🇪🇺 Eurovision 2022 Voting Irregularities & Cheating | Eurovision 2022
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 05. 2024
- #ESC2022 #Eurovision #EurovisionReaction
Twitter: @EurovisionTom
Thumbnail background graphic credit: AAA Design / @aaadesign98
Relevant Links:
EBU STATEMENT: eurovision.tv/mediacentre/rel...
Timestamps:
0:00 Intro
1:18 Quick disclaimer
2:30 2 Main ways to cheat
4:58 a BRIEF history of cheating in Eurovision
7:54 Martin Österdahl & Jan Ola Sand
9:28 What happened this year
13:26 Their reaction to the accusations
14:50 2 Examples of why its unusual
17:04 The statements from the accused broadcasters
21:05 Possible solutions
The majority of my videos contain music videos, as so the record companies will place ads on my videos as they own the copyright.
I use the "My Eurovision Scoreboard" app for my scoreboard graphics - I am not affiliated with them in any way. I just like their app.
Thanks for checking out my video, please like and subscribe if you enjoyed 😘🤗.
My target audience is Eurovision fans and not just those who are only looking for a positive reaction to their own country's song. I give honest reactions and thoughts about Eurovision topics - If you cannot handle that my opinion does not confirm your own, then please just move on to another reaction video, thanks! Personal attacks will be deleted immediately.
DISCLAIMER!
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for fair use for purposes such as criticism and commentary - as is the case in this video. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Most content used in the video belong to the EBU and Eurovision, other than the content clearly filmed by me, including me. - Hudba
As a Pole, I am ashamed that the Polish jury took part in it. But I'm not surprised. In recent years, Polish public television has been getting worse and worse. We had good song this year but people will remember this and not Ochmans voice. 😑😔😭
Yea honestly its so weird, because when I did my prediction video, i only had 2 definites - Sweden and Poland. Like I felt Poland were sooooooooo safe. A lot of people said that maybe they worked with San MArino jury last year so maybe they were just keeping up tradition.
But personally, this does not affect my opinion of Poland, River or Ochman whatsoever. It is not fair to blame others for the actions of a few in the delegation.
@@ESCTom Polish public television cooperated with San Marino a year ago, but they also connected with them online at this year's preselections, they took place on the same day.
Thanks for all your videos, you are the best Eurovision channel ever. I look forward to the 2023 😊😉
People remember nothing, not even all good songs. Juries are ridicolous for long including them voting for bad songs. What normal people care? I know noone who does and watching it a bit to make an idea and forget all about it. Juries suck.
@@magdalenawiszniewska2825 well I meant that Eurovision fans will remember that 😄 "normal" people in Poland have zero idea about it because there is zero info about it in tv
The polish jury has become some sort of an rigged joke. First this, now blanka winning :c I feel for you, it must be sad to see your countries jury being so unfair
Props to the EBU for being so transparent in the press releases about this. In terms of fixes they can do, I don’t really like the idea of adding more jurors, as the more jurors you add, the more you’ll tend to see the same 10-15 countries consistently getting points (like in the OGAE) and the others getting little to no points. I think if the names of the jurors could be anonymised until after the show, so then countries wouldn’t know who to bribe, could be an idea, but there’s no perfect fix.
yes josh i 100% agree. the bigger the pool of voters, the more homogenous the votes get. A bigger spread of points is important to reduce countries getting 0s and low scores and getting demoralised.
After figure skating judges got caught rigging their scores, they went to a system where there are more judges and some of the scores are randomly thrown out. Having bigger juries but only using five scores might help. It would at least make it more difficult/expensive to manipulate the jury vote if there are more people to incentivize.
@@davidlynch5748are you talking about 2023 esc jury voting?😮
What I find annoying is the fact that one of those countries in particular is rumoured to have been bribing jurors & people from certain countries to vote for them on & off since they joined the contest in 2008 but in the main nothing seems to have been done regarding it. If something had been done (e.g. excluding them from the following years contest or having to pay a fine) then this bribery/riggin business could have been stamped out before now. I'm sure there will always be some countries that try to bribe jurors from other countries but if it's rumbled by the ebu then they need to keep on publising it until we get to the point where countries just cease doing it.
Hmmm I wonder who that certain county is that joined in 2008 🤔 perhaps it has something to do with 🔵🔴🟢or maybe ⚪️🔵…
About Poland - My guess is they were likely still a bit concerned about their qualification - they have never been top 10 with the juries before I think. Maybe they thought some guaranteed points was a good idea, and then everyone got caught. Their silence + accepting reading the new votes (unless I remember wrong) in the final makes me feel like they're not trying to deny what happened, but rather just moving on and accepting that their jury votes got thrown out over this. They also exchanged 12's with San Marino last year, I think so might've been a continuation of that which escalated bringing in 4 others who were borderline or not qualifying according to odds
yes the general consensus on twitter is that Poland has accepted what happened and not argued about it. theyve already confirmed for 2023.
@@ESCTom At least Poland moved on....unlike Romania 😆
Jury saved em in 2008
I'm with you I feel for all of artists from these countries but especially WRS and Christian Ochman - they got their countries first qualifications since Kyiv and they were deserved and they've been tainted by this through no fault of their own.
I think the best solution is to just bar the jury for a year so you're told next year you have no jury vote and the algorithm decides your country's result. It seems unfair to penalise artists for what juries do.
i think that would push countries into withdrawing, which they dont want. they just want them to stop cheating. I think they just need to make it so difficult to cheat thats it not worth the hassle
Juries were reintroduced in 2009 because of block voting by the public.
I agree it's unfair to taint Christian Ochman with any suggestion that he only got through due to "cheating". It was a very good and he has a great voice. It would have been a shock had it not qualified. I was quite surprised at how comparatively little it got from the juries in the final.
Juries are dumb. We keep juries and they show their tastes (which might be odd and look cheating ) or better no more jury
some people blaming the ebu and Martin Österdahl (because he's the fact of ebu) if WAY too easy and very wrong. The only ones who are guilty in this story, are the jurors who were caught making agreements, cheating and violating the core values of the contest. Of course it took a while to communicate, because the ebu had to sort things out and it's dangerous to come up with statements before you fully investigated the matter. The rule to replace the cheated votes with an aggregate result (not a given result, like some people falsely say) is only fair.
100% agree
a great point you make here is that they definitely would have wanted to make sure they were right as wrongly accusing would have caused massive uproar
Definitely over Azerbaijan and their behaviour in Eurovision over the years.
It's JUST a song contest! If they can't play fairly at something that's meant to be a little bit of fun, then they shouldn't bother being a part of it.
The fact these countries even risk their reputations over something so little (in the grand scheme of things) really surprises me.
I've seen people saying "oh but politically we wouldn't get anything if they didn't try and give themselves an advantage" in a few of the comments sections and this really riles me.
Firstly all these countries neighbour other countries where they generally benefit from their support. Most of the countries share similar cultures so they also benefit from that too. Isn't that enough of an advantage/blessing already?
All this just sucks the fun out of something that's meant to be just that......'fun', and it puts some of the other countries at a disadvantage and makes it less fun for them.
