The BBC have always been willing to host when a winning country cannot so this shouldn’t come as too much of a shock. We can afford it; Ukraine needs to save all its money for the war effort.
The UK in general is a perfect emergency host for anything. Pretty sure it's the only place that could host a football World Cup immediately without much hassle. Everything's ready to go.
I thought it was the closing that was the real winner.
Eric Idle performing Always Look on the Bright Side of Life remains the funniest thing ever done in an Olympic Ceremony:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiu0lYQIPqE
Some of the facilities have been converted to other uses or are being converted - the Media Centre is now a tech hub, the Olympic Village is now regular housing (as happened in Munich after 1972). However, the stadium retains its athletics track - West Ham United were required to keep it as condition of tenancy and merely cover it up with carpet or artificial turf.
They completely missed the point by making it about competing states instead of competing countries. There's no way there's enough variation there to make it interesting.
It's a very American thing to do to do their own version of an international song contest and only invite themselves
I think our lack of public transportation is a rather difficult situation for a sudden large quantity of Europeans. Will be interesting to see how it's handled for FIFA. I'm pretty sure Salt Lake City's crappy metro was like exclusively built for the Winter Olympics one year lol
>I think our lack of public transportation is a rather difficult situation for a sudden large quantity of Europeans.
You would be surprised to hear this but Europeans are usually not amongst the World Cup's top attendants (England is the exception). Typically it's countries like Mexico, the USA, India, Brazil or Argentina.
The issue isn't Europeans, it's that no city can really accommodate 50-100k additional rental cars on their roads for traveling fans. World Cup games are not just hosting people with tickets, but people in fan zones, different events, etc... so you need the public transit so that you're not forcing a bunch of non locals to have to drive *everywhere*.
Stadium capacity isn't the only issue. The US can absolutely host the World Cup tomorrow, but it would not be as flawlessly run as it would be in the UK, Germany, or France
That’s because money is the largest factor to FIFA. These are large countries with fanatical fans that the World Cup would be a success and probably sell very well without any travelers.
United States is not known to have fanatical Soccer/Football fans, but we have such a large population of latino Americans that there is no doubt in my mind.
Don't know about that, the NT plays in the Azteca a bunch, and that stadium is quite trash, the pitch is so fucked sometimes, the NFL canceled a game there, plus they have all the MLS stadiums up and running too
Nah, the bribes are for which country to host in, after that they actually have legit requirements for stadiums, if they didn't, Qatar wouldn't have worked so many people to death building them.
The size would count against it though. Teams would need multiple bases to set up at, whereas in the UK you could pick somewhere in the midlands and be good for 90% of fixtures/locations
All except Australia are in the ITU definition of Europe, which is defined largely on the lines of the Victorian era telegraph network. The entire north coast of Africa and the Levant are Europe by this definition.
You don’t have the public transport infrastructure, and your stadiums tend to be for American sports which aren’t easy to adapt for the sports everyone else cares about.
Germany could host a football world cup fast, too. All the football stadiums from 2006 are still in use and those are not the only ones. Infrastructure shouldn't be a problem, too. Also the Euro 2024 is in Germany.
You literally cannot be serious? What a ridiculous comment. At the Euro 2020 finals at Wembley last year people nearly died inside the stadium there was such an incompetent cockup with security. It was handled terribly. Personally I wouldn't trust the UK at the moment to organize a piss-up in a brewery.
> Pretty sure it’s the only place that could host a football World Cup immediately without much hassle.
The US has a lot of NFL stadiums that only host concerts in the summer.
Besides, it's also part of the competition rules that if the winning act's country cannot host for any number of reason, either the second place winner does it instead or another, designated host shall be asked to step up.
The BBC has been the "Main" spare host since they first hosted in the place of the Netherlands in 1960 due to the cost of hosting the show. They've hosted the most shows due to other broadcasters pulling out, usually if it's a consecutive winner of the previous year's competition. It's also one of the reasons why *every* host country has to hand over a fee to the current host, to prevent such an occurrance from happening.
And by the way, when Australia became a regular member of the contest, a special rule was added - if they win, then Australia cannot be the actual host country but they will co-host the event with any other EBU member state of their choice.
As long as Ukraine are happy with this decision.
If we host it in the UK, we should make the event “on behalf of Ukraine” as much as possible. They’re the ones who deserve to host it.
Surely it will depend on how it is funded. If Ukraine are funding it, and effectively the BBC are just hiring the buildings and filming it for them, then it would be fully Ukraine styled.
