and Dance!
Oh good grief, it comes to something when the brouhaha over John Sergeant and Strictly Come Dancing is being discussed on the Jeremy Vine Show on Radio 2. What next, a Panorama expose into the scandal of Sargegate?
Poor old JS hasn’t done anything wrong apart from saying yes to appearing on what is a popular light entertainment show. And let’s just stress the words “light” and “entertainment” there, just for the record. I’m not watching BE THE BEST AT DANCING ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD EVER!!!!!, I’m watching Strictly Come Dancing and loving tuning in to see John Sergeant being entertaining (ooh, there’s that pesky E word again). I also love seeing the other dancers strutting their stuff, it’s what the show is all about.
Surely Strictly is about having a go and stepping up to the plate? The show has been credited with getting more people to take up ballroom dancing, and watching somebody with two left feet like Sergeant gives even a confirmed non-dancer like me hope. But it seems that some just want to let a personality like John take part only as long as it suits them… How elitist.
Yes, I’m looking at you, Arlene Phillips. Might I suggest a healthy case of shutting up might be in order here? The more you bleat and cackle on about this, the more the voting public will just dig their heals in and keep phoning for John. If there’s one thing the British public loves, it’s an underdog. And amusingly, according to the Telegraph, a large proportion of those voting for John Sergeant and his dance partner Kristina Rihanoff have been doing so to annoy the judges.
“I personally would like to see him off the show. I would be desolate if he won.”
Arlene Phillips told Today, going on to say:
“The criteria that the four judges were hired on, six series ago, was to find the best possible dancer to become Strictly Come Dancing champion. If we’re saying that it’s about personality, why don’t the girls just throw off their clothes and the boys do a comedy routine?”
Which, with all due respect to Phillips, is nonsensical rubbish. I don’t care on what criteria the judges were hired. This situation highlights just how important a part the public vote plays in the outcome of the show - it’s one part talent show, one part popularity and personality contest. When it comes down to it, the judges are there too provide just as much entertainment within the format as the dancers, and if any of them can’t cope with that, then quit.
I know this might make me unpopular with some readers of TV Today, but that’s the way I see it. If somebody taking part and trying when they don’t have the best of ability isn’t a positive thing for those members of the audience that might want to have a go themselves, then frankly, I give up.
And remember Gabby Logan? She got a bit too competitive and desperate to win and the public spoke. And that’s what Strictly is about - so let’s remember that above all, this is supposed to be fun. I’m sure John Sergeant is having plenty of it!
Totally agree with Mark Wright! It is a great shame that the public cannot vote the judges off! To bad mouth Mr Sergeant one week and then be nice to him the next is not the way to placate the British Public. The judges rudeness to Mr Sergeant and his partner have denigrated the programme far more than any of Mr Sergeants performances have. The judges could learn a lot from Mr Sergeant about dignity and integrity,
How do John and his dance partner feel about all this criticism ? If I were him I would walk away. The judges have really not been able to comprehend the nature of this entertainment, and the BBC must enlighten them or replace them.
I disagree. Yes, the show is about entertainment. But is is also about a dancing competition and if you throw away the underlying purpose of the show, namely to pick the best ballroom dancer you no longer have Strictly Come Dancing as we know it. The show title tells us that. John is his own spin doctor. You cannot undermine the underlying reason for the show, a dance competition.
the judges should remember who are paying their wages before they sprout about the public for without us they would have no job on tv earning vast amounts of our tv payingmoney
Remember guys, it's only a TV show.
The judges in this entertainment show are completely despicable. They are constantly telling the paying public that there role is to judge the dancing, but in fact they try to sway the public by ceaselessly humiliating and putting down certain celebrities.
The voting public obviously disagree the with them so the judges should shut up and stop victimising the more entertaining performers.
In particular, Arlene Phillips should desist from her endless dripping poison campaign of John Sergeant. She should resign or be sacked.
This show comes from the original Come Dancing, in which regular people (now banished to daft quiz shows on the telly most often than not) competed to find the best dancer.
The celeb element is for the modern day. It is a dancing competition at heart.
HOWEVER
...this muddies the water for the people most audiences take for granted - the professional dancers. The life of a pro dancer can be confined to competitions within their industry, and cruise ships. This is a big deal for the pros. Winning this competition has caché for them. So for some of the professionals - like James Jordan who had a word at the end of last Sunday about it being a "dancing competition" - it's highly important that technique, ability, and winning, count.
I see the point also of why other celebs may wonder the point of actually mastering what they get scored highly for when, like John, you can be devoid of much ability and still succeed.
I have a problem with this in society at large, when people aren't good at things (and yet perfectly capable in other arenas) being led to think it's okay to be rubbish and that in fact hard work and no talent will get you rewards!!! What happened to hard work and talent combined?
Having said all of this, the sum total of the parts of the show is that it is Saturday evening entertainment. As much as the judges and pro dancers want to justify their position on the show by telling themselves it's some kind of professional dancing accolade, it is not. It's like in a restaurant, they say the best waiters are the kind you don't even notice. When the couples are on the floor, the eyes should be on the celeb. And "celebrity" means froth, fun, gossip.... if they wanted to compete as dancers, they would have taken up classes and compete within the dancing industry. This is glitz and glamour and sparkle, and however much it may grate, if Sergeant sparkles... then he's got every right to stay in there.
As "Beautiful People" said, good things come to those who grate.
(I find John strangely loveable, but he is obviously rubbing some people up the wrong way!)
Those people who vote for John Sargeant are the same folk that believe 'comedy' socks & ties are the height of wit.
JS is, viewers seem to have fogotten, a serious political commentator and it's doubtful he could ever have anticipated such success on prime time, Saturday evening TV. Any more obsession with his dancing (in)ability and it would have become difficult to take him seriously as a news man again. Wise man to quit now