Literally, like you don't win anything. The contest is there to unite countries through music, it just leaves a bitter taste in my mouth knowing that some countries just don't care and want to tarnish that..
imagine what they could do if they put half as much effort into sending a winning entry that they do cheating
I'm not surprised Poland took part in this, because Poland is the most underrated by jury/most overrated by televote in Eurovision (although I'm not sure how 2022 results affect that now, but considering televote still gave more than jury to Poland I'd imagine it still stands). So they probably thought that we needed the extra jury points for safety (also adding to the fact that Poland last qualified in 2017 prior to this year). I do find it funny tho that Poland/TVP, the very Catholic country had the jury give 12 points to San Marino and thought that it wouldn't be obvious there was something going on.
omg lol that is such a good point about giving the most satanic song 12! 😂
Whilst River and Ochman deserved their placing (I'd actually say they deserved higher), Poland tends to do very well on the televote because of diaspora.
@@CandleLight1974 we dont. Even good songs usually lose. Diaspora helps now Ukraine and few other places. We barely rarely got sth from maybe Germany. While Belarus would always vote Russia.
Its dumb all the division for the countriesz making us fight. We should just all vote one good song. When you win you need to find millions to make the next contest, so its nothing good about actually winning
7:44 I like how Australia is put in the Scandinavian/Nordic pot :P
Hey Tom only found your channel this year and so happy I did, one of the most in depth informative Eurovision channels I follow and for a Eurovision geek like me it's great!! Keep up the good work 👍👍👍
Thank you Anna 🥰
thanks for explaining this all so clearly! and i absolutely agree with you, the ebu definitely did the right thing dismissing the votes here, although i think they should fine the jurors/ broadcasters responsible as well
The fact that none of these countries even tried to suggest they would cooperate with the EBU speaks volumes. Immediate denial and trying to shift focus just makes them look worse. If they were actually innocent, you'd expect them to be saying that they would be internally investigating, especially in light of such blatant evidence of country collusion.
18:32 - I believe San Marino has come out and said that their 12 in the final went to Italy, not Spain as announced, so I'm still not sure why San Marino still announced theirs on the night.
yea i retweeted a comment on twitter that basically said that a normal response would be "we'll look into this immediately" and not "THAT OTHER PERSON CHEATED!"
My impression from some of the statements is that the EBU send the validated points back to the individual broadcasters to announce - at least one of the statements said that they noticed they were different to what they had submitted from the jury and refused to announce the EBU's version; I'm guessing San Marino either didn't have the same person checking both versions, or were willing to comply at that stage.
if I understood it right, EBU asked the countries to call the aggregated results. the countries that refused had 'technical difficulties'
@@dv2483 no. Some broadcasters didn't get informed
The main type of excuse I've read is that "other countries cheat too so this is unfair". Lol, others cheating without getting caught doesn't make it OK. Hopefully this will teach everyone a lesson for next year (not just those 6 countries). Do you know if there are any sanctions currently, other than getting your vote cancelled? Also, isn't it gross how they all imply foul play in favour of Sweden? They cleary do it because the head of EBU is Swedish -_-'
Yea the accusing Martin of cheating is the bot calling the kettle black. The odds before the semis that Sweden were going to qualify were 0.000001 - it is zilch surprise that Sweden did well with the jury.
My understanding is that they cant just make up sanctions, it needs to be in the rules BEFORE. So maybe they might make some in time for next year
But this year the cheating around has a twist: EBU is cheating along with the others in plain sight, instead of being a good example for all participants. Shame! I'm not watching this mockery of a contest again.
Also I love it when your videos are longer! Helps my day go by faster at work lol x
lol thanks Maya, although please dont tell me you do something involving heavy machinery or landing airplanes though 😂
Spot on synopsis of the situation Tom
My overall sentiment, is, that is such a shame that countries feel they must and can do this. It just diminishes the reputation of the contest and adds fuel to its critics who gleefully continue to point out that the whole institution is corrupt.
How dare they!!
It is OUR competition and we MUST do everything in our power to protect and preserve it!
Maybe a solution, or is it, would be to have jurys from semifinal 2 judging in semifinal 1 and vice versa
Maybe it wouldn't work?
Anyway, great vid as always Tom
Ps those "aggravated scores" must be very angry as opposed to the "aggregated scores"
🤣🤣🤣🙊
omg lol you wretch, did i say aggravated? 🤣
I saw the other semi voting suggestion - i think it just adds in extra steps but you can still swap votes, its just a little less efficient to get a group together.
I think they should focus on the main solution being countries STOP CHEATING. Incentivise them to not cheat
@@ESCTom very true.
But yes, aggravated scores brought a smile to my face throughout🤣🤣
Anyone that loves your work knows that your "worms" often get confuddled!!😊😊
I have no issue with votes being disregarded if there is an obvious irregularity. My only concern is the EBU then replacing the votes with a more logical selection. It seems the EBU could doctor the results themselves if they wanted to by doing this. Something definitely needs to be in place to improve jury honesty, but also a back up plan in place that doesn't result in the EBU replacing the votes. Maybe have independent jurors as an emergency back up.
I agree for the most part, but I think the EBU is kind of stuck in a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” scenario. If they use an aggregate, they’re “rigging the numbers.” If they use an independent jury, what’s to stop accusations that the EBU simply tells said jury how to vote? I don’t know if there’s really any solution that pleases everyone.
nah i dont think they are going to doctor them, they arent Eurofans stanning a country, theyre professionals who want to put on a good show. The aggregate system is relatively transparent, like its based off the allocation pots, so its not like they are randomly doling out 12s to people who got 0 from everyone else.
Aw Romania! You know they didn't need their jury to cheat because WRS got all my votes because I generally loved his song and performance so much. I hope all the Artists will be okay and this does not effect their reputation.
yea i can see why they did it though, he was hovering around 12-13th in the odds to qualify the whole time.
If EBU says is cheating and if you don't have the proof they will have a law suit.
Wrs was 14th in jury vote, 18 points from 20 countries. Romania and Moldova always do poorly with the juries, and Sweden and Australia always do great! No coruption whatsoever! In the semi2 Australia 169 points from the jury, Belgium 105. Totally fair!
Absolutely great video Tom, very interesting and insightful. I like that your being positive as always, that in the end it's a good thing that this happened and that the EBU has stepped in. I would say it's pretty clear that these are all country which mostly do not show a massive interest in the competition, but do feel that a NQ would be "bad' for them because they can't accept being on a bad streak or because it's bad for their reputation. I do not want any of them to withdraw (well except for one maybe but I'll stay nice 🙂), but the solutions you offer them (basically just step up your game!) is something that most of them should pick up.
OK just one country I'll call out: Romania, you should really fire your head of delegation. I still haven't forgiven her for being so nasty to Roxen last year, and then the way she messed up this year, with that whole televised debate which in the end resulted in a national final that was just as poor as the ones you had before, and then getting you all in this mess as well... No shade at all to WRS who deservedly won Selectia Nationala and did a great job in Turin! But if TVR wants to become competitive ever again and get the Romanians invested into Eurovision (viewing figures there are absolutely dismal), there really need to be big changes there.
Yea i have to admit I dont know enough of the specific details about Romania's HoD - eg I thought it was a guy, not a girl. But yea definitely Romania are a bit of a mess in the last 5 years, and despite WRS's one man qualification, the delegation looks chaotic
they just had a poll on their website asking whether they should withdraw or not, which ESC twitter had to rush and save as it was massively in favour of withdrawing before we flooded the vote
One suggestion I saw on another channel was to isolate all the jurors from each other. So none of the jurors know who the other jurors are. They never meet or get the others' names. It's much harder to collude if the other jury members are unknown to you. It wouldn't solve every cheating scenario but it could be done without increasing jury numbers.