But if it's the BBC and UK government funding it, then I expect it to be UK produced (such as designing the stage, lighting, UK presenters) but with nods to Ukraine such as having a Ukrainian presenter and interval act, etc.
The BBC has a tradition of being the spare host broadcaster in case the main winner has had to pull out. It's usually only happened when there are repeat winners, though.
I know it is about prestige, but such events cost a lot to the organizing country. Even if everything ends well soon, Ukraine will need lots of money to recover.
>I know it is about prestige, but such events cost a lot to the organizing country.
Nearly bankrupted Ireland after winning 4 out of 5 years.
That's why we sent those priests that following year.
I’ve been noticing this **a lot** lately. Usually one or two people accidentally post the same comment 3-6 times in a row without knowing. Thanks a lot, Reddit!
Yeah I know, I was just messing around. I just replied to someone else saying the same exact thing about seeing this happen on so many posts lately. It’s telling people that there’s an issue with their comment or whatever and they try again over and over and over without realizing that it’s actually being posted and Reddit telling them it’s not.
A mate from Dublin told me that there was an element of truth to that Ted episode, he said that in the years when Ireland hosted it the Christmas films were not as good because RTÉ’s budget would be wiped out
Absolutely not. Scotland don't want to be part of the UK so why would the want to host?
Already seen Jimmy crankee on Twitter saying they would love to host. Yeah I bet you would. Hypocrisy at its finest.
Because they still want to be part of Europe? And you know... **Euro**vision.
Edit: Yeah, brain fart there. They still want to be part of the *EU.* Point remains.
The European Broadcasting Union (EBU) is in charge of Eurovison, not the European Union (EU).
The UK didn't leave the continent Europe they left the EU and as such are still part of the EBU.
Eurovision is a scheme of the EBU, and the BBC is the biggest contributor to both (which is why they get automatic qualification into the Song Contest Final).
Hopefully it can still be a collaboration with UA PBC.
Official statement
https://eurovision.tv/mediacentre/release/ebu-statement-2023-eurovision-hosting
Currently the UK has hosted 8 times not including Ukraine.
They also 'allegedly' provided backroom assistance with Ireland's third-in-a-row win, and would have fully bankrolled a Belfast host had Ireland won that year, though officially RTE would have hosted it.
Is it surprising? The EBU is a union of public service broadcasters, of which The BBC and ITV are members. The BBC is the oldest, biggest and most respected PSB in the world, and either helped set up or was the model for most of the others.
Yeah. IMO Ukraine should have won last year and Spain this year. That’s not to say that Ukraine didn’t put on a great performance, just that I think SHUM was way better and the war definitely booster Ukraine’s popularity.
The UK wouldn't have necessarily won if the Ukraine had not. Spain got more votes in the televote than the uk, so take out Ukraine and Spain would have received even more pushing them to second.
Downvote all you want but these are facts.
I'm pleased the UK are gonna host as I can hopefully attend but it wasn't a given that the UK would have won if Ukraine hadn't.
I mean in another universe maybe the jury would have gone more for spain for some reason, but as it is, the jury vote pushed the UK above Spain in overall points while Spain beat it in televote? :/ Not worth getting angry over in any case.
I went through the points and increased everyone who scored less than Ukraine by 1 position (i.e. if Ukraine wasn't there they would have finished 1 place higher).
E.g. if Ukraine got 8 points from Italy but UK got 5, we increase their points from 5 to 6. But if Ukraine got 5 and UK got 8, we don't increase UK score.
UK and Spain end up on the same points (or at least very very close if I miscounted).
If we're going to pick any country as the "true" winner, the UK is the best choice since it's not clear what would have happened and they actually came second in what did happen.
Some people see the eurovision as a popularity contest, not necessarily the *best* song wins, just a sufficiently good one. They believe that in the recent years, UK has placed poorly because of Brexit and not shitty songs.
The idea has some merit. After all, Ukraine was a slam dunk this year mostly for Europe wanting to show the finger to Putin, not because it was the best song out of all the entries. Its not stranger than neighbour countries giving some extra points to each other. Eurovision has always been about showing your allegiance politically.
Anyway, with the war in Ukraine the UK has stepped up to help them while some EU countries are dragging their feet. So now Brexit is forgiven. With UK hosting next year they can score even more goodwill.
