Eurovision 2016

More here from Christer and Martin at SVT : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhrvgWLdNaU

It appears the 1-8 and 10 points will be displayed automatically during the in-vision spokesperson voting, with only the 12 points announced by the spokesperson. This will speed up voting... But may also cause a car crash in satellite terms (the co-ordination is often not that quick...) as they will need to line-up each country more quickly, unless they allocate more transponder space to the voting.

Would have preferred the last three 8, 10 and 12 points to be revealed by the spokespersons primarily to give the organisers time to breathe, as for the combined televote sure will turn the event into a cliffhanger. It certainly does work. I'm glad the televotes will still be accounted for on a National Basis even if announced in combined form. Will be fun.

It'll ruin the in play betting markets though as massive swings in the final seconds could lead to chaos.

I'm not too sure - spending a good hour bouncing around Europe listening to results from juries, only to find the whole scoreboard could completely change in the closing minutes of the show.

I'd like to think they won't just go "Here's the public votes added" and then you have the winner - but create a bit more drama.

http://escinsight.com/2016/02/18/explaining-the-impact-of-eurovisions-new-voting-system/ makes a very good point.

By announcing the jury votes (which are awarded on Friday night during the jury dress rehearsal) by spokesperson, they can significantly reduce the duration of the show potentially. The jury votes can be announced as soon as the televoting has closed, as there will be no need to ratify televotes before spokesperson in-vision voting takes place (as they ere reporting results known since Friday evening).

This gives the show producers the duration of the bounce around 43 countries before they need a final televote number, rather than having to wait for televoting to be ratified before starting the spokesperson sequence. As a result it also, potentially, reduces the need for post-voting filler content (and also reduces the show budget as a result)...

Once they get into the televote sequence I am guessing it will be announced lowest to highest with 26 separate results, unless they lump all the zero points (from televoters) or lowest scores (less than 5? less than 10?) as a 'here are how the less popular results turned out'? Cutaways of poor scoring songs in the green room could be pretty cruel... At the bottom of the televote table you are announcing failure, not success (unlike the current set-up)

With 26 results to announce, potentially, there is quite a lot of time to take. Be interesting to see if they announce the 0 countries points at the start or leave them off - which could be horribly cliff-hangy (have we got 0 or 100s?)

For those who don't watch Melodifestivalen - this is a guide to how it will possibly look : https://youtu.be/ZHWQfyGqovo

(But the difference is there is only a single televote result so it is awarded pro-rata based on percentages, ignore that and think of it as totals of other countries 1-7,8,10,12 and it makes some sense)

I must be the only person here who wants each vote announced seperately. The only difference to how it used to be would be to lose the announcers repeating each vote in English and French, and to have the televoting votes separate, as it's going to be now, but also announced on a country by country basis. That would mean each country's spokesperson announcing two sets of results.

Some might say the whole process is slow enough already, but there are plenty of ways to speed up the whole process if they want to, but my feeling after last year's marathon is that they don't want to speed it up.

No - you're not alone. I think the contest will lose a huge amount of appeal when the audience will no longer know which country's public have voted for which song unless they go to a website after transmission.

To be honest, I don't care how the whole of Europe phone voted in total, I want to see if Sweden, Norway and Denmark voted for each other...

You could do a 43 country bounce and then pre-reveal the jury votes as you introduce the spokesperson, and then animate on the phone votes. You'd still benefit from arguably the bigger change - which is the total split of phone and jury voting and the consequent doubling of the number of votes each country has (we can now award a total of 116 points rather than 58 ) - which avoids the situation the UK had with Poland in 2014 (where it got the highest number of phone votes in the UK, but no actual votes from our combined televote+jury because the Jury hated it and nullified the public vote).

There are two big changes here - one is the voting method, the other is presentation.

However I do think there is an underlying aim to reduce the running time of the contest. It has run over quite significantly recently, and in some countries now finishes very late at night.

The voting sequence often rates higher in the uk than the actual singing of songs. I don't know whether this is the case anywhere else in Eurovisionland. I sorry to see the loss of 8, 10 and 12 being announced country by country. The calling in of countries IS Eurovision for me, and I think for most viewers in the uk.

WTF are they thinking - the joy of the voting is seeing how the people of each country vote not the faceless music execs. The main reasons the outcome is so clear so early now is that there are so many countries voting and also the juries are out of touch with the public, meaning the dynamic voting order just doesn't work.

It still won't stop countries voting for their neighbours though will it?

Unless the UK has an act that we actually like!

So if this happened last year, guess who would have been last ..................






..... yup UK

The 2015 results with the 2016 system! pic.twitter.com/Sgmq2NHFlc

— Timcade | 🇫🇮🇸🇪🇦🇹 (@CalmAfterTheTim) February 18, 2016

(No reason to doubt the source's maths)]

I dunno, though, because surely that would mean people would be voting while they were already announcing the jury votes, which would make it seem pretty easy to influence the vote. If you saw a song was miles ahead before you'd even voted, would you even bother to phone? Also as well, I know they base the jury votes on the dress rehearsal but surely they don't want to make it that obvious? Rather spoiling the magic of the event a bit.