Increasing the number of jurors is another possibility, but there are other problems with doing that. Mainly cost and logistics. I don't know who pays for transporting and supervising the juries. If it's the EBU that pays, maybe the EBU should consider increasing the number of jurors. Much harder to cheat if you have to do it with more than just 5 people. Personally I think 5 jurors is a ridiculously low amount.
i think youre referring to ESC Gabe from ESC united?
Yea I dont think that would work. The jurors dont need to see each other, they just need ONE person from the network or the Head of delegation to tell them what to do. You could send them to the 5 corners of the world and the HoD could still contact them and tell them how to vote.
@@ESCTom Yes I think it was someone from ESC United. Yes, the downside of that idea is that cheating could still be arranged by the jury contact person. Maybe change the jury contact person to a random person from the EBU then? And not use people from a country's delegation as the jury contact person.
I think there's a distinction between country officials/delegations and jury members. That's why country officials were so vocal demanding clarifications from EBU, and started internal inquires (to see if their jury members got corrupted). So don't put the entire country in the same boat, saying the officials wanted answers from EBU "so they can cheat better for the final".
i think a normal response to being accused of cheating is "We will look into this matter immediately with utmost importance".
Not "OTHER PEOPLE WERE CHEATING TOO, LOOK AT BELGIUM!!!!"
@@ESCTom I saw last night's local show in which Romania responded..
In simple words the message (to EBU) was "Why did you think we (the officials) were involved in this? If you told us sooner we would've seen what happened and cancelled the jury, or take measures, and admit the problem.
But because you didn't communicate with us, we had further damages because people said we can't establish a simple TV connection during the live show, plus people here speculated erroneously about the votes of the final, trying to make sense of the accusations, but not knowing the problem was in the semifinal. We felt betrayed when you acted like everything is ok until the last minute and you did with us 3 rehearsals for the presenter's intervention in the live show (so how do we know when are you talking seriously?)".
Basically the TV broadcaster said it had no idea what was happening, both from EBU and from what the jury did (its also in the rules that the voting is secret until the last moments, and locally the voting was done according to all the rules, with notary representatives, observers, etc). So I tend to believe them (the broadcaster official), especially because they was so vocal from the first moment and made a big fuss publically (when if they were involved they would've had an idea about the problem and wouldn't be so vehement demanding answers).
I also saw some of the jury members's reaction.. meh.. indeed some were like "what about Australia+Belgium+Sweden+whatever".
A jury member said he wouldn't do such a thing since he's part of the Austrian jury (or something like that).
Anyways, the Official in chief said they had a meeting with EBU and told them all of this and that EBU noted and said there are some good points, and that they'll think how to improve the collaborations and about avoiding such problems in the future.
(Locally its important that they showed this, because people were furious on EBU (thinking the problem was about the voting for the Final), so its way better when the truth comes out).
4:15 - Even bigger countries can be rigged through televote. France in the semis has very little viewers (I'm not even sure it airs on telly tbh) so I noticed the televote usually goes for diaspora (Armenia this year) or weird/suspicious votes (in 2021, I think if I remember correctly there was some sort of alliance with Bulgaria /Greece /Portugal /Moldova and the French televote seemed to match that alliance... Maybe I remember wrong though)
ah yes, good point. i did notice that the viewing figures for France for the final this year were lower than some of the QF countries. they genuinely are not that interested in it compared to other countries
Rigging? Are you ok? People who are citizens of a country voting for a song they like cannot be described as rigging! If French Armenians voting for Armenia is rigging then Nordic people constantly voting for each other is rigging as well! After all, even if one of them sends garbage, it will still get votes from the good Nordic neighbors. Jury kind of solved the diaspora voting problem but it made neighborly voting problem a zillion times worse.
Looking at this year just been, most of these six countries gave up.
Montenegro gave up literally. They straight up left the contest.
Azerbaijan put in zero effort for their internal selection and failed to qualify.
Romania and San Marino got zero points.
Poland rigged their national selection instead and managed to bait the televote to get them into the Eurovision final.
Georgia was the only one who moved on, started fresh, and put effort into their entry. Then failed to qualify anyway.
Edits: spelling mistakes
Although I would suggest that Azerbaijan trying something new is possibly their attempt at a fresh new start
as a eurovision and statistic lover, your channel is my dream
Haha thank you Lachy 🥰
I specifically remember Moldova exchanging 12 points with someone last year that I noticed while just watching and not even looking into anything
Great piece of work Tom! I'd never actually thought about it before, but this helps clarify for me why they have separate jury shows - it gives the adjudicators that 24 hour window to scrutinize the results before they are announced during the live shows. When where jury shows first introduced? Do you have any idea? I tried googling it but couldn't find an answer. All this does make you start to wonder about jury votes way back in earlier days lol
yea tbh im not sure if thats the main reason for the jury show, or a lucky coincidence. there is definitely an advantage to having another run through for the technical staff and the entrants too.
Also i know that the jury show performance used to be the backup performance as well.
So im not sure whats the chicken and whats the egg
Another amazing video! To your point at 18:46 though (and I'm still watching the video so forgive me if you address this later), San Marino I believe said was planning to give 12 to Italy, and were surprised that they were told Spain got their 12. (Also love how all the other broadcasters, plus Belarus back when that happened in 2019, complained BECAUSE they would've given 12 to a neighbor and it made them look bad, which...dude, how blatant can you get? Not to mention how Romania went so far as to include Moldova's HoD on their "talkback" show so they could whine about not getting any points from them. I loved it, they were chiding a neighboring country for actually voting with integrity for once, especially after some epically dodgy voting in 2021 from them).
EDIT: Whoop, so you did! Yeah, it's been a rough two years to root for San Marino. They've just been a total shambles, which is a shame since I've met their HoDs and they're really nice and smart. Somebody at RTV San Marino is screwing the pooch, clearly. I honestly wouldn't even be mad if they took a year off to get their shit together, cuz the embarrassing voting every year and the absolute mess of UVpSM this year tell me something needs to be shaken up for real.
Yeah I really hate that type of blatant jury riggin discussion that happens with some of the heads of delegations. One of things I really like about Martin Osterdahl right now is that he is clamping down on that type of nonsense. So I'm sure that if he sees or hears anything like that, he probably will contact the head of delegation to berate them for
Excellent video Tom!
thank you Matt 🥰
100 mil € fine in the rules of the competition ends cheating.
Very happy wrs didn’t need that vote rigga morris to get through to the final 😊
The current ‘Wagatha Christie’ court case here in the UK cant hold a candle to this debacle 😂 What I found strange was the responses I got to a comment I added to another video about this when I remarked that it was a good move for the EBU to go so public with this when they did - the majority of responses banged on about the EBU being crooked and secretive 🤦🏻 The thing that it does prove however is the emphasis that countries place on getting to the final. Back when the semis were introduced many folks complained it was getting too big etc etc but I think it gave the contest a proper boost, the next big boost being the redesign to the point delivery since 2016 😉
i think the semis have massively upped the quality. Back in the 90s you could send any old shite and be in the final. Now the shite mostly gets filtered out
It's pretty obvious what happened in 2013 - and it's not dodgy at all (and, tbh, saying something dodgy happened in 2013 is a pet peeve of mine).