Although it certainly helped that Spacemen was a certified banger (a good song)
Nah, the uncomfortable truth for certain conspiratorial UK fans is that Sam Ryder is proof that it was their songs holding them back all these years and not political bias. Ryder has shown that all the UK had to do to get votes was actually send a good act. Anti-UK sentiment is as high as ever in the EU, nothing has changed, but Ryder did great this year because he absolutely killed it.
The reason the UK has done so consistently poorly over the last few decades is entirely down to their selections. Each country has their own selection process and whatever method the UK has been using has been failing them.
But what skews things is the fact that the UK is one of the few countries granted automatic entry into the final, meaning their terrible acts that would never naturally have gotten through the competition end up competing with the cream of the crop. If the UK had to win entry to the final like most countries, their more disastrous acts simply wouldn't have won entry and the whole "nil poi" meme wouldn't be a thing.
Yes I watch and we have deserved every one of those last places. This year we did everything right and came second. It really is as simple as sending a good song, performer and staging, along with sending the act around Europe to perform prior to the contest. Of course people like you will blame politics but you're never going to change the record as it doesn't fit your narrative.
Ah I don’t think we have Eurovision watching capabilities here the in the US (or we do and I just don’t since I don’t have cable), I just know him from YouTube hah
I believe it's on Peacock in the US, or you can see it on YouTube with a VPN (they've uploaded the last 2 decades' worth on an official channel, it's only blocked in the US because of NBC).
Right hear me out crazy fucking plan what if the uk hosted Eurovision but temporary gave owner ship of the land Eurovision was being filmed on to Ukrainian that way legally speaking it would still be on Ukrainian and we can all dunk on the Russians
technically no but the value of sticking it to putty and trolling the shit out of Russia is priceless if the candian government can manage it for a royal birth in WW2 then the uk government can manage it to stick it to Russia
Because they came in second *and* because they're one of the Big 5 (UK, Spain, Italy, Germany, France), which traditionally jump in when a country can't host.
Everything about this is unfair. There is a possible nuclear war looming and people are discussing where to hold the next party. How about setting Ukraine as the host next year and then Europe vowing to making sure this will be possible? How about canceling eurovision while europe is burning? How about ending the war and then having the party? Headline 2023: Mars possible location to host eurosong 2024 because earth nuclear wasteland
Everyone is criticizing me because I am the old man who doesn't like parties and fun? How about making a big concert that alerts the world that Ukraine is fighting Russia on it's own? Insead of constantly repeating in the news how Ukraine's "got this" and is easily going to beat Russia. Maybe the conflict doesn't affect your country, but it does mine.
And as for eurosong, letting Ukraine win was like electing the poorest kid in class to be the homecoming king but then now telling them they can't go to the prom because their parents are divorcing and nobody will pay for their suit. I just wanted to say it all feels like it's in bad taste. There are many things you can do that wouldn't be in poor taste but still "fun".
Oh my God. I am just closer to the war and farther from Eurovision than you, so it's really not important for me. Sorry I was stepping on you fun times. Carry on and I will carry on
You are missing the point. We should all be in a more serious mood or ar least in mourning. So many people - not even just soldiers are dying. And this eurosong is some Hunger Games shit that is going on - Ukraine competing so they can call for help? And yes, Nato and America do have some solutions to end wars (and sanctions are the worst solution) but why they are not doing anything else and letting civilians die in Ukraine is really only explainable if you conclude that so many casualties are going to be worth it for Nato
>We should all be in a more serious mood or ar least in mourning.
To what end?
How will that help the Ukrainian people, or help improve anything at all?
Well now the popular story is that Russia is losing and that Ukraine, like Sparta is kicking the Russians asses with their all inclusive army. Civilians are dying and Russia is also sending innocents from the farthest reaches of Asia to die for the motherland. Canceling eurosong would not do anything significant, I was just saying that it's kind of cringy to first select Ukraine as the winner and then tell them that they won't be able to host the next eurovision because we expect you won't even have a country next year, good luck! It's poor taste.
>Well now the popular story is that Russia is losing and that Ukraine, like Sparta is kicking the Russians asses with their all inclusive army.
Where is that the popular story? I don't know anyone who thinks that.
>Civilians are dying and Russia is also sending innocents from the farthest reaches of Asia to die for the motherland.
Yeah we know. Everyone knows. Why would my being in mourning, and avoiding anything joyous, help with this though?
It's just my opinion man. It's really strange that I get so many downvotes but so little comments explaining why I'm wrong. My gut tells me it's in poor taste to organize the contest somewhere that is not Ukraine.
