Eurovision 2011 - 10/12/14 May 2011

Do I really want to know who the winners of previous years are? If I wanted to know, I could easily find it on Wikipedia. He's entitled to post whatever he wants, but his interaction is sometimes (saying lightly) one-sided, sometimes questions put to him just gets ignored like that post never existed.

Yes, the information is here for them to read. Not discuss. Because there is nothing in your posts worthy of discussion, and even if there was, you wouldn't participate. Talking with people is interaction. Talking at them is self-indulgent.

Get a blog.

Or just look back to page 49 where he posted the same info two weeks ago.

You are welcome to give feedback on the results of my analysis.

Aren't you all surprised to see that 24 countries have yet to achieve their first ever win, and that a further 9 countries last won in 1990 or earlier?

There are people who moan that the UK seems to have no hope of winning ever again, therefore the BBC should pull out for good. Why should we win in the foreseeable future, when:
a) we've already won it 5 times
b) 24 countries have yet to get their first win (including Portugal who first entered in 1964)
c) a further 9 countries last won in 1990 or earlier
... ?

Indeed, why should ANY country in the 16-year run 1996 to 2011 inclusive (i.e. 1996 Ireland, United Kingdom, Israel, Sweden, Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Turkey, Ukraine, Greece, Finland, Serbia, Russia, Norway, Germany, Azerbaijan) win in the foreseeable future?

Don't you think that the 24 countries that have yet to get their first ever win (Portugal, Malta, Morocco, Cyprus, Iceland, Slovenia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Romania, Slovakia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, FYR Macedonia, Belarus, Andorra, Albania, Moldova, Bulgaria, Armenia, Georgia, Montenegro, Czech Republic, San Marino) and the 9 who haven't won since 1990 or earlier (Austria, Spain, Monaco, Netherlands, France, Luxembourg, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy) deserve to win first?

Mark my words, the UK's turn to win will come again one day, maybe another 15 to 20 years time. Don't be alarmed at that, Denmark had a 37 year gap between wins 1963 to 2000.

Following Azerbaijan's win in the 2011 ESC final, I immediately acknowledged Azerbaijan was the latest addition to the list of a different country winning each year 1996 to 2011 inclusive. Yes, I posted that list around 11:30pm, but for last night I posted it again for ease of reading in conjunction with the other reports (Years Taken To First Win Eurovision Song Contest, Still Waiting For A First Win, When Will They Win Again?, Gaps Between Wins).

It's a competition. Some countries sometimes produce good songs while others consistently don't. The country that deserves to win is the country with the best song, whether that country has won once or 10 times. If you start penalising countries for 'winning too often' it's no longer a contest. Indeed, the not-so-good countries would rest on their laurels and continue churning out dross because there's no incentive to try harder. The onus is therefore on Croatia, Romania, Slovakia, et al to step up to the plate and produce something that Europe considers worthy of winning the contest. Otherwise, tough luck I'm afraid.

True, but it would be good to see Portugal or Malta win for once. Portugal's best ever placing was 6th in 1996. I seriously suggest they they enter a catchy song that's entirely in English next year.


Of course you can't penalise a country for winning too often. In the early years, France won in 1958, 1960, 1962, 1969 (shared) and 1977. Netherlands won in 1957, 1959, 1969 (shared) and 1975. One could have argued they won too often back then, but it's interesting how Netherlands haven't won again since 1975, and France haven't won again since 1977.

Ireland won four times in five years during the 1990s (1992, 1993, 1994 and 1996), so that meant RTE had to host the Contest four times in five years! Well done them, you couldn't penalise Ireland for winning so often, though I think they should have been excused hosting it so many times (e.g. following their 1994 win, I think 1994 runners-up Poland should have hosted it in 1995). Rumours had it that Ireland itself got fed up with winning due to the cost of hosting the Contest the following year. Their 1994 ballad "Rock 'n' roll kids", which didn't use the orchestra was rumoured to be a "subtle attempt not to win", yet it won with 226 points! Again I must stress both are only rumours, not gospel truth. Interestingly though in 1995 they had the rather boring ballad "Dreamin'" sung by Eddie Friel which finished 14th with 44 points; I've often wondered if that was an attempt to finish last with nul points to avoid hosting it in 1996!

You know a lot about Eurovision Tumble Tower.

Returning to your comment about when we should next win, there isn't a time frame for when people win. If the UK had a good song, that lots of people across Europe liked, and the jury liked it, then we would logically be able to win. It's nothing to do with when we should win again, like the 20 year timescale you put forward. We'll win when we have a song that's more popular than all the rest.

And I highly doubt that Morocco could enter again. Since it's not actually in Europe, which I would've thought should be the main criteria for entering. Although, Israel do still enter it...

^ The main criteria for entering is having a member broadcaster of the EBU which Morocco and several other North African broadcasters are part of.

No, because I understand basic maths.

Not that old argument.

You don't necessarily need to be in Europe to be in a full member of the EBU and the Eurovision Song Contest has always been there for full EBU members.

You were right. 1080/50i, and 50Hz temporal res for the live bits (not like last year)
(& 0.4-0.6 Mbps Dolby Digital 5.1 - maybe if they had used 3 discs they could have used lossless without affecting the picture too much).

My Blu-Ray arrived this morning, previewed some of SF1 and to say the least am impressed.

Hope the rest is as good, have no reason to think it won't be.