Eurovision 2008

[Dirk Gently]

Well, the 4 best songs went through. But things still might not go the way we think. The public are funny creatures.

[duncan]

Andy Abraham was by far the best singer on the night, but I conceed that his song was not a Eurovision kind of song. For me it's between The Revelations and Michelle Gayle. I'll stick my neck out and say Michelle Gayle will win it, but this is Eurovison so what do I know.

[Si Hunt]

We agree with Tim, stupid old Terry should not have given the public a chance to pick a dud. Mind you, this is the man that last year announced the wrong act as winner by mistake.

Si.

[Dirk Gently]

Andy Abraham & Michelle Gayle are through to the sing off, basically the known people.

Michelle Gayle had better win!

[Dirk Gently]

Oh FFS!

[Stephen Morgan]

Oh FFS!

NO!! NO WAY!! No way have we picked a winner with Andy. I fear the Irish are not the only ones who have picked a turkey this year.

[duncan]

What is so wrong with Andy?

He has a great voice. We are never going to win the contest no matter who we send so why not send out a great singer and show them that we are not a nation of Gemini's and Scooch's?

[Si Hunt]

Oh for F*ks sake. This is an absolute swizz. We are GUTTED.

What's the POINT of having a judges-based system if you're going to allow the presenter to let one of the losers through and then the British public to vote for him because they know him from a show which gets 20m viewers??

Eurovision is about big songs, spectacle, costumes, props and performance. And what have we got?

Some baldy twat of a dustman singing a little ditty he's just written.

Disaster.

Si.

[Dirk Gently]

What is so wrong with Andy?

Well in my opinion he's got the worst song of the 4. Revelation & Michelle Gayle were better Eurovision songs.

[duncan]

Yes, they were indeed. I posted that I thought MG should win it. But we have picked a great singer for once and when you look at past UK entries, that is something we havent done.

[Simon R]

He has a great voice. We are never going to win the contest no matter who we send so why not send out a great singer and show them that we are not a nation of Gemini's and Scooch's?

Andy is a strong singer and a nice guy but I don't like his voice or him. I find him smug and he's just one of those people that rubs me up the wrong way. The problem is the song. It's average at best. It's just about memorable after three or four listens but that's not going to help with the millions of viewers who will hear/see it once and once only at the contest. He can sing but he's no stage presence and no real performance apart from the vocal so nothing that will stand out.

It's a crap song. Like a Jackson 5 bside from or something.

Michelle wasn't that strong vocally and perhaps the song was slightly too knowingly camp and self aware but I thought it was memorable, well structured and much more likely to do well than Andy.

[duncan]

I couldn't sing the chorus of the last 5 winners of Eurovision. So a song doesn't have to be memorable.

I agree that MG's was catchy but the chorus was out of tune and that could have sounded awful on the big stage of Eurovision. And's wasn't so catchy but he sung it well. I do agree that his song may not be a winner, but MG may never have won it either, I suppose we will never know now, but Europe doesn't like the UK anymore.

[Dirk Gently]

Yes, they were indeed. I posted that I thought MG should win it. But we have picked a great singer for once and when you look at past UK entries, that is something we havent done.

OK, if I accept that he is a good singer that doesn't make it a good song & to be honest that's what should have been chosen. It's a song for Europe not singer.

[duncan]

How many of the past half dozen winners have been good? Good doesn't count in Eurovison imho.

I don't necessarily agree with Andy winning A Song for Europe, as previously stated, I wanted Michelle Gayle to win. I just don't think that it's a disaster.

[Stephen Morgan]

The reasoning that there is nothing wrong with Andy is debatable. He may be a great singer with a good, strong voice, but his is not a Eurovision song. I stand by what I said in my previous posts, he was the best of the worst, and we have Wogan to blame for his "wild card" the song is a dud, and certainly not a Eurovision winner. So who's voted for him? The Gran's who voted for him on X Factor, or the general music loving public?

[duncan]

Eurovision fans I suspect. The same ones that voted Scooch and Gemini through. The reasoning that there is nothing wrong with Andy is quite rightly debatable, and I stand by my previous post that this is not as big a disaster as some think.

[Milky Tears]

The Bin Man's dodgy ditty has raped my Sydney Youngblood lovin' childhood!

[Si Hunt]

Eurovision fans I suspect. The same ones that voted Scooch and Gemini through.

Wrong. Why would you think this? The general public voted him through, because they saw "that nice Andy we know off X-Factor" compared with Michelle Gayle who they've never heard of. No-one evidently bothered to think "what song is more likely to win Eurovision for us?".

Andy had a Number 1 album last year off the back of the 12m viewers that watched "X-Factor" that year. All those Mums are going to have been playing the album and voted for harmless, dull old Andy because of it. Christ, when will we stop placing our Eurovision chances in the hands of stupid old Joe Public?

Si.

[duncan]

I say that mainly because A Song for Europe doesn't normally do well in the ratings. Of course there would have been a cross section of the general public voting, but my opinion is that A song for Europe is for Eurovision fans. You seem quite definate that I am wrong, but I have only ever given my opinion in my posts. Whose to say my opinion is wrong and your is right?

