Credits
Written by
Published
Source(s)
News
© EBU
Poland won
Voting analysis of the Eurovision Dance Contest 2008
Quick stats
- Poland has won the competition for the first time. The country has never won the Eurovision Song Contest and Junior Eurovision Song Contest before either.
- Poland has easily beaten Finland's winning margin: Finland was 11 points ahead of Ukraine in 2007 while Poland got 33 points more than Russia this year. Poland has also achieved the highest total score in the competition (154).
- In 2007, only two countries got more than 100 points - this year, no less than six countries did so. However, it has to be considered that because of the jury vote, more votes were given in total.
- Poland has achieved 9.06 points per country regarding the jury vote as the votes of four countries. From the televoters alone, Poland has scored impressive 10.31 points per country (Finland got an average of 8.80 last year).
- Poland has got 12 points from five of the 13 other countries. Russia scored 12 points three times, which means more than half of the "douze" went to the top two countries.
Jury vs. televoting
The jury and the televoting did hardly agree. Denmark would have won the competition according to the jury vote, while Poland would have only finished sixth. Portugal got no points from the jury but got points from twelve out of the 13 other countries.
This was the jury vote:
- Denmark : 48 points (4x12)
- Greece: 40 points (4x10)
- Lithuania: 32 points (4x8)
- Azerbaijan: 28 points (4x7)
- Russia: 24 points (4x6)
- Poland: 20 points (4x5)
- Ukraine: 16 points (4x4)
- Finland: 12 points (4x3)
- United Kingdom: 8 points (4x2)
- Sweden: 4 points (4x1)
- Portugal
Netherlands
Ireland
Austria
This would have been the result based on televotes only:
- Poland - 134
- Ukraine - 103
- Russia - 97
- Azerbaijan - 78
- Lithuania - 78
- Portugal - 61
- Denmark - 54
- Ireland - 40
- United Kingdom - 39
- Sweden - 34
- Finland - 32
- Greece - 32
- Austria - 29
- Netherlands - 1
East vs. West
This year, it was obviously more the year of the Eastern countries. However, regarding the fact that the top three countries got high marks from all over Europe, diaspora voting seems not to have infected the results very much. Worth noting: the bottom seven couples of the jury were all from Western Europe. It has also been mentioned that Western Europe had less luck with the running order: six of the seven countries that performed in the first half are in Western Europe.
Running order
Again, the countries late in the running order did much better than those early in the line-up. The top four countries all performed in the second half while the bottom five were all performed in the first half. The highest placed country from the first half of the show was Azerbaijan at #5.
Related polls
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Best act not to qualify from the semi finals
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Most traditional Europop song
- First quarter final in Bulgaria: your favourite?
- Jury vote, do you agree?
- Jury vote only in the final or in the semis as well?
- What mixture of televote and jury vote do you think is the best?
Go directly to the reactions
Recent news about Other
Tonight: Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2008 84
esctoday.com award nominations: last days to vote 4
esctoday.com awards 2008: Your nominations (8) 108
esctoday.com awards 2008: Your nominations (7) 39
esctoday.com awards 2008: Your nominations (6) 40
Reactions
When reacting to a news item, please stick to the topic. Inappropriate messages (swearing, racism, hate, etc.), messages in other languages than English and spam (which includes URL advertising) will be deleted and you risk your account being removed. Reacting on newsitems is only possible when logged in as a member. Still don't have member account?
Click here to react Click here to become a member (free!)
Neo
Just because other countries do it doesn't make it ok for Greece and Cyprus to do it, by that argument you can say because some people think its ok to be homophobic its ok for you to be.
guys please stop with the 12 points exhange between cyprus-greece...get over it!!how many countries exhange points??
romania-moldova?
belarus-russia?
azerbaijan-turkey?
serbia-hungary and bla bla bla?
I'm watching EDC 2008 on BBC iPlayer now and I'm sorry NO WAY did the UK deserve 9th! Top 3 would have been the only place that they should have got! NINTH?