In 2013 the rules of combining jury points and televoting points were changed. Previously, they would write down Country A's jury top-10 (12-10-8-7-...) and Country A's televote top-10 (12-10-8-7...), combine it and make a Country A's overall top-10 (12-10-8-7...) out of it (with the entry higher in televote getting more points in case of a tie). In 2013 they started a new thing when both juries and televote results be presented as full top-25 (or top 26s) and the Country A's overall top-10 depends on an average place an entry received in Country A's jury top-26 and Country A's televote top-26.
And also, previously the jury listings and televote listings were published, because EBU had to count those top-10s and those 12-10-8-7... points from both jury and televote - to determine the winner. They would just add up different columns - and give us the post about the fact that Norway got 144 pts from jury and 75 pts from televote.
But in 2013, why would they do this 12-10-8-7... thing 78 extra times. They don't need juries top-10 and televote top-10s anymore, they are working with top-26s in 2013. It was the biggest amount of data ever needed to determine the results of ESC - and we are saying they needed to make extra 78 lists they didn't need to determine the winner.
As of 2013, EBU didn't have a big beautiful website and wasn't gonna need to publish everything. Before that they would just make a post with jury and televote rankings (sometimes with a spreadsheet file). And in 2013 they knew they aren't gonna be making 78 extra top-10s to count jury and televote results and they probably also wanted to showcase their new system - so they've published what was easiest to count - the averages. Instead of trying to find the top 10 of each list, they found an average each country got in each top-26.
And then the controversy and conspiracies started - people saw the new type of showcasing the data, people didn't understand why, people couldn't compare it to previous years (yeah, 2013 data is incomparable with any other year's data, it's very sad) and people hated it. And EBU probably didn't have the resources (or even desire) to post any extra stuff - we, the people who are interested in this data, is such a small majority and we behaved very toxicly in this case and we're still full of conspiracies about it.
In 2014 though they were prepared - they've made a great website and they've published everything there. 2014-2016 were years with the most amount of data available (unfortunately, they are overwriting the amount of data available on the website every year - the amount of data for 2016 should be the same as for the latest edition, so they deleted some things since).
For why they haven't published the results of 2013, I would guess that some data were lost or were combined in a non-beautiful, non-publishable format. It is still costs money for a non-commercial EBU to put this stuff into form and publish it. Or they decided which amount of data they would publish even before the contest - and didn't want to change their rules behindhand to prove something to a hundred angry people in the Internet.
P.S. After 2013 Azerbaijan stopped influencing televoting (it is clear from their results), so if there was some problem with this country's result, it would be with televoting, not juries. Also, I leave in Eastern Europe - and here Eurovision conspirologists are saying that the 2013 results were not published to hide Denmark's cheating since EBU - according to this theory - did not want Azerbaijan to win for a second time in 3 years. 'Whose mess would EBU cover up - Azerbaijan's or Denmark's?' (obviously, all of this is bullshit and I'm convinced that in 2013 EBU published the exact amount of data EBU planned to publish that year).
And, to be honest, it's strange to hear your theory that Jon Ola Sand stepped up in 2013, because the cheating was so big it would influence the winner. I don't understand who is cheating in this scenario and who is true winner.
Also, I don't understand it timewise. The results of televoting are coming in right during the grand final, mr Sand would have to monitor a lot of data to find inconsistencies in voting for Azerbaijan. In case of jury voting in 2022, EBU had the whole day to find those unusual patterns and decide what to do with them (juries in 2nd semi are voting on Wednesday during rehearsal while the show itself is on Thursdays) and then they were still thinking until they got jury results of those countries on Friday (also, in 2015 it took about 10 hours for EBU to disqualify Montenegro's and FYRM's juries - and several weeks to change Belarus jury vote in 2019). I don't understand how would Jon Ola Sand find the bad votes this fast and say: 'Okay, so now we're changing the results, we are fully recounting these countries and we're changing which information we're gonna publish to hide this scandal'. It is not something one person decides in less than 10 minutes - and even if every employee and producer would agree to that immediately, we'd notice that they extended interval acts or added a lot of extra unnecessary small talk.
I suppose it's possible Azerbaijan was caught red-handed after doing something with televote in a lot of countries (because eversince Azerbaijan stopped getting a lot of points from televote), but I doubt it happened that fast. I think that Azerbaijan's cheating and non-publishing of the points are completely disconnected events and Jon Ola Sand was not doing anything to change the results or to hide anyone's machinations in 2013.
You should check out this tweet that someone I follow on twitter did, because it relates to this topic
twitter.com/dolphin_dane/status/1663827103077244928?s=46&t=xFQfKjeNDPZB-rpEcKjXpA
I'm surprised Norway didn't do too well
Martin did last Year too.
Hopefully there will be more honesty within the Jury's next year
Thank You for explaining this problem in such a clear way! 🙏 And I suspect at least 2 of our jury members got instructions how to vote as they literally work in TVP ("Jaka To Melodia?" show) and their careers depends on TVP. Also this bizarre alliance with San Marino since last year... I thought it was 1 year event and easy to hide because San Marino had a decent song and FloRida. But this year I couldn't believe my eyes, Polish jury from homophobic TVP voted for San Marino! It was cheating or (tin foil) it was voting against TVP and in support of LGBT community 🤔and because of EBU this sabotage faild 🤪(what a irony this would be) Greetings from Poland and sorry for my English
omg lol i didnt even think about that, that is so true! 😂 Yea poland giving the most un-Catholic song 12 makes no sense.
I also didnt know that 2 of the jury members had connections to TVP so thank you for the info
your english is great by the way, i understood everything you said
I don't think that EBU had right to decide points instead of those six countries. It would be better if their votes were eliminated but EBU can't prove their cheating because Romania claims there were none. Other three countries voted for each other but were not accused of cheating. Does that mean that in future if someone votes for it's neighborh will be suspicious. It's Pandora box. Montenegro and Serbia are same ethnic group as Moldova and Romania or Greece and Cyprus. Giving each other high points is understandable. I'm afraid any year following someone could be accused of cheating that will damage esc credibility.
The 6 countries very clearly and very obviously cheated. There’s no doubt about it whatsoever. Romanian broadcaster are denying it because they have 0 integrity.
EBU HAS to use the aggregate. It’s literally what is written in the rules! They can’t just randomly make up a new rule on the spot to eliminate results.
@@ESCTom Greetings from Serbian in Dublin.
Insightful as always. Youre definetaly one of the best.
Thx for making eurovision smart 😊
thank you Yair 🥰
Late on the ball but this was said by the EBU after the 2013 edition: Broadcasters would be banned for up to three years if voting irregularities were discovered to have taken place in their country. Isn't that a rule then?
I personally feel that was a reaction to Azerbaijan quite blatantly cheating in 2013. Maybe they relaxed the rules after that though, im not sure
when the solution causes even more problems, I don't think it's a good solution
I am fed up and utterly disgusted. It’s not fun anymore and I realize that some (like me) watch and love ESC for the variety of music. Others rather watch it for the competition, for seeing their country getting as many points as possible, no matter how and why they get them. Even worse, some use Eurovision for political statements and manipulation. Guess not only Germany, personally I need a break from all of this.
Yea unfortunately that happens with all competitions. All those things happen in sports and Olympics as well. As soon as there’s competition, there’s an expectation for results and incompetent people will start to cheat cos they can’t win otherwise.
