure the right songs are in the mix. sure they may tactically ensure that the songs that get through are similar to songs opposing the songs that their nation is entering. for instance if your country has a ballad, you ensure no other ballads get through ensuring people who will vote for ballads only have the choice of your song.
after watching the show tonight, it was shown to me how the results would have looked if the eastern European votes were taken out. Russia, despite having the best dance routine of the night, would have finished with 9 points. it then makes one ask the question, is there 'anti-bloc voting'? are western countries not voting for eastern European countries on purpose so they cant win? Montenegro did it to Serbia when Serbia and Montenegro were a unified nation, so why cant half a continent do it. Italy would have won without the eastern European vote which would have not only have been a triumphant return for Italy to the contest, it would of ensured Italy would have ensure they had an entry for 2012.
Eurovision is not perfect though and though changes will occur to get a more popular result, it shouldn't get rid of why we watch it, because it is the funniest thing on tv all year
the other change i have cried for for the last few years is changing the selection from the semis so that the top 5 songs from each final can go through from televoting then 10 go through from the jury made up of any combination from both the semis. anything below the top 5 wont win anyway, it is found that an act has to qualify atleast second from their semi to win. the combined juries are just there to make sure the right songs are in the mix. sure they may tactically ensure that the songs that get through are similar to songs opposing the songs that their nation is entering. for instance if your country has a ballad, you ensure no other ballads get through ensuring people who will vote for ballads only have the choice of your song.
after watching the show tonight, it was shown to me how the results would have looked if the eastern European votes were taken out. Russia, despite having the best dance routine of the night, would have finished with 9 points. it then makes one ask the question, is there 'anti-bloc voting'? are western countries not voting for eastern European countries on purpose so they cant win? Montenegro did it to Serbia when Serbia and Montenegro were a unified nation, so why cant half a continent do it. Italy would have won without the eastern European vote which would have not only have been a triumphant return for Italy to the contest, it would of ensured Italy would have ensure they had an entry for 2012.
Eurovision is not perfect though and though changes will occur to get a more popular result, it shouldn't get rid of why we watch it, because it is the funniest thing on tv all year
