Some of these posts are just silly.. this was probably the most jury-friendly final we ever had.
wanted to downvote one of their rivals, it doesnt make sense that they heavily rewarded the other ones by giving 12 to Spain and 8 to UK.
Their jurors put Ukraine on pos 8, 10, 11, 12 and 12 which didnt result in points for them.
juries gave 12 to Sweden and 10 to Spain, so again other main competitors got heavily rewarded. Their jurors put Ukraine on 7, 11, 14, 16 and 20. Italy (who people said had a much better jury final) was put on 4, 8, 16, 16 and 21. Not much better.
juries gave 10 to Italy, 7 to Sweden and 3 to UK. They are the ones who probably did have Ukraine the lowest of these with 13, 14, 19, 22. 23.
gave 7 points to Ukraine in the semi. In the final three (!!) jurors put Ukraine into their top 10. Italy clearly didnt even want to win again this year, so it wouldnt make sense to downvote the other favourites. They have always been voting weird. This year they gave no points to Sweden and Spain as well, but 3 to UK.
gave 8 points to Ukraine in the semi. In the final they still had Ukraine on 6, 8, 8, 14 and 15. They didnt give high points to the other favourites (5 to Spain, 4 to UK and 1 to Sweden), but its just silly to assume there was any strategic voting involved.
gave 3 points to Ukraine in the semi. In the final they put Ukraine on 10, 13, 13, 16 and 18. They had both Sweden and UK even lower, but did give 5 points to Spain.
I could also just handpick certain votes like
putting Spain on 12, 18, 22, 22 and 24. On the other hand they did reward UK with 12 points. So I guess it just happens that certain entries arent to every jurors taste.
did have Ukraine on a 20th place overall, Ukraine placed Serbia on their last place.
I find it weird that certain countries get called out for not giving jury points to Ukraine, but if its a country like
it gets accepted?