Off-season is 5 months so you have lots of time to recharge your batteries
I was dissapointed in the statements as well. The thing is that the delegations and the TV stations could have not known if someone just got to the jurymembers. So they could have just apologised and said they would not use these jury members again. What I mean is that they could have given a half apology if they didn't want to admit they themselves did something wrong. I was expecting more of that, not attacking other countries. Of course they should take responsibility but I wasn't exactly expecting that from all.
Yeah a normal response for broadcaster would be to reply that they would investigate and find if the accusations had any basis, and if so who was the culprit. The fact that they didn’t even do that and jumped directly to accusations of the EBU shows that they were probably guilty
Wonderful video. Legend!!! Well explained. I think the shame is a good enough penalty for now, and if they're caught again, 1 year suspension.. #AzerBUYjan
Thanks for this! Really explains a lot, very nasty and the responses are very disappointing! ☹️
San Marino doesn't have a televote because there is no separate San Marino telephone system - they just use Italy's. So there would be no way to stop Italians ringing a San Marino number to vote for the Italian act (or whoever). However, there is also a minimum threshold for televoters - which excludes a few other countries from the televote. Prior to 2016, it was easy to tell who they were as they had 100% jury vote, however since 2016 their "televote" has become a computer-generated score.
Also! There is nothing dodgy about the 2013 scores not being released. The EBU announced they were going to do this months prior to ESC 2013. They specifically said they were doing this because they didn't want to reveal which countries had not met the televote threshold. But this system only lasted one year. Following the SIM card scandal that year (which you mentioned), the EBU reverted to full voting split totals in the name of transparency. (I am kind of obsessed with this and did a deep dive and found all sorts of interesting info!)
So why won't the EBU just go ahead and release the split totals? The rules for ESC 2013 included the way the points would be revealed, and subsequent changes to the rules can't be applied retrospectively. All jurors and broadcasters participated in 2013 with the agreement and expectation that their voting totals would not be publicly released, so the EBU cannot arbitrarily go back on this agreement. (Annoying but understandable!)
Btw, I bloody loved this video! Excellent (and enjoyably brutal) analysis! The one thing I'm wondering is who instigated the cheating? Was it an executive at one of the broadcasters? A rogue employee of the broadcaster? Someone associated with one of the artists? Whoever, there must have been one person who sparked off the whole sordid affair, either bribing the jury members or just persuading them to barter a points swap. I'm sure the EBU will be trying to figure this out too!
Haha thank you for the comments Robyn. wiwibloggs got me into being obsessed with Eurovision, so I love you guys and owe you a lot! 🥰
ah I did originally record about the Italian phone system, but i edited it out as I wasnt sure.
ah thats interesting, so there may be some "secret" aggregated televote countries that we dont know about. I would guess its largely the countries like Czechia with the low viewing figures.
Thanks for the info about 2013, that does make more sense now. ill put that in the pinned comment. Without that info, it does look super shady, but with that context, its v different. (I still want to get Jan Ola drunk one night and get him to show me)
In regards to who instigated - it seems 🇸🇲 & 🇵🇱 had something going already. I would guess 🇸🇲 would have instigated to do that again, as they were way down in odds. I think 🇦🇿 are always up for a bit of "influencing" so that was an easy one, especially in a year they were borderline. apparently 🇲🇪 & 🇸🇲 were jury mates as well. The signs do point towards 🇸🇲 being the bad boys, but that's just rampant speculation. I don't know who manages the juries, whether its the HoD or someone at the broadcaster, but i would imagine the HoD is the most obvious ringleader with the most to gain.
You are the most insightful CZcamsr out there Tom. Also I hope you are doing fine in Shanghai given all the lockdowns and stuff, you could do more stuff with your channel once ESC season is over. What about a q&a?? ;) stay safe
hey felix, yea im thinking about several options. once i leave china, i can do live streams way easier cos i can use software to make them more interactive. I cant use that software within china.
I am hoping to keep something up over the pre-season, even if its only weekly or monthyl
If my adding is correct each of the six countries received between 39 and 43 points from the other five. Montenegro "only" got 39 but the also gave the fewest, since they just had to give Serbia their 10 points. Poland diverged from the plan by not giving Georgia their 6 points (only 4), so Poland "only" got 41 points back. The others got either 42 or 43 points from the five other countries. Sounds like a plan to me.
Martin, you are absolutely correct. all between 39 and 43. I think that Montengro got less because
1. they probably insisted on putting Serbia high to make the results look more "realistic".
2. They thought they were already going to get 12 from Serbia (they only got 7 though), whereas the other countries didnt have an obvious points donor.
The points look VERY evenly shared
Thank you for so much for this video, and I appreciate you adding your perspective as someone who is kind of an expert in statistics. I have SO many things I want to talk about (sorry for the wall of text).
You talking about the artists of those countries being smeared by association really makes me sad because most of the accused countries had songs I really liked this year, specifically Poland is my joint #1 and Krystian doesn’t deserve to be associated with this because he’s a lovely, modest guy with a good head on his shoulders.
I said on my podcast that Azerbaijan in particular should be kicked out bc this is now the second major voting scandal they’ve been caught in. I am beyond sick of their antics now.
I’ve heard rumours for years that San Marino and Montenegro have some sort of vote exchange relationship so I’m not surprised that they were in this group lol. I’m surprised that Malta weren’t involved as it’s basically a running gag within the fandom that they have bribed juries in the past as well as having paid YT views for their songs.
I’m one of those people who suggested that they should expand juries to 10 bc it makes it harder to hide their rigging but you made a good point about how that might be too expensive to manage. I like your idea about having more high-profile industry people involved as they have more to lose with a voting scandal. I know the UK jury has had people like Carrie Grant and a Capital FM DJ in the past.
haha sorry i should specify im not an expert in statistics, but the statistics relevant to this (probabilities and significances) are very similar to what i needed to study for my degree.
I think 🇦🇿 have been in more than 2 major voting scandals....
I think Malta werent involved because they were already in the naughty chair from "influencing" the odds last year.
thank you Tom
22:50 this year 3 out of 5 of the romanian jurors were ex-participants…..
ok, so its a 2 step process. now its time for there to be social repercussions for them. This is where there should be an expectation that an anti-cheating broadcaster should come forward and openly berate and punish their cheating jurors.
Thank you 🙏
Not surprised that Azerbaijan is in the middle of it…again!
You can pretty much assume they will be involved
Here is the pinned comment where I will leave any amendments that I need to make:
Links:
EBU statement: eurovision.tv/mediacentre/release/ebu-statement-irregular-voting-2022
🇷🇴 statement summary: eurovoix.com/2022/05/20/romania-withdraw-eurovision-jury-voting/
🇦🇿 statement summary: eurovoix.com/2022/05/16/azerbaijan-requests-explanation-from-ebu-jury-voting/
🇬🇪 statement summary: eurovoix.com/2022/05/16/georgia-statement-regarding-eurovision-2022-jury-voting/
🇲🇪 statement summary: eurovoix.com/2022/05/20/montenegro-latest-statement-eurovision-jury-voting/
🇵🇱 statement summary: eurovoix.com/2022/05/17/%f0%9f%87%b5%f0%9f%87%b1-poland-tvp-releases-statement-on-eurovision-2022-jury-voting/
🇸🇲 statement summary: eurovoix.com/2022/05/20/san-marino-eurovision-2022-jury-voting/
2013 clarification:
Apparently the EBU had pre planned to do this and because it was written into the rules that year, they cant go back on it now. so theres nothing dodgy about it
Do you have a link to, or even just the name of, the PhD you referred to?