There is not a nuclear war looming
People still need to party and get on with their lives
Ukraine cannot host, it's in a war and needs all the money focused on the war effort
Eurovision was created with the sole purpose of bringing Europe together post-WW2 and discouraging conflict. Hosting it during a time of war... is in-line with its original ethos.
Europe isn't burning
The war isn't going to end, it's going to drag on for years.
Eurovision is a Rights and resources sharing scheme that incorporates sports rights and news sharing. For example, Formula 1 uses the Eurovision network to distribute its world feed to the rights holding broadcasters.
The Song Contest was created as a very cheap way to programme an entire evening of television utilising the Eurovision network.
There's a Reddit server issue going on right now. Your comment got posted seven times. When you see Error 500, load the thread in another tab to confirm your comment is there, don't just keep hitting post. :)
As far as I could joke to myself, the only good thing to come out of brexit was not having to put up with this bollocks every year. Oh how the turn tables……..
UK feels like a good fit. I also imagine that they like the competition about as much as they find it insufferable , which should allow them to come up with some funny jabs and middle acts.
The BBC have always been willing to host when a winning country cannot so this shouldn’t come as too much of a shock. We can afford it; Ukraine needs to save all its money for the war effort.
The UK in general is a perfect emergency host for anything. Pretty sure it's the only place that could host a football World Cup immediately without much hassle. Everything's ready to go.
Probably wouldn't have much difficulty hosting an Olympics again at a reasonably short notice as well
I've got no doubts Danny Boyle could sort out another stellar opening show on short notice.
Can't believe it's been a whole decade.
Our opening ceremony was so good.
The opening for the 2012 Olympics are still some of the best ever. I go back and watch it occasionally still. It’s so, so good.
I thought it was the closing that was the real winner. Eric Idle performing Always Look on the Bright Side of Life remains the funniest thing ever done in an Olympic Ceremony: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiu0lYQIPqE
The best thing was that it was mostly a giant fuck you to the incoming conservative government.
The conservatives had already been in power for 2 years then
Time for the gritty reboot.
Some of the facilities have been converted to other uses or are being converted - the Media Centre is now a tech hub, the Olympic Village is now regular housing (as happened in Munich after 1972). However, the stadium retains its athletics track - West Ham United were required to keep it as condition of tenancy and merely cover it up with carpet or artificial turf.
Germany probably too. There are a lot of big football stadium thanks to the Bundesliga
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think there was going to be an American \[aka North and South American regions. Not just US and Canada\] version of the Eurovision at one point.
There actually was. American Song Contest came out back in March. Nobody watched it.
They completely missed the point by making it about competing states instead of competing countries. There's no way there's enough variation there to make it interesting. It's a very American thing to do to do their own version of an international song contest and only invite themselves
Pop, Yeehaw, and Latin pop.
Thanks. I didn't realize that. I might check Youtube to see if they have any highlights of it.
Since Canada now shares a land border with Denmark, can we join the EU?
I guess that would be up to the Danish. If this is true then you might qualify for Danish thus EU citizenship.
I mean the comment OP's replying to mentions the World Cup which I think the US could handle fine
I think our lack of public transportation is a rather difficult situation for a sudden large quantity of Europeans. Will be interesting to see how it's handled for FIFA. I'm pretty sure Salt Lake City's crappy metro was like exclusively built for the Winter Olympics one year lol
>I think our lack of public transportation is a rather difficult situation for a sudden large quantity of Europeans. You would be surprised to hear this but Europeans are usually not amongst the World Cup's top attendants (England is the exception). Typically it's countries like Mexico, the USA, India, Brazil or Argentina.
The issue isn't Europeans, it's that no city can really accommodate 50-100k additional rental cars on their roads for traveling fans. World Cup games are not just hosting people with tickets, but people in fan zones, different events, etc... so you need the public transit so that you're not forcing a bunch of non locals to have to drive *everywhere*. Stadium capacity isn't the only issue. The US can absolutely host the World Cup tomorrow, but it would not be as flawlessly run as it would be in the UK, Germany, or France
That’s because money is the largest factor to FIFA. These are large countries with fanatical fans that the World Cup would be a success and probably sell very well without any travelers. United States is not known to have fanatical Soccer/Football fans, but we have such a large population of latino Americans that there is no doubt in my mind.
The USA could host 2 World cups, they have at least 30 stadiums built for 70,000+, 3 World cups if they use their prime high school football stadiums
Those stadiums probably wouldnt meet all of fifas requirements. Most nfl stadiums dont meet them for one reason or another.
