Posted April 10, 201114 yr From Eurovision Times... EBU – According to oikotimes.com, the EBU will reveal an innovative change to the voting procedure of the Eurovision Song Contest by Friday this week. Rumors about the possible changes have circulated on the internet for quite some time now, as the voting order had not been drawn (as usual) at the Heads of Delegation Meeting. Several possible scenarios for a change in the voting system have been considered: Last year the Swedish Head of Delegation Christer Björkman had suggested to determine the arrange of the countries only on the night of the final when all the votes are known in order to ensure an exciting voting for the audience. A computer would determine in which order the countries would vote in order to have a tight race for as long as possible as opposed to a runaway winner like in 2009. This procedure would entail serious organizational difficulties as it is already tough to get the satellite links to all 43 participating nations. Furthermore the end of the voting would be rather dull (in case we had a runaway winner). The second more probable theory is, that the non-qualifying countries’ votes will be announced in one block or might even be summarized in a single set of points (1-12). This system would allow the other countries to announce their result in full including points 1,2,3,4,5,6 and 7 and would probably further minimize the impact of diaspora and neighbour voting in the contest. It is quite possible that the changes will only be of minor nature though. Stay tuned for more information. I could easily be down for making the order non-random. But I'm not sure if I'm at all keen on putting the non-qualifying countries' votes in one single block - I mean, it'd probably help a lot of the accusations of diaspora, but they're pretty much insignificant now we have 50:50 voting. Thoughts?
April 10, 201114 yr Constantly non-qualifying countries would probably feel even more insignificant now if the second variant is chosen. I hope it's the order if i get to choose between the two.
April 10, 201114 yr How typical that draw 'changes' would be suggested by Christer Björkman :lol: I'd be quite happy to see the non-qualifying countries votes announced in some other way personally, I really miss the old vote announcing system, I can never keep up these days, the scoreboard moves so quickly, I used to get far more tense watching it the old way.
April 10, 201114 yr I really really hope it isn't the second option. I'd much rather have only the 8,10 and 12 from each country read out than have the full results for some, and then have 18 countries bundled into one and rushed through in 5 minutes!
April 10, 201114 yr Neither sound overly great, a fixed running order is very undesirable for me personally, I'll be stuck thinking something like 'nice for Estonia in the lead but they're about to lose it soon when the twist comes' halfway through the voting.
April 10, 201114 yr Author Neither sound overly great, a fixed running order is very undesirable for me personally, I'll be stuck thinking something like 'nice for Estonia in the lead but they're about to lose it soon when the twist comes' halfway through the voting. A fixed running order doesn't necessarily equate to a twist though. It could just equate to having it so that: 01 UK 240 02 France 235 03 Estonia 232 Is resolved on the final vote rather than the UK pulling away and getting to around 235 with three votes to go with France miles behind.
April 10, 201114 yr Neither sound overly great, a fixed running order is very undesirable for me personally, I'll be stuck thinking something like 'nice for Estonia in the lead but they're about to lose it soon when the twist comes' halfway through the voting. I don't know if you've tried the voting simulator yet, but if not give it a try and you'll see that the fixed voting order doesn't necessarily work like that. It simply makes sure that the top few countries are as close together as possible for as long as possible.
April 10, 201114 yr I can't see option 2 happening, as that 90 second scoring window is a vital advertisment for smaller countries, like lithuania, to try and attract tourism, plus the national broadcaster gets advertisement from it. I think that's the reason the presenters go over the top on compliments - to try and keep their country on TV longer :lol: . And that's not to mention the outcry from the people of those countries. I'd be pretty annoyed if the UK didn't get a fair look in after spending money on voting. I'd personally prefer it if all participating countries announced all their votes individually. I know many find that boring, but I really like it. Apart from the top 5/bottom 5, I can't follow the scoreboard at all when only the top 3 points are announced. I quite like the idea of making the results more exciting, but not if it builds some countries up for a huge fall.
April 10, 201114 yr I'd personally prefer it if all participating countries announced all their votes individually. I know many find that boring, but I really like it. Apart from the top 5/bottom 5, I can't follow the scoreboard at all when only the top 3 points are announced. I quite like the idea of making the results more exciting, but not if it builds some countries up for a huge fall. I'd love that, but the voting would take over an hour and a half to do :lol: There's no way that it could be properly implemented and keep the contest to three hours long :(
April 10, 201114 yr I'd love that, but the voting would take over an hour and a half to do :lol: There's no way that it could be properly implemented and keep the contest to three hours long :( True :(, but maybe they should make it a four hour show, and just start it an hour earlier? I guess many casual viewers would moan then though -_- .
April 10, 201114 yr I'd really prefer they went back to announcing ALL the points individually either. It all goes so fast otherwise :(
April 11, 201114 yr Agreed. And lumping all the qualifying countries together is just going to make them feel more like they don't matter. The fixed voting order thing sounds good , but if Russia is third behind the UK and France, and Ukraine hasn't voted yet two turns from the end you know what's going to happen.
April 11, 201114 yr I'd agree that option 1 seems like the better option. There are already enough countries teetering on the brink of quitting without giving them extra reason to want to leave. :(
April 11, 201114 yr I prefer only 8, 10 & 12 being announced. I'd like option 1. Can't see them lumping DNQ together, further reason for countries like Andorra to stay away. Wouldn't mind if non-qualifiers voted first, followed by qualifiers in final running order though. Edited April 11, 201114 yr by Jaack Sykes
April 11, 201114 yr How about ditching the non qualifying countries' votes altogether? I've always disliked the fact all 40+ countries can vote in the final; seems pretty illogical.
April 12, 201114 yr How about ditching the non qualifying countries' votes altogether? I've always disliked the fact all 40+ countries can vote in the final; seems pretty illogical. It seems as if you're the only one judging by the comments above, although I'm somewhere in the middle of the two opinions. I've just found this from the AKOE blog which suggests that option 2 won't be happening; With several Heads of Delegations also in attendance, it's a great chance to hear how preparations are going for Dusseldorf. The one thing that I found most interesting was the new way that the voting in the final will be presented. The shaper people will have realised that there was no draw done for the voting order for the final in May. It now appears that the EBU are looking at the option of deciding the voting order, in order to provide the most exciting voting sequence in the final. If I have my story correct then the juries will vote straight after the Friday night show, rather than waiting until Saturday afternoon, as in previous years. The EBU will then judge how the public in hat country is likely to vote, base on the jury scores an previous voting trends and decide which running order for the voting, will provide the most exciting voting. I have to say that I think this is an excellent idea, as the voting, which was once one of the most exciting parts of the show as become less exciting as the contest expended. It also means that every country (including those eliminated in the semi-finals) will get to present their votes individually. Just a thought, but even if they don't have enough time to announce them individually...why not present the 1-7 on screen instantly, and leave them on screen whilst the vote announcer is doing their 'hello, great show' routine, and then move onto the 8, 10 and 12 after thirty seconds or so, at least it would give time for everyone to digest the first set of numbers before hearing the bigger votes. As it is, and has been for the last few years, they appear on the screen for a split second and I can't keep up at all personally.
April 12, 201114 yr How about ditching the non qualifying countries' votes altogether? I've always disliked the fact all 40+ countries can vote in the final; seems pretty illogical. I think that seems really unfair though. Andorra haven't qualified from a few attempts, why would they come back and pay to enter if not only they don't make the final, but they don't get a say in who wins? Just an example, and I hate the idea.
Create an account or sign in to comment