I cant access the pdf, but i think this is it - www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140508110933.htm
The war of the music industries!!... For all those who knows what I'm talking about
Where did you get your fabulous top?
I bought it online in the uk a long time ago. It’s falling apart now 😂
I love it. If you remember the online shop, please post 😅 Fair play on comprehensive analysis Tom. Doing Ireland proud.
the "tenties"
What about these strange 12 or 10 points for azerbejdzan from nations that do not have nothing incommon with them Spain, Greece, Serbia....Did they punished Azerbejdzan in 2011,2013 and now.And they will continue to do that.For me Azerbejdzan has leading role in cheating for years. And every time they got what they wanted.
Azerbaijan getting 12 from Malta between 2010-2013 was also very sus.
just to clarify, im not saying Azerbaijan can never get 12 - sometimes their songs are actually great.
I feel there may have been warnings or punishments behind closed doors in 2011 & 2013.
Also a friend pointed out to me that 2011 was during the recession and there weren't exactly loads of countries who wanted to host back then!
That's the final, this is about the semi-final 2 results. I don't see what Azerbaijan would get from buying votes in the final, they had no chance to win... that would be like burning money
@@ESCTom I have great memory. These what I am saying is not connected with your video. I also read and watch Eurovision for a long period of time. And without these jury points in the final Azerbaijan would be 23rd or 25th. And maybe other country deserve it more like The Netherlands or Czecia or Portugal for example.And many of them stayed behind. I think this is much wide story then these 6 countries. But the least painfull is to accuse San Marino and Montenegro with less then million people together.And after all you defend Azerbaijan.Did you see patern that Montenegrin national broadcast sent schema between Belgium, Australia, Israel, Sweden and Estonia. Ok that is maybe speculation but maybe this is also.What Montenegro and San Marino got with this - 13th and 14th place in SF2.But no, you only gave one side of a story and put your head between you hands how stupid they are and why did not they apologize.
Spain had maors (close arab style music) , Greece and Serbia are from Balkans (have in common the sounds and being under Ottoman influence). Why will everybody like western style music?
Tom - Slightly off topic: Do you thing that there is any danger of France and Germany at some point potentially withdrawing their financial support from the competition? France due to a general lack of interest from viewers, and Germany out of their inabilty to get beyond single figure scores.
(Even with conceding that 'violent thing' was great - despite not being very German)
honestly im not 100% sure.
I think the general joining the EBU fees are proportionate to population and GER and FRA are definitely not going to leave that.
As for the participation fee, im not sure whether that also is proportionate to population or if its a flatter fee.
If it is the former, there would be a higher risk of withdrawing, if its the latter, then much less risk.
Honestly i dont think either would leave. Germany are the only ones to have particpated every year since it started, and its not like theyre sending amazing stuff and doing badly.
France have done 2nd best of the big 5 in the last 10 years, so no reason for them to leave after just 1 bad result
@@ESCTom Fair comment. I was thinking more in terms of French apathy towards the competition in general, not per se their poor result this year. - In the wake of Pravi's 2nd place last year I watched her subsequent return to France and tv appearances on the French channel we get here in NL. It was pretty muted, and she has resumed making music as before with perhaps a moderate raise of profile. I also watched the last two "France decides" shows and they were really poor in production, quality of song (Pravi excepted), and tension. I guess they just give a gallic shrug and say "C'est la vie".
Meanwhile, it will be fascinating to see how Germany responds, now that UK and Spain have found an escape route out of wooden spoon territory.
There needs to be greater transparency in the way the qualifications are announced in the semi-finals. There doesn't have to be a full going through each individual country's jury and public vote like in the final but at the very least the numbers from both should be stated, rather than just randomly calling out country's names.
i dont really get how that would helped with stopping cheating?
It would definitely kill a lot of suspense for the results in the final though
The problem is that if we take Poland out of this list, this whole conspiracy theory collapses. Especially because Poland received way more points than the rest, for example 12 more points than Montenegro, which received the least (from this group of 6 countries). This is a problem (with EBU's theory) because why would the 6 countries agree to favor Poland so much, when it needed the least "help" to qualify? (Poland's song was a favorite in the odds)
And if you take Poland out of this group, then this "normalizes" the "voting pattern", so there's a self fulfilling prophecy element in this EBU theory.
For example (if we take Poland out of this group of 6), in the case of Romania:
-it gave 12 points to San Marino, but so did Belgium, and now Poland's 12points to San Marino comes to "normalize" this vote.
-giving 8 points to Montenegro would be similar to Serbia's 7 points for Montenegro and (now) Poland's 7 points for Montenegro.
-giving 7 points for Azerbaijan would be even more "normal" since Serbia gave Azerbaijan 8 points , and Poland gave it 10 points.
-and finally the 6 points for Georgia, which is similar to the 5 points given by Czechia to Georgia, (and now Poland joins the list, thus "normalizing" this vote).
The points received from these 6 countries between each other were:
Poland - 41
Georgia - 42
Romania - 43
Montenegro - 39
San Marino - 43
Azerbaijan - 42
poland didnt get more than the others, so taking Poland out of the group has no rational basis
The jury is the problem and it’s sad that some fans are afraid of accepting it. Indeed, we had problems before jury. Namely, diaspora and neighbor voting. The jury kind of solved the diaspora problem but made the neighbor voting even worse. Jury still give very high points to “friend” or “neighbor” countries. And it’s ridiculous to claim that jury understands the more artsy songs better while the voting doesn’t reflect this at all. The jury either vote for friends and neighbors or songs with higher odds to win. They care about odds since they don’t want to stick out like a sore thumb. Imagine everyone giving Sweden 10 or 12 and you give them zero. If they really want jury, then maybe they should invite only one well known professional from each country and let them vote transparently on air in front of everyone’s eyes. Let’s the public see who is that jury and why they give their vote to X or Y county.
2023 was RIGGED?😮
Well explained
I would trust you with my own life ngl😆
If it's not about winning, and is about music/performance, they should just scrap the competition element of it. And it just be a performance of music from different countries... That way, jurers can't cheat.( Even though this doesn't affect the winner, it usually just affects the middle rankings very slightly. Though I'm not sure if any of those countries wouldn't have got through the semi final.) Also, rightly or wrongly, the EBU replacing votes (I know it's in the rules already, but not sure it's the best method) makes the EBU look bad and corrupt (I think the votes should be totally voided and no replacement given in the case of a competition in future). Particularly this year where it just looked like they gave Ukraine lots of points so that they wouldn't risk losing (not saying that's what they did. Just that is how it looks).. I'll be honest, as soon as Ukraine drew first half, I was 99% sure they'd get number 12 in the running order... Also, the televote being heavily biased to Ukraine this year because of the war, making them winning a foregone conclusion since the day Russia invaded in Feb when they shot to the top of the bookies favourites. Meaning they only won because of the war getting an almost perfect televote score...and they made a political statement which is against the rules and should have disqualified them, but the EBU didn't disqualify them.. I'm 99% confident Ukraine will win next year because they'll either still be in the war or just come out of it. So they'll be the pity/sympathy/solidarity vote again.. Will an invaded country be set to win Eurovision? If that keeps happening, there's no way Eurovision should be called a contest surely?... Taking out the points/competition element out of it would make it free from cheating, free from bias from jury cheating/manipulation/bias and televote bias. And it would stop the EBU being accused of authoritarianism. It would also still bring people together in a really good show without the negativity of "political sympathy wins" or "cheating". As you said, it's not about winning right? So why does anyone have to win.
well, *I* love Circus Mircus ..