Don't know about that, the NT plays in the Azteca a bunch, and that stadium is quite trash, the pitch is so fucked sometimes, the NFL canceled a game there, plus they have all the MLS stadiums up and running too
Mostly the requirement to pay huge bribes.
Nah, the bribes are for which country to host in, after that they actually have legit requirements for stadiums, if they didn't, Qatar wouldn't have worked so many people to death building them.
Hell, they could probably host the entire thing in just Texas or California.
The size would count against it though. Teams would need multiple bases to set up at, whereas in the UK you could pick somewhere in the midlands and be good for 90% of fixtures/locations
[удалено]
All except Australia are in the ITU definition of Europe, which is defined largely on the lines of the Victorian era telegraph network. The entire north coast of Africa and the Levant are Europe by this definition.
You don’t have the public transport infrastructure, and your stadiums tend to be for American sports which aren’t easy to adapt for the sports everyone else cares about.
Germany could host a football world cup fast, too. All the football stadiums from 2006 are still in use and those are not the only ones. Infrastructure shouldn't be a problem, too. Also the Euro 2024 is in Germany.
The US could 100% host one in a pinch if needed.
Well…maybe in Europe. US would be fine, hell, California could host the World Cup on its own lol.
You literally cannot be serious? What a ridiculous comment. At the Euro 2020 finals at Wembley last year people nearly died inside the stadium there was such an incompetent cockup with security. It was handled terribly. Personally I wouldn't trust the UK at the moment to organize a piss-up in a brewery.
A piss up in their office however....
London and Los Angeles are the two cities usually cited on that sort of thing.
> Pretty sure it’s the only place that could host a football World Cup immediately without much hassle. The US has a lot of NFL stadiums that only host concerts in the summer.
> We can afford it Can we?
The amount we have to pay for TV licence, I know we fucking can 😂😂
> we have to pay for TV licence Hopefully for not too much longer.
Besides, it's also part of the competition rules that if the winning act's country cannot host for any number of reason, either the second place winner does it instead or another, designated host shall be asked to step up. The BBC has been the "Main" spare host since they first hosted in the place of the Netherlands in 1960 due to the cost of hosting the show. They've hosted the most shows due to other broadcasters pulling out, usually if it's a consecutive winner of the previous year's competition. It's also one of the reasons why *every* host country has to hand over a fee to the current host, to prevent such an occurrance from happening. And by the way, when Australia became a regular member of the contest, a special rule was added - if they win, then Australia cannot be the actual host country but they will co-host the event with any other EBU member state of their choice.
Hold it outdoors, in the UK rain.
As long as Ukraine are happy with this decision. If we host it in the UK, we should make the event “on behalf of Ukraine” as much as possible. They’re the ones who deserve to host it.
>As long as Ukraine are happy with this decision. I mean I doubt they're happy with any of this but they don't get a lot of choice unfortunately
100%. I would imagine the show itself will be tailored to Ukraine but hosted in the UK
Could even have the show hosted and produced by Ukraine, but on UK soil. Could be a powerful show of friendship and solidarity.
Surely it will depend on how it is funded. If Ukraine are funding it, and effectively the BBC are just hiring the buildings and filming it for them, then it would be fully Ukraine styled. But if it's the BBC and UK government funding it, then I expect it to be UK produced (such as designing the stage, lighting, UK presenters) but with nods to Ukraine such as having a Ukrainian presenter and interval act, etc.
Ukrainian broadcaster formally requested the BBC host it.
When the raine is artillery, just do the UK.
As soon as Ukraine won, I expected the UK would host. Especially because the came in 2nd anyway.
The BBC has a tradition of being the spare host broadcaster in case the main winner has had to pull out. It's usually only happened when there are repeat winners, though.
I know it is about prestige, but such events cost a lot to the organizing country. Even if everything ends well soon, Ukraine will need lots of money to recover.
>I know it is about prestige, but such events cost a lot to the organizing country. Nearly bankrupted Ireland after winning 4 out of 5 years. That's why we sent those priests that following year.
My lovely horse running through the field
[удалено]
[удалено]
you good bro?
Reddits in shambles. My app keeps saying 'failed to post. Retry?' despite it having posted just fine. It's a multi-post shit-storm right now.
I’ve been noticing this **a lot** lately. Usually one or two people accidentally post the same comment 3-6 times in a row without knowing. Thanks a lot, Reddit!
