Contact us

The Green Document

Chorizo

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2014
Posts
4,346
Whatever the rulebook states, the juries constantly ignore it anyway when they rather vote for their neighbor or for a song they prefer for any undisclosed personal reasons. I think the jury members should have to add comments to their top 3 and bottom 3 to explain their choices and these comments should be scrutinized by the EBU and possibly published after the contest.
 

Ferryman

Active member
Joined
April 9, 2023
Posts
80
Location
Stuggi (for April), Liverpool/Stockport (for May)
The following is an extract from 'Rules for the ESC 2017'. I haven't been to locate a more recent version. This section covers the jury procedure, and twice refers to the mysterious 'Green Document'.


1.3.3) NATIONAL JURIES’ VOTING PROCEDURE

Each National Jury shall meet in its own country on the day of the second Dress Rehearsal of the Semi-Final in which it is responsible for voting and on the day of second Dress Rehearsal of the Final. The National Juries shall watch the live transmission of the second Dress Rehearsals and proceed to vote in accordance with the EBU’s instructions included in the so-called "Green Document”.

All members of the National Juries shall receive their own voting sheet (to be distributed by the pan-European televoting partner) and shall be required to send a form, duly completed, in which they confirm that they will comply with the voting instructions, as well as a signed declaration in which they undertake to vote independently.

After the presentation of all the songs in a given Show, each jury member shall rank all the songs which have been performed in the Show in question and the points shall be allocated in accordance with the system described under Section 1.1.3.

Each National Jury’s deliberations shall be monitored by a notary, whose tasks shall be to:
ensure compliance with the voting rules;
to avoid any calculation error, collect, check and certify, before the ranks are allocated and entered into a computer by the chairperson:
the calculation of the results and the completed voting papers established by the chairperson;
send by fax all the certified voting papers to the pan- European televoting partner.

Respect for this provision shall be the responsibility of the Participating Broadcasters.

The Chairperson and the Notary shall remain available and must be attainable at any time until the beginning of the retransmissions of the second Dress Rehearsals of the Shows and during the Shows themselves.

If it appears that votes are casted only in the intent to abuse the voting system or to false the final results or have not been undertaken in accordance with the Green Document, the EBU Permanent Services, in consultation with the Pan-European televoting partner, the independent auditor of the voting process and the chairman of the Reference Group reserve the right to remove such votes for allocating the ranks.

Each Participating Broadcaster shall ensure that its National Jury is fully independent and votes in total impartiality. It shall cooperate with the EBU and the independent auditor in connection with all matters regarding National Jury voting.
 

HarryUK

Veteran
Joined
April 12, 2014
Posts
3,996
Location
London / Kent, UK
If it appears that votes are casted only in the intent to abuse the voting system or to false the final results or have not been undertaken in accordance with the Green Document, the EBU Permanent Services, in consultation with the Pan-European televoting partner, the independent auditor of the voting process and the chairman of the Reference Group reserve the right to remove such votes for allocating the ranks.
So why haven't they penalised Armenia and Azerbaijan for each jury member constantly ranking the other country last due to politics??
 

Ferryman

Active member
Joined
April 9, 2023
Posts
80
Location
Stuggi (for April), Liverpool/Stockport (for May)
Q
So why haven't they penalised Armenia and Azerbaijan for each jury member constantly ranking the other country last due to politics??
Quite agree.

Action was taken for SF1 2016 when one of the Russian judges was displaying her voting record on-line during the voting process. In that case the infringement was being circulated live at the time. There would have been no escape if there had been a failure to take action. The judge's votes for the SF were ruled out, and another judge was drafted in for the GF.
 

Loindici

Veteran
Joined
June 5, 2019
Posts
3,640
Location
Bejba
Hmm, interesting, I never thought something like this would be an iceberg moment for us.

But alas, let me read the snippet that you've posted. If other forum members sees this, it can be a fun discussion.
 

midnightsun

Veteran
Joined
February 26, 2016
Posts
3,927
Location
Germany
In a German podcast one or two years ago they talked about that, I‘ve written a post about it back then, let me see if I find it
 

soundofsilence

Active member
Joined
April 2, 2023
Posts
532
He it's the same things just with bigger English
 
Top Bottom