RE the Moldovan entry-type songs, if the juries consider uniqueness, folksy songs would most likely always get low scores because of it's strong reference to traditional themes. For folk to get a high jury score, they would have to only reference it and the entry should have it's own structure.
Shouldn't that kind of music score high on uniqueness though? Folk is particular to the tradition of a country or area, plus Moldova or Ukraine for example mixed it with other genres. Why would this type of music not be considered unique?
Do you think ireland would've qualified if this didn't happen ?
Nope, definitely not. we came 15th in the end and if the cheating hadnt been caught, we would have come 17th.
we completely bombed with the juries
Irelands song was not that bad.. Except for the fact that the song didn't inspire a broader amount of the general public to vote for it. I for one do not relate to modern teenage girl problems.
we need to aim for more than "not that bad"
TBF I had assumed there would be a voting block with these countries because they are mostly Eastern Europe (Except San Marino ) mostly Novelty (Juries vote for acts similar to their own) .
many of them are eastern, but only AZE and GEO share a border from all of them
I am very struck by the case of Sweden, Australia and Belgium, in addition to the votes among them, the votes they gave to Spain, which were 12, 12 and 10.
[VERY long 1am analysis of Australian jury votes incoming]
I can’t speak for Sweden and Belgium’s juries, but as an Australian I can say that most of Australia’s jury votes make total sense to me. The hype for Spain’s song was pretty insane on SBS, the Eurovision commentators couldn’t help but show their bias towards Spain during the live commentary, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the jurors were similarly just as in love with the song. Sweden and Serbia were also big favourites among SBS staff and commentators so those countries coming second and third respectively in the jury vote didn’t surprise me either. I’m of course not saying that what the SBS commentators like the best is necessarily always a good representation of what the jurors like the best, but I have seen a similar trend across previous years of coverage so I wouldn’t be surprised if the commentators and jurors have overall similar tastes.
Also I’m not quite sure how you could argue that Belgium is included in this jury vote rigging if it did exist, because Australia only gave Belgium 5 and Sweden gave them 1, while there were other countries which gave them more in the jury (Serbia gave them 8, Italy 7, a few other countries gave 6). Also, Belgium only gave Australia 1 point, which it hardly seems like it would be worth vote rigging over.
If you think Ukraine should have been higher up Australia’s jury ranks I would have to disagree (much as I absolutely love the song and it was in my top 3 with Moldova and Slovenia). This is entirely speculation on my part, but I think Australia being so far removed from Europe means that the Australian jury are even less likely to favour songs with folk elements or for particularly political reasons. Also the coverage of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its effects has not been great or especially prolific in Australia - I personally saw a lot of news about Ukraine in Australian media for only about the first two weeks, but after that Australia was having terrible natural disasters with record breaking floods across eastern Australia which completely took over the whole domestic media and Ukraine news got drowned out. That being said, I’m extremely happy that the Australian jury gave Ukraine 7 points, and I’m not surprised that the televote gave Ukraine 12 points either, because their song is 100% the kind of entry that the Australian public goes crazy for.
The big shock about Australian jury votes to me was the fact that the jury didn’t give even a single point to the UK - I thought it would be a song they would have absolutely loved, so I don’t quite understand how they only ranked it 15th. Even Moldova (with their pretty abysmal jury score across the board) ranked higher in the Australian jury ranking than the UK, so I’m not quite sure what happened there. Unless the jury were just too over-conscious of the expectation that Australia would rank the UK highly?
Also, out of all participating countries in Eurovision, I feel like Australia has the least reason to try to rig the votes (I don’t know any Australian who actually wants us to win Eurovision - while it would be kind of funny for a minute it would be a nightmare to work out what would happen next in terms of hosting etc, and Europe already hates us enough for just participating as it is, no need to make Europe hate us even more for spoiling Eurovision by winning it as a non European country 😅). Our Queen Dami Im coming second in 2016 was enough for us already 💕
@@joumanashead1722 I really liked your runner-up this year. Voyager would get so many televotes, but Australia keeps sending 'Jury-baites' I feel. I don't even blame your country because you can't rely on cultural support, but I really want you to risk something and see where it would go.
I love salty Tom!
If thhose countries cheated then the punishment should be given. But the way EBU handled the situation was bad,so nontransparent with so many excuses , lying in the final that those were the valid votes of those countries,on and on and on.
I dont think they can give any punishments that arent already written in the rules. So I think using the aggregated votes and cancelling their announcement was the only thing they could do within the rules limits this year. But they might change the rules for next year
@@ESCTom I see! The thing is Martin could've said the truth in the final when he presented the agregate substitute that those votes were just that... agregate substitute and more information will be given after the final . Instead EBU lied about technical difficulties with the live transmission and then Martin lied that those were the real votes from those countries with a smiley face which makes everything so fake now,so manipulative .They should've handled the situation much better!
it makes absolutely no sense to start talking about countries cheating in the middle of the jury segment. The timing of the show is planned, so throwing in a completely controversial tangent statement of juries cheating WHILE the jury votes are happening is completely insane.
If the cheating countries dont want to be treated that way, the solution is to not cheat
@@ESCTom as long as the way to proceed this year is in the benefit of the UK placing, everything is perfectly done
@@ESCTom Why? Nobody said to discuss the matter of cheating in that moment, just say is the agregate substitute for that respective country instead of blatantly lying. No discussion required in that moment,the voting process wouldn't be disturbed. Not only that but the juries votes were already given from friday so no influence on other juries votes. The same number of words,no timing disturbing whatsoever. Instead he went to cover cheating with another two lies. Now it will forever remain that moment when EBU lied live .
Just two words he was supposed to say: agregate substitute.
Sorry, only watched a small portion of the video earlier, then had to rush out to spend time with my little nephew.
Yes totally agree that if a country cheats then they shouldn't have the right to read out or share the results of their televotes. And I agree with the votes being replaced with aggregated results.
If you're an athlete running the 100m and you get caught taking drugs during a preliminary round, then you are immediately disqualified. You don't get to run again in the final!
How can these people cry that the EBU have handicapped them when they openly cheated?! If you're going to try and cheat the system, it's only fair you have some rights taken away from you as a repercussion. You can't cry about it and claim that the EBU rigged it for other countries when you yourselves have rigged the voting in favour of yourself!
yes, exactly!
there is definitely different cultural approaches to cheating in different places. Like just look at Russias STATE SPONSORED doping program. If you need any more proof of different views towards cheating, look no further than that
How was Spain not a happy / easy to digest song/performance? You said the jury needs to counterbalance the public vote which is skewed towards easy to digest/happy songs. This means the jury should be biased in favor of slower / harder to digest songs.. (which is a problem into itself, since by definition the jury should not vote for what they like the best). She has no "monetary problems" thanks to "booty hypnotic", so message wise it didn't need jury help. ..and it has only 2 chords ..and the verses are basically ..rap, and even the chorus is largely an echo style 1 note/tone repetition "(slow) mo, mo, mo, mo, mo".