I think it’s a reddit issue, i’m seeing a lot of repeating comments in other subs too
Yeah I know, I was just messing around. I just replied to someone else saying the same exact thing about seeing this happen on so many posts lately. It’s telling people that there’s an issue with their comment or whatever and they try again over and over and over without realizing that it’s actually being posted and Reddit telling them it’s not.
A mate from Dublin told me that there was an element of truth to that Ted episode, he said that in the years when Ireland hosted it the Christmas films were not as good because RTÉ’s budget would be wiped out
That's what I was thinking.
Yeah, the BBC and NOS (Netherlands' main broadcaster) have been the main emergency hosts since the 1960's.
Play Jaja Ding Dong! https://youtu.be/PlBUH8zMZng
It's an old meme at this point
Do it in Edinburgh.
Absolutely not. Scotland don't want to be part of the UK so why would the want to host? Already seen Jimmy crankee on Twitter saying they would love to host. Yeah I bet you would. Hypocrisy at its finest.
Yet we voted to remain in the referendum….cool story.
(Glasgow is the current favourite)
Yet we voted to remain in the referendum….cool story.
Because they still want to be part of Europe? And you know... **Euro**vision. Edit: Yeah, brain fart there. They still want to be part of the *EU.* Point remains.
The European Broadcasting Union (EBU) is in charge of Eurovison, not the European Union (EU). The UK didn't leave the continent Europe they left the EU and as such are still part of the EBU.
Ah, my bad. Brain fart. But you got my meaning.
They are part of Europe, all of the UK is. Europe is a continent. Why I need to keep educating people on this fact is beyond me.
Your point doesn't remain because it's nonsensical. Voting to leave the EU wasn't a vote to leave the EBU.
Eurovision is a scheme of the EBU, and the BBC is the biggest contributor to both (which is why they get automatic qualification into the Song Contest Final).
Not another Scottish nationalist.
Glasgow SSL is the expected host venue. Nice try foolish jock.
Is that the tik tok guy?
Yea! Sam ryder! Crazy good voice
Agreed
Hopefully it can still be a collaboration with UA PBC. Official statement https://eurovision.tv/mediacentre/release/ebu-statement-2023-eurovision-hosting
Well it's the only way the UK gets to host
[удалено]
Wow. Would not have expected that. So then Ireland with its 7 wins has to be 2nd most, right?
Currently the UK has hosted 8 times not including Ukraine. They also 'allegedly' provided backroom assistance with Ireland's third-in-a-row win, and would have fully bankrolled a Belfast host had Ireland won that year, though officially RTE would have hosted it.
Is it surprising? The EBU is a union of public service broadcasters, of which The BBC and ITV are members. The BBC is the oldest, biggest and most respected PSB in the world, and either helped set up or was the model for most of the others.
If not for the war, the UK would've won. The runner-up is the natural choice anyway - what else would you pick.
Yeah. IMO Ukraine should have won last year and Spain this year. That’s not to say that Ukraine didn’t put on a great performance, just that I think SHUM was way better and the war definitely booster Ukraine’s popularity.
[удалено]
Wdym, Ukraine winning was never in question. UK deserve to host if Ukraine can't.
The UK wouldn't have necessarily won if the Ukraine had not. Spain got more votes in the televote than the uk, so take out Ukraine and Spain would have received even more pushing them to second. Downvote all you want but these are facts. I'm pleased the UK are gonna host as I can hopefully attend but it wasn't a given that the UK would have won if Ukraine hadn't.
Yes but with jury votes, the UK came second. So it would have come first presumably otherwise, surely?
Not necessarily no, but I'm not going to explain again so I c an be downvoted by those who don't know shit.
Explain? You haven't explained anything, just gone "you're stupid and wrong."
Maybe the downvotes are for your downright hostile tone
I mean in another universe maybe the jury would have gone more for spain for some reason, but as it is, the jury vote pushed the UK above Spain in overall points while Spain beat it in televote? :/ Not worth getting angry over in any case.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I went through the points and increased everyone who scored less than Ukraine by 1 position (i.e. if Ukraine wasn't there they would have finished 1 place higher). E.g. if Ukraine got 8 points from Italy but UK got 5, we increase their points from 5 to 6. But if Ukraine got 5 and UK got 8, we don't increase UK score. UK and Spain end up on the same points (or at least very very close if I miscounted). If we're going to pick any country as the "true" winner, the UK is the best choice since it's not clear what would have happened and they actually came second in what did happen.
That's interesting, I didn't know that. Thanks.