Michelle Gayle is a well known name. How can you say that she has never been heard of?

Up until Gemini a few years back, we had been doing fairly well with the public vote and I personally don't see any reason for change. Andy does not have a winning song, but with the way the voting goes in Eurovision, will we ever have a winning song again?

[Si Hunt]

You seem quite definate that I am wrong, but I have only ever given my opinion in my posts. Whose to say my opinion is wrong and your is right?

Yes sorry about that, my "Wrong!" did sound a bit aggressive. It was quite late and alcohol I'd taken to numb the pain of us selecting Andy had begun to accumilate by that point. I'd not have put that if I was thinking clearly! That said...

I say that mainly because A Song for Europe doesn't normally do well in the ratings.

Are you sure? The actual contest always gets extremely good ratings.

Michelle Gayle is a well known name. How can you say that she has never been heard of?

She was a well known name 15 years ago. Since then she's only really done "Reborn", a flop reality show that didn't get a second series. Especially compared to Andy, who built up a sickening Supermarket following during last years highly-watched "X-Factor" finals and subsequent number 1 album. What struck me is that there must be a million Mothers out there who have been repeat playing his turgid old album since last March. Now I'm sure it filled a gap in the market, and did it well, but the sort of audience that have his album isn't the sort that will be voting for him at Eurovision... yet those same people will have put him through last night, without a thought for what it's actually for. BOTH Judges were emphantic that Michelle should have won for goodness sake, and I have to say that unlike these sort of things usually, both made a lot of sense and seemed to have a good idea of what would be most likely to do well. Even the voice coach acknowledged that Andy's performance was better but that wasn't solely what was needed for our entry this year...

Andy does not have a winning song, but with the way the voting goes in Eurovision, will we ever have a winning song again?

You keep using this as a defence of Andy, but it seems like a pretty dead-end argument to me. If you're going to keep saying "We never win anyway so why not Andy" we might as well not enter anyone at all. Okay we won't win, but you have to remain hopeful and pick the act that at least has the best chance of getting us back into the Top 10 (we're at rock bottom, let's not run before we can walk). At the end of the day Eurovision seems to be about stage presence, performance, costumes, props and spectacle. Andy has none of those, and all I can see right now is his little 'soul man' act being literally laughed off the stage.

Also I repeat my objection at the 'rigging' of the vote through the awful 'wild card' cheat. What's the point of having judges if someone they have decided to elliminate is allowed BACK IN to win at public vote?! It's absurd!

Si.

[duncan]

OK. Fair enough. But I am in no way defending Andy. All I have maintained is that it's not the end of the world. I would have preferred Michelle Gayle or even The Revelations to win, but I had concerns about their vocal performances and how that would come across on the big stage of Eurovision. Remember Gemini? However, they didn't win. Andy did. His song is a decent enough song that would probably be a top 20 hit, but it isn't a Eurovision song. However, he sings it very well and a good voice might, just might carry him into the top 10 of Eurovision this year. Then again, it may not. We will have to wait to find out. All I'm saying is that, for me, it's not a crisis that he won and my other two preferences didn't.

Anyway, no need to apologise, you were only giving your opinion as was I.

As for the ratings, I could very well be wrong, but the Song Contest does indeed perform very well each year, but A Song for Europe doesn't. I'm sure the overnights will tell.

[Simon R]

How many of the past half dozen winners have been good? Good doesn't count in Eurovison imho

There's a list of winners here if anyone wants a look...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurovis...inners#Winners

I didn't like last years winner by the Deep Roy look alike at all and I wasn't mad on Lordi's heavy metal one in 2006 with the monster masks but 2004's "Wild Dances" and 2005's "My Number One" were both genuinely decent pop songs as was 1999s and 2003s.

Whatever people thought of our "Teenage Life", "Touch My Fire" and "Flying the Flag" at least they were lively performances on the night even if they flopped like old tits at the voting. Andy's performance is just dull, dull, dull. Maybe they can do something with it in the rehearsals to give it some life but it's such a boring song there's very little to save it. He hasn't even got sex appeal on his side. Maybe getting in some dancers like Barrowman suggested would help but it's not even a dancey song.

[Si Hunt]

Leaving aside how good or not Andy will be, should questions be asked about just how the songs are being picked? It is a SONG contest after all. He seems to have made the 'finals' of the selection process (and bear in mind some people didn't) with a song he wrote - the man's only previous industry experience has been as runner-up in a performance based talent contest. He hasn't had any previous songwriting experience at all, as far as I can see. How, and why, did he end up writing this years entry? Not being snidey, but it can't possibly be because it's any good - I'm sure songwriting is a great hobby for him, but I heard the song four times last night and I still can't remember how it goes.

Si.

[duncan]

I'll give you that. I can still sing the chorus to Michelle Gayle's song but struggle to sing any of Andy's song. That's why I wanted her to win last night.

[Simon R]

Shockingly as we've mentioned earlier in the thread Andy's song is co-written with the men who co-wrote various Spice Girls hits amongst other pop gems...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_(production_team)

Why couldn't they knock out something as good for this?

I'll stop going on about it soon but I struggle even to remember what Andy's song is called.