By raising the standards for the last few years generally pitiful standard of songs there is a better chance of the winner being spread around the continent - Remember it wasn't too long ago that Ireland won 4 years out of 5! The voting in the semi's could stay the way it is now by the way and the selection of the semi's can also stay the way it is now - we'd get a balanced Final, voted by the songs all countries choosee during the semi's and those who don't make it to the final will try harder the next year with a higher standard of song.
First of all: WHAT STANDARDS???? 80% of this year's songs was to be called pitiful (including Ireland).
And a balance? Are you kidding? There will never be a balance as long the current voting system stays.
And for the 4/5 Ireland... that's about 10 years ago (last win in 1996)... how many countries were in competition back then? And how many Eastern/Balkan/Soviet?
Would Ukraine 2007 and Latvia 2008 qualify as a gimmick? So what you say isn't entirely correct is it?
No but Ireland 2008 was definitely a gimmick - and really shouldn't have been allowed as funny as it was on first listening.
[1]The only result you'll get by allowing only the final-countries to vote is that the West will not even get there. Almost sounds like an insurance for the East to organize a ESC at least every 2 years. Perhaps that's not how you see it or meant it, but it almost feels like it. No it wouldn't necessarily be insurance for the East - By raising the standards for the last few years generally pitiful standard of songs there is a better chance of the winner being spread around the continent - Remember it wasn't too long ago that Ireland won 4 years out of 5! The voting in the semi's could stay the way it is now by the way and the selection of the semi's can also stay the way it is now - we'd get a balanced Final, voted by the songs all countries choosee during the semi's and those who don't make it to the final will try harder the next year with a higher standard of song.
Thanks to Muireianne Bullens for your comments. It's a lovely name - where are you from.
Muireanne, I'm afraid you have taken my idea and someone else's comments and taken them as all mine. Actually the idea of 2, 3 or more prizes in not new. It has been done for many years at San Remo, Sopot and many other European song competitions during the 1970's and 1980's. There was the Festival Prize, Jury Prize, Composers Prize etc etc etc. So it'snothing new and I'm sure it's nothing that the EBU could sort out if it wanted. My view is that the switching between Jury winner and Audience winner is not on. It would have to stay with the Jury (Main Prize) winner.
Again thanks for the responses to my idea - Hope Mr Svante is reading this..................but somehow doubt it.
But don't make it a rule to shift the host-right from People's to Jury-winner every year
Well, that's a detail ...but in general it's a good idea to have a 'back up winner'. Perhaps the other winner could take over if for some reason the 'hosting winner' can't do it that year.
The more I think about the 2 winners idea the more I like it 
If Russia (or any other country for that matter) wins 2,3,4 or even 10 times in a row it should host every single time... and here kicks my backup idea in. Who will be able to carry such expence that many years in a row... so the backup (jury) winner is the safety-net in this case. That's what I already said no?
But don't make it a rule to shift the host-right from People's to Jury-winner every year... that's too ridiculous.
Russia was the people's choice, so they host next edition. Let's say the Jury choose Ukraine. In 2009 the winner is the UK (televote) and Russia by jury. In your suggestion in this case Russia will host again
If Russia wins in 2009 (as the system is now), won't they host again anyway? That risk (the same country to win/host the contest twice in 2 years) is always present in Eurovision and there's no way around it. Even if we have 50/50 juries televoting, still the same country could win 2 times in a row.
However, with 2 winners we could maybe have a rule about it..that we can't have with 1 winner.
For example..if same country wins 2 times in a row, then that (and only that) time, the other winner hosts..how about that?
S B,
Would Ukraine 2007 and Latvia 2008 qualify as a gimmick? So what you say isn't entirely correct is it?
The only result you'll get by allowing only the final-countries to vote is that the West will not even get there. Almost sounds like an insurance for the East to organize a ESC at least every 2 years. Perhaps that's not how you see it or meant it, but it almost feels like it.
