Posted October 23, 200618 yr ESC Today The fans have spoken, Allen Ivanic's on line petition seems to have done it ! "It’s no use swimming against the current", admitted Mr Edgar Böhm, ORF’s responsible executive for Eurovision to local newspaper Kleinen Zeitung. Austrian website 'Eurovision Austria' broke the news on Friday evening, Austria is set to return to the Eurovision Song Contest next year. ORF, the National Austrian Broadcasting Corporation, has confirmed that Austria is plannning to return to Eurovision Song Contest in Helsinki. If they return, they would be back in the semifinal line up in Helsinki on 10th May 2007. "It’s no use swimming against the current", admitted Mr Edgar Böhm, ORF’s responsible executive for Eurovision to local newspaper Kleinen Zeitung. The song and the artists will be internally selected by ORF and they will be revealed in January 2007. The big question still remains: what will happen when too many countries join Eurovision Song Contest? And how many are 'too many'? esctoday.com opened up the debate about the 40 country rule on October 14th with our 'Eurovision Song Contest full?' article. The article was meant to spark an informative discussion about what fans think should happen. So far, there are more than 150 reactions. Click here to have your say. One of the main reasons that a cap was placed on the number of participating countries was to appease broadcasters who are concerned about the length of both the semifinal and the final. Broadcasters subscribe to the Eurovision Song Contest, but they also have their own shows, schedules and charters which must be adhered to. Some broadcasters were finding it increasingly difficult to incorporate the Eurovision Song Contest in it's previous format. This was a major reason for the number of finalists being limited to 24. The concept of having two semi-finals is also unpopular amongst certain broadcasters, who would then have scheduling problems in broadcasting 3 'long' shows in one week. Thus if more than 40 countries enter and the limit is, as is almost certain for 2007 at least, kept at 40, who do you think should be left out? Answers on a reaction below, please.
October 23, 200618 yr Has nobody thought of zoned semi-finals? - one for east, one for west, being shown in their respective territories. The best 8 or so go through to the proper semi final, making it so that broadcasting is not such a problem as both semi heats wouldn't be too long.
October 23, 200618 yr Author Has nobody thought of zoned semi-finals? - one for east, one for west, being shown in their respective territories. The best 8 or so go through to the proper semi final, making it so that broadcasting is not such a problem as both semi heats wouldn't be too long. I think Ricky mentioned something along those lines sometime in May actually. :lol: It would be a very good idea. Or just zone the Baltics/Balkans anyway. The "founding members" of the Eurovision should be allowed in at all costs imo.
October 23, 200618 yr I think any kind of extra semi finals / pools / heats are a terrible idea. It would kill the contest stone dead! It would also be extremely pointless for the sake of accommidating 4 or 5 extra countries :wacko: There's nothing wrong with having a limit and having a few small countries missing out (as the larger ones would be given preference). If they were that eager to pariticipate they would have taken part long before now! I'm sure a chance will come sooner or later for the few countries missing out to slot in.
October 23, 200618 yr I think any kind of extra semi finals / pools / heats are a terrible idea. It would kill the contest stone dead! It would also be extremely pointless for the sake of accommidating 4 or 5 extra countries :wacko: There's nothing wrong with having a limit and having a few small countries missing out (as the larger ones would be given preference). If they were that eager to pariticipate they would have taken part long before now! I'm sure a chance will come sooner or later for the few countries missing out to slot in. How would an extra semi final kill the contest? Many countries have been unable to take part until now due to financial constraints (i.e. Hungary, Ukraine) - should we alienate them, even though they wanted to take part? And why should larger countries be given preference? That completely goes against the principle of the Eurovision Song Contest - to unite Europe through song. You hardly unite Europe by ignoring the smaller countries, and what exactly do larger countries have to offer? Italy pulled out, are we saying should they retturn they should be given preference over a smaller but more illustrious country, such as Luxembourg? Speaking of Luxembourg, should we ignore them, even though they used to take part but had to pull out due to the costs it inflicted upon the national broadcaster?
October 23, 200618 yr Author The semi final is killing the contest. -_- We were going perfectly alright up to and including the 2003 contest. The Big Four and top 12 or whatever it was going through and eight countries coming in and out. That was a good idea, having a semi final takes the p*** and having to go through 40 countries voting is a drag even for me. -_- 2006 was the worst contest I've seen from 1996. -_- The voting was dire, only announcing the top three is the daftest thing they've ever come up with - even worse than having all the semi finalists voting. -_-
October 23, 200618 yr How would an extra semi final kill the contest? Many countries have been unable to take part until now due to financial constraints (i.e. Hungary, Ukraine) - should we alienate them, even though they wanted to take part? And why should larger countries be given preference? That completely goes against the principle of the Eurovision Song Contest - to unite Europe through song. You hardly unite Europe by ignoring the smaller countries, and what exactly do larger countries have to offer? Italy pulled out, are we saying should they retturn they should be given preference over a smaller but more illustrious country, such as Luxembourg? Speaking of Luxembourg, should we ignore them, even though they used to take part but had to pull out due to the costs it inflicted upon the national broadcaster? Okay, maybe I chose my words wrongly, but the Eurovision has always been a special occasion; one night of fun. Even with the semi-final it takes away some of the magic, but it became necessary as there are now so many countries wanting the 24 slots. However, I really don't see the point of turning the one night into a whole week event for the sake of an extra 5 or so countries taking part, and lets face it, that is all that's left in the entire continent. I doubt that every country will want to take part every year, so sooner or later an opportunity will arise for these countries. Your point is valid, and I appreciate that bigger countries probably shouldn't take precedence over smaller, newer countries. I was merely commenting on what the rules are at the moment. This could be resolved by having a similar heat to the 1996 contest involving the 10 or so bottom / new countries submitting their tapes and being narrowed down to 5. However there is simply not enough justification for a completely new round or semi-final, and it is best simply for a few countries each year (not necessarily the smaller ones) to be left out.
November 8, 200618 yr and Moldova is pullung out next year :lol: I will not miss that country. Two awful songs!
Create an account or sign in to comment