Its impossible to be apolitical. Even I voted politically, as a simple viewer. Besides the song which I wanted to show my love for the most, I had France and Estonia at top 3, but since the vote is expensive.. (in my area, another fairness issue..). I still love and listen to France's song, I couldn't care less about its low jury (and public) vote. Ukraine this year is a good example, of showing love / solidarity, yet still having a musical contest (in parallel). I still argue its detrimental for this show to be a competition.. there's no need for this drama. People dress as nice as they can without being ranked by a jury. Likewise each country can show the song that best represents them each year.
How about the second semifinal? No comment here?
Australia has give:
Suedia 12
Israel 10
Belgia 8
Macedonia de Nord 7
Irlanda 6
Australia received:
Suedia 12
Israel 10
Belgia 8
Macedonia de Nord 5
Irlanda 5
Belgia gave:
Suedia 10
Australia 8
Israel 7
Belgia received:
Suedia 8
Australia 8
Israel 7
Suedia gave:
Australia 12
Estonia 10
Belgia 8
Malta 7
Suedia received:
Australia 12
Estonia 12
Belgia 10
Malta 10
Yea I already discussed this at length in another video
They should use top 20 in the televoting to lessen the effect of diaspora! 1-18,20,22p
hmmm thats interesting, ive never heard that idea before. only with televote though?
Romania didn ‘ t need this !
WRS was very good in the competition. And many people Said that România will qualify!
And you are not right!
If was something wrong in the semifinal , they have 2 days to anunțe that somone cheating.
But they didn ‘t! Why? Because is a huge lie.
People from many countries can t vote for WRS or for Poland? Why??
They didnt know they didnt need it before the semi final. they were 11-12th in the odds so it looked like they wouldnt qualify. it was a surprise that they did so well in the televote.
the EBU doesnt owe the countries who cheated anything. If they are going to break the rules, the rules state that the jury becomes ineligible for both the semi and the final. those are the rules that they signed up to
the solution is to not cheat
They were not yhe only ones voting with each other, so did Sweden, Australia, Belgium and Malta, they exchanged between them the top point. But that was considered normal. And then EBU comes and takes the points of these 6 “cheatin” countries and redistributes the points and Sweden, Australia and Belgium recieve 12. 10 and 8 points! Because they were the best, this was the explanation from EBU. Wtf?
Tom explained this in the video. I suggest you re-watch the video.
Any way who was the winner of the changing votes your country UK. Who was the loser Spain
im not british 🤦🏻♂🙄
@@ESCTom ok 👍 im not spaniard either
Tom, if these 6 countries have cheated in 2nd semi, why the EBU have changed the points in the Grand Final?! Where is the logic?! Did you agree that EBU votes for Romanian jurys in the GF has changed the UK/Spain final scoreboard?!
Have you seen the video?
@@henning1152 Sure. And sincerely the story with the EBU aggregate pattern (!which was used in the Grand Final!) it's weird. To put the same points for the same countries... and 12 points only for UK/Ukraine - it's weird too. I understand why British people are OK with that, but ... I still hope that TOM will answer at my question.
PS> The jury hates the opera songs too. Just take a look at IL VOLO points.
@@dumitrupanait4856 It's not wierd that the aggregate results correlate with each other. For example Azerbaijan and Georgia belongs to the same algorithm group, and again UK was all non-cheating juries favourite, making it likely also juries from the 6 countries would have liked United Kingdom
@@dumitrupanait4856 Jury generally likes mainstream pop, though you can't say Juries don't like opera. Elina Nechayeva (Estonia 2018) Received 143 jury points (6th) while 103 points (9th) in Televoting.
PS. Her song is way better than three cheesy men just singing "Grande Amoooore"
Serbia got 12 points from Montenegro, yeah - not by cheating, tho. It's logical that montenegrian and croatian understand the best and like it because of that. Serbia deserved more points from the jury this year, but, what is OBVIOUS is that, since there is the jury, mostly every year we have the same countries in the top 10. The jury is the shitty part of Eurovision and no one can change my mind. They should at least make it 70% televote - 30% jury because the public says it all - if we want a happy crazy song to win, then it should win. So tired of the over produced americanised music only in english and 0 ethnicity...
The danger with that scenario is that it becomes a freak show, with acts simply out to grab attention, rather than create something meaningful. If you look at the "Arcade" victory in 2019, it won neither the jury or Public vote. However, it did well in both because it was emotionally resonant, but also a well crafted song. Moldova's entry this year had its moment in a contest overloaded with ballads, but a show full of such songs and performances would kill the competition stone dead.
in addition to what Alipan said, its also necessary to counter large partisan votes, songs earlier in running order, and also to disperse points amongst more countries. the larger a sample size is, the greater the tendency to homogeneity
completely beside the point. First, cheating is the de facto mode in Eurovision. the scandale is not about the fact that those 5 countries cheated but about the fact that they got caught dong it. If you want to stop the cheating, as you claim, maybe you should look into the music industry who see each song as an investment from which they expect a huge return. so it is in their best interest that their song get the highest ranking possible or the highest exposure. and we are talking here of a colossal amount of money. which in turn will give you as many reasons to cheat in the first place. You want to stop the cheating... then you must deal with the music industry first, before you can make this possible.
i disagree its the de facto mode. I feel very largely that every year the good/better songs do well, (even if they arent to my taste) and the worse songs do badly. I can think of very few instances where many absolute stinker songs inexplicably did very well in one year and everyone was like "WTF happened?" AFTER 2013
How about the shitty song from Finland , years ago , the one with the monsters , winning the Eurovision , mainly due to votes from Scandinavian and other Western countries. It was argued that was a public vote as a protest against bla bla and bla bla. How big a coincidence can be for Ukraine to win this year ? People like what they like , it shouldn't be interfered . Same like a brilliant book passing thru the Directors filter / vision when going into a movie. Who cares about the Directors view , I want to see the book in the movie , not his opinion. Is same extrapolation for this kind of interference . It was cheating and cheating by the EBU , that's it , accept it !
Двойные стандарты! Другие государства голосуют друг за друга, ето норм...
(this comments translates as "Double standards! Other states vote for each other, this is the norm ...")
It's normal that regions with similar music styles will enjoy music that is familiar to them - eg Norway, Sweden and Iceland have very similar pop music.
The difference is when this is pre-determined because jurors are told to vote for someone.
@@ESCTom Hi Tom😍You are best
@@ESCTom I mean that other countries gives points each other, this is normal.....What exactly are these countries accused of? Poland and Azerbaijan was great this year
@@suleymanova3377 These 6 countries have deliberately agreed between each other to vote for each other. That is blatant cheating. Not sure why you are struggling to understand this since it's so obvious.
@@nian60 if it was deliberately done, could they prove it? And why these countries done this before?
Spain the real winner ❤️
lol i dont know how you managed to draw that conclusion from this video
@@ESCTom many many people is feeling that Spain is the real winner. I don't think she meant you said that.
The big cheater is UK who was seccond thanks to algorithm in order to give a present to thev70 year reign ofvQueen Elizabeth and next year will be in Scotland to honor her deceased husband.
Probably these 6 countries cheated but not in the final. We need to know thd points in order to know if Chanel was seccond
hmmmmm
Chanel was second