Anyway, a jury-prize isn't such bad idea but only when every jury has its say to it... that is called democracy.
Look, I find it a nice but also a ridiculous idea to create two prizes to start with.
I'm in favour of a 50/50 televote/jury voting on the entire contest, but with those two prizes you will keep continueing the voting system as it is known today, and that's a problem.
The host of a next ESC is by definition the winner of the contest, right? When you have 2 winners all of a sudden, and - as you suggest - the one year the People's winner has to organize, the other year the Jury's winner this will affect the ESC in general even worse.
For instance (let's take this year's result as an example with a fictive Jury winner and fictive 2009 winners, ok): Russia was the people's choice, so they host next edition. Let's say the Jury choose Ukraine. In 2009 the winner is the UK (televote) and Russia by jury. In your suggestion in this case Russia will host again. Then 2010 televote Greece, jury Poland - Greece hosts. 2011 televote Poland, jury Russia - back to Russia? In 4 years Russia will have hosted 3 times, but what about UK, Ukraine and Poland then? They always miss out though they have just as much right (and sometimes even more) to host and attract tourists as well?
If you create a Jury-prize, let it be a recognition for the country that wins it (perhaps even grant that country an authomatic qualification for next year's final along with the host) and a safety-net for the EBU to retreat to whenever the People's winner fails to organize.
Dan't make the ESC more complicated than it already is.
Why only the countries that make it to the final?
simple - it's an incentive to produce better songs and not gimmicks. Some countries don't try to present a good song.
The jury prize would be voted by all fans from countries who entered so they don't feel left out.
Thanks for the positive responces by the way.
Then it would rather be the "People's winner" organizes, and the "Jury winner" is kept as a backup in case the other winner can't organize for some reason
No, why? Every year both prizes will be awarded and we will know beforehand who will host..for example, 2010 Jury hosts, 2011 People and so on. And the year the Jury song can't host, at least that country will feel proud they won that award..and the same will go for the People's song next year
Muireanne,
the way I see it (and it's the same as S B except I think the People's winner should also host the ESC every other year), the jury's choice would be announced after the final, however they would have already voted (and given their votes) during the semi's..but people wouldn't know what the juries have chosen.
So, after the final, the presenter announces 1st the Jury Prize (which could have been a song that didn't make it to the final) and 2nd the People's Prize which will have to be a song that made it to the final since it will have made it there through televoting.
But to be honest I don't think the juries and the people will have such a big difference..at least regarding the songs that didn't make it to the final..with 2 semi's it will be very difficult for a winner (even by the juries judgement) song not to make it to the final.
And maybe the host of the next ESC can be one year the Jury's winner, next year the People's winner and so on.
Not such great idea Mina. Then it would rather be the "People's winner" organizes, and the "Jury winner" is kept as a backup in case the other winner can't organize for some reason.
Or the "People's winner" organizes the final, the other one is occupied with the semis.
The best idea I have come across has been 2 prizes. One for the best song and therefore the title winner (the Jury Prize) to be voted ONLY by the juries of the countries who made it to the FINAL in the traditional way. The winning country of the Jury Prize would have the honour of hosting the next years competition.
One tiny detail I would disagree on. Why only the countries that make it to the final? Isn't it perfectly possible a song that didn't make it to the final wins the jury-prize? Therefor all juries should be allowed to vote. A jury-prize - as you present it - should have nothing to do with semis and finals at all don't you reckon?
Apart from this little disagreement, nice idee but ..... LOL whoohaaa!.... never gonna happen.
2 prizes is a great idea.
How about a Jury prize (only by juries) and a People's prize (only by televoting)?
And maybe the host of the next ESC can be one year the Jury's winner, next year the People's winner and so on.
What do you think about this?