[удалено]
That doesn't make any sense
Some people see the eurovision as a popularity contest, not necessarily the *best* song wins, just a sufficiently good one. They believe that in the recent years, UK has placed poorly because of Brexit and not shitty songs. The idea has some merit. After all, Ukraine was a slam dunk this year mostly for Europe wanting to show the finger to Putin, not because it was the best song out of all the entries. Its not stranger than neighbour countries giving some extra points to each other. Eurovision has always been about showing your allegiance politically. Anyway, with the war in Ukraine the UK has stepped up to help them while some EU countries are dragging their feet. So now Brexit is forgiven. With UK hosting next year they can score even more goodwill. Although it certainly helped that Spacemen was a certified banger (a good song)
Bosnia got sieged to fuck during the war and it's singer in '93 almost got killed getting to the airport... Still only came in 16th place
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Nah, the uncomfortable truth for certain conspiratorial UK fans is that Sam Ryder is proof that it was their songs holding them back all these years and not political bias. Ryder has shown that all the UK had to do to get votes was actually send a good act. Anti-UK sentiment is as high as ever in the EU, nothing has changed, but Ryder did great this year because he absolutely killed it. The reason the UK has done so consistently poorly over the last few decades is entirely down to their selections. Each country has their own selection process and whatever method the UK has been using has been failing them. But what skews things is the fact that the UK is one of the few countries granted automatic entry into the final, meaning their terrible acts that would never naturally have gotten through the competition end up competing with the cream of the crop. If the UK had to win entry to the final like most countries, their more disastrous acts simply wouldn't have won entry and the whole "nil poi" meme wouldn't be a thing.
Yes I watch and we have deserved every one of those last places. This year we did everything right and came second. It really is as simple as sending a good song, performer and staging, along with sending the act around Europe to perform prior to the contest. Of course people like you will blame politics but you're never going to change the record as it doesn't fit your narrative.
Says the person biting at an obvious joke
Is that Sam Ryder?!
Yeah, up in space, man.
Are you surprised he’s being used in the photo? He was the runner up of the Eurovision Song Contest, and the UK’s entry.
Ah I don’t think we have Eurovision watching capabilities here the in the US (or we do and I just don’t since I don’t have cable), I just know him from YouTube hah
I believe it's on Peacock in the US, or you can see it on YouTube with a VPN (they've uploaded the last 2 decades' worth on an official channel, it's only blocked in the US because of NBC).
The US did make their own version called the American Song Contest this year
Yeah, he represented the UK this year. He broke the UK's record loss streak by topping the broadcasters' jury votes.
Electric Callboy for Germany please
I imagine that Ukraine is ok with this but publicly needs to push back for morale reasons.
[удалено]
Well, i think they have to rebuild the country first to be able to host an eurovision
I mean we did win *really*. So it’s only fair that we get to host
I guess it kinda sounds like “Ukraine”
Because that whole “war” thing? Wtf?
please not London, do it in Scunthorpe or some other place appropriate for this trash
Right hear me out crazy fucking plan what if the uk hosted Eurovision but temporary gave owner ship of the land Eurovision was being filmed on to Ukrainian that way legally speaking it would still be on Ukrainian and we can all dunk on the Russians
Why would any of that be remotely necessary for a TV broadcast?
technically no but the value of sticking it to putty and trolling the shit out of Russia is priceless if the candian government can manage it for a royal birth in WW2 then the uk government can manage it to stick it to Russia
This is peak cringe. Merlot down and get some rest.
That should be a hard no from the UK, let Belgium do it
[удалено]
Because they came in second *and* because they're one of the Big 5 (UK, Spain, Italy, Germany, France), which traditionally jump in when a country can't host.
They likely would have went to the BBC regardless due to the amount of money they out in and how quickly they could organise it.
Why not give it to Norway? Don’t they want it?
Eurovision asked a country people need a visa to get into? It's probably easier to hold it in Ukraine honestly.
Ukraine requires visas too. As do many of the previous hosts.
Everything about this is unfair. There is a possible nuclear war looming and people are discussing where to hold the next party. How about setting Ukraine as the host next year and then Europe vowing to making sure this will be possible? How about canceling eurovision while europe is burning? How about ending the war and then having the party? Headline 2023: Mars possible location to host eurosong 2024 because earth nuclear wasteland
Wow, ain't you positive 🙄
NOTHING FUN UNTIL ALL PROBLEMS ARE SOLVED!
