Contact us

What changes do you want introduced to the rules/format?

A-lister

Veteran
Joined
December 28, 2009
Posts
30,181
Discuss!

These are my proposals:
  • Abolishment of pre-recorded backing vocals.
  • Increasing the maximum amount of people allowed on stage from 6 to 8 (or 10 even), I think it's a good compromise between only allowing live vocals and still make it possible for dancers to do their thing. Also, it's long overdue tbh, 6 has been a very low number for years now and is just and odd number in this time and age.
  • Acts and songwriters/composers need to have a proven connection to the music market of the country they represent, no more shopping around for entries! The concept of Eurovision is entries representing their countries, I feel like we diverged from that. It doesn't mean that all songwriters/composers need to come from said country, but at least they need to be an active part of that music scene (past Eurovision entries don't count here!). I am fully aware that some music markets are integrated and that micro-states are 'de facto' part of their neighbors' markets, but a change of rule would take that into consideration while still protect the concept of entries actually representing their countries.
  • Running order needs to be random! I think we pretty much established now that letting the "producers" choose it opens up to favoritism, corruption and tactics. We should have a transparent and fair system, and there a methods to keep a nice flow in the production (draw the songs from genre/tempo pots for instance).
  • Abolishment of juries (now I am not delusional and know it won't happen, but at least decrease their powers to a 40/60 situation in favor of televoters).
  • Have it explicitly written into the rules of Eurovision that only recognized independent countries that are at least partially geographically within the European continent, or at least have a history of a minimum of 5 previous entries in the contest, can take part and scrap the idea of the dated European Broadcasting Area (that EBU don't even follow themselves). This would close the door to any risk of having countries like USA, China, Qatar, Morocco, Lebanon, Canada or others joining. It's not EUROvision if the world can join! Let's protect the brand and concept!
  • Have the juries verbally give out 8-12 points (I know it would make the show longer, but don't we want more suspense? I know that we can't go back to the old days of giving out 1-12 when we have so many countries and also split the televoting results, but this could be a compromise that could still work).
  • Re-establishing the language rule (another idealistic fantasy that won't happen, but that's just my opinion).
 
Last edited:

H.P. Lovecraft

Well-known member
Joined
February 24, 2021
Posts
670
Ehm? I was always against Australia entering the contest so not sure about the question?

But now they've been in for some years and should we just throw them out? xshrug

I see I'm in the camp who want to protect the Eurovision brand, I have nothing against non-European countries just to clarify, but I am in the camp who think Eurovision should stay European and it's just that simply. People are free to disagree of course.
I have not judged or reproached you, A-lister. I have read your posts well (obviously the recent ones - I signed up not long ago). I understand well that you want to protect the brand and in large part I am with you.

I don't want Australia to be thrown out but, by virtue of its presence at the ESC, a "Wild Card" that guarantees a non-European presence is not unthinkable.

Here there are no better ideas than the others, I'm not right I'm not wrong, we are discussing to grow something we love.
 

H.P. Lovecraft

Well-known member
Joined
February 24, 2021
Posts
670
I really like the idea of a Wildcard.

I much prefer Option C (but not necessarily hosted in Australia). Not only would there be more content for fans of Eurovision, especially if it were held in the Eurovision off-season, but as I have a concern with the internal selection process of a Wild Card.

The decision of such an internal selection would involve the Eurovision Song Contest Reference Group (who we really mean most of the time when we say EBU) which are to make decisions in the general interest of the ESC, but if given a range of potential nations to which a wild card can be given, I could see there being difficulties coming to a decision. As they only meet four to five times a year and the members include those who are otherwise busy in their regular duties at the broadcaster they represent, they may not have the time to fully consider detailed proposals which could lead to more risk-averse decision-making.

Having a selection show would help resolve these difficulties in part because those entries would allow potential participants a means to demonstrate the level of support broadcasters and other commercial partners can bring to the table. This could lead to more diversity than if left to internal selection alone.

I would probably call the show 'Passport to Eurovision Song Contest' or the 'Passport to Eurovision' for short myself.
Great analysis, Lance xclap I also really liked what you would like to call this competition. I think that if we study this situation better and, like crazy, send a letter to the EBU, we might even get their interest.

Here we are discussing the change of many rules (televoting, juries etc ...) but I think that none of this will be changed. Changes always involve controversy. I believe that the only way to ESC is to continue to grow and strengthen as a brand. European and EBU affiliate music could soon reach the same mainstream power as the US. We must not only make a show but allow our singers to make a career and make themselves known beyond national borders. We must avoid that many of the talents who tread the stage of the ESC are lost in oblivion. We must try to get the name "circus" out of the mouth of ignorant people.

Anyway, I'm glad the two of us agree and prefer the same option (C). I thought of Australia as a host nation because it deserves great recognition from the EBU. Australia loved and always believed in this musical contest. Then, of course, the "Passport to Eurovision" selection can also be made itinerant. I already see the Japanese partying in the streets following this event xyaaay

Come on guys! Together we can create something wonderful! xheat
 

Lance Esgard

Well-known member
Joined
March 15, 2021
Posts
372
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Great analysis, Lance. I also really liked what you would like to call this competition. I think that if we study this situation better and, like crazy, send a letter to the EBU, we might even get their interest.
Oh, thanks! (Somehow I thought you were on this forum a lot longer than you actually have).

I like how a Wildcard has a potential to strike a balance between expanding the Eurovision brand as the EBU clearly desires and not giving permanent spaces away to non-European nations given the limits to the number