It's amazing isn't it? Before televoting there was none of this bickering about unfair voting by neighbours (except the annual Greece/Cyprus 12/12 swap which did them no good at all as they counted each other out) Tele voting will be the death of ESC. The split of Jury vote/ Televote obviously did not work last Surday night
The best idea I have come across has been 2 prizes. One for the best song and therefore the title winner (the Jury Prize) to be voted ONLY by the juries of the countries who made it to the FINAL in the traditional way. The winning country of the Jury Prize would have the honour of hosting the next years competition.
The second prize to be voted on by the TV audience - the televoters of ALL the years entries INCLUDING those who did not make it to the final. They will vote for the performance of the song and they can vote at their hearts content for best singer, song performance, dress design, dancing, laser display, fireworks miming, diaspora, neighbour etc etc etc. This would be the audience prize. Yes it could be the same song but the income for the smaller countries who depend on the televote would still be there for them so they will not loose out.
The technology is still there to count the votes and announce the winning song the same way as the songs that pass to the final from the semi-fianls is presently made and we'd get the full drama of the full vote 1-8,10, 12 for the Jury prize instead of the shortened announcements we get now. Both songs can be reprised.
I give in. You are a hopeless case
Well Molly Parton, Mina's answer "Yes, I do" on my previous question left me completely speachless. I agree with Chwarae Teg and admire her everlasting optimism of the ESC and EDC being fair competitions without result-effecting voting systems, but I as well am about to give in. A hopeless case indeed. 
Stockholm Calling
Maybe I would have thought differently if I had seen the dancing. But I didn't think much of the Poles.
Mina
I give in. You are a hopeless case
Muireanne,
I agree with pretty much all you've said. I despair of the diaspora/ex-pat and cultural/linguistic/neighbour voting. No country is to blame as it is within the current rules (I am not making some cheap racist jibes here, unlike some), but the effects of it are so huge it's making the whole thing a laughing-stock. Mina Carnation is right in that the winners have so far been unaffected, but that is only because they have been clear-cut winners. Come the day when there is a close score at the top and the stupid voting system WILL alter the first-placed performance. It will be plainly, painfully obvious, and the whole of the European viewership will tear the Contest apart with derision.
Mina Carnation,
I admire your optimism.
I was at the event in Glasgow and I have to say it was a fantastic show!! Poland deserved to win!!
Transfer the amount of contestants of the ESC into the EDC (let's say 40)... you truely believe Poland would have stood a chance?
Yes, I do.
I'm glad Poland has won actually. At least they played it fair (unlike the rest of that top-5).
On a total of 14 countries you cannot see the block-voting (but you sure as h**l can sense it). Transfer the amount of contestants of the ESC into the EDC (let's say 40)... you truely believe Poland would have stood a chance?
Greece was on its' own in this EDC (not saying they weren't performing well), and where did they strand? Russia... oh well, I'm sick and tired to discuss that lot any longer. What about the UK and Portugal. Were they really that bad they hardly received any points? Don't think so. And what about the Netherlands? They weren't all that bad either were they. But they sticked to the rules and therefor were no match to the pro's from the cheating lot from Russia, Lithuania, Azerbaijan and Greece (not that it helped them an awfull lot this time).
Muireanne,
yes, I really believe that if someone likes a song or an act they'll vote for it. Sure neighbours will get a piece of the pie, but personal taste will never disappear completely. Especially in EDC and if you look at how all ex soviets voted for Poland with high scores, you'll see that they simply liked the couple. So did we and we gave them 10 pts. And everyone else, too. Russia who was 2nd was also voted by everyone except the Uk.
Molly
Perhaps you would think differently if you had watched the performances. In my opinion the top 5 countries were really 5 of the best ones, though I think Finland should have been up there too. I voted for Russia. What bothered me was that 3 of the competing couples were professionals.
I only used Finland as an example to make the problem of voting a bit clearer.
Finland is one of those countries that come up strongly the past few years, but not at all are to blame for block-voting themselves (allthough they usually share their high points with neighbours as well).
The list of 168 reactions is divided into 7 pages. Choose a page:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
React yourself
This news article is older than one week. Reacting to articles is only possible in the first week after publication.