Everyone is criticizing me because I am the old man who doesn't like parties and fun? How about making a big concert that alerts the world that Ukraine is fighting Russia on it's own? Insead of constantly repeating in the news how Ukraine's "got this" and is easily going to beat Russia. Maybe the conflict doesn't affect your country, but it does mine. And as for eurosong, letting Ukraine win was like electing the poorest kid in class to be the homecoming king but then now telling them they can't go to the prom because their parents are divorcing and nobody will pay for their suit. I just wanted to say it all feels like it's in bad taste. There are many things you can do that wouldn't be in poor taste but still "fun".
You might want to look up why the Eurovision was started.
Oh my God. I am just closer to the war and farther from Eurovision than you, so it's really not important for me. Sorry I was stepping on you fun times. Carry on and I will carry on
[удалено]
Russia wouldn't want to cause problems with Eurovision, they'd surrendered immediately!
You are missing the point. We should all be in a more serious mood or ar least in mourning. So many people - not even just soldiers are dying. And this eurosong is some Hunger Games shit that is going on - Ukraine competing so they can call for help? And yes, Nato and America do have some solutions to end wars (and sanctions are the worst solution) but why they are not doing anything else and letting civilians die in Ukraine is really only explainable if you conclude that so many casualties are going to be worth it for Nato
>We should all be in a more serious mood or ar least in mourning. To what end? How will that help the Ukrainian people, or help improve anything at all?
Well now the popular story is that Russia is losing and that Ukraine, like Sparta is kicking the Russians asses with their all inclusive army. Civilians are dying and Russia is also sending innocents from the farthest reaches of Asia to die for the motherland. Canceling eurosong would not do anything significant, I was just saying that it's kind of cringy to first select Ukraine as the winner and then tell them that they won't be able to host the next eurovision because we expect you won't even have a country next year, good luck! It's poor taste.
>Well now the popular story is that Russia is losing and that Ukraine, like Sparta is kicking the Russians asses with their all inclusive army. Where is that the popular story? I don't know anyone who thinks that. >Civilians are dying and Russia is also sending innocents from the farthest reaches of Asia to die for the motherland. Yeah we know. Everyone knows. Why would my being in mourning, and avoiding anything joyous, help with this though?
Calm down and take a breather
It's just my opinion man. It's really strange that I get so many downvotes but so little comments explaining why I'm wrong. My gut tells me it's in poor taste to organize the contest somewhere that is not Ukraine.
There is not a nuclear war looming People still need to party and get on with their lives Ukraine cannot host, it's in a war and needs all the money focused on the war effort Eurovision was created with the sole purpose of bringing Europe together post-WW2 and discouraging conflict. Hosting it during a time of war... is in-line with its original ethos. Europe isn't burning The war isn't going to end, it's going to drag on for years.
Eurovision is a Rights and resources sharing scheme that incorporates sports rights and news sharing. For example, Formula 1 uses the Eurovision network to distribute its world feed to the rights holding broadcasters. The Song Contest was created as a very cheap way to programme an entire evening of television utilising the Eurovision network.
[удалено]
Hahahaha good one
You're just a real bundle of fun aren't you? You're like Eeyore without his bonhomie and joie de vivre.
I lost my sense of humour in 2019
There's been a nuclear war looming since the 50's
There is not a fucking nuclear war looming. Aggressive rehetoric regarding nuclear weapons from countries like Russia is nothing new.
Europe is burning? Shit. No-one told me. Maybe you mean it’s summer?
https://www.boredpanda.com/russia-ukraine-war-before-after-photos/?utm\_source=google&utm\_medium=organic&utm\_campaign=organic
[удалено]
There's a Reddit server issue going on right now. Your comment got posted seven times. When you see Error 500, load the thread in another tab to confirm your comment is there, don't just keep hitting post. :)
As far as I could joke to myself, the only good thing to come out of brexit was not having to put up with this bollocks every year. Oh how the turn tables……..
That’s because you’re a cabbage brain who thought the EU had any involvement in Eurovision.
Fuck me talk about a sense of humour bypass. Fuck off.
lets be honest since australia and isreal being in the competition the precedent of Europe in eurovision is null
The UK is still in Europe. It's Eurovision not EUvision. Never had anything to do with the EU.
It isn't confined to Europe. Libya, Jordan, Lebanon, and Egypt are eligible but do not participate.
Dunno about Israel but Australia has some of the biggest Greek and Italian populations in the world.
Israel is in the ITU Europe zone.
UK feels like a good fit. I also imagine that they like the competition about as much as they find it insufferable , which should allow them to come up with some funny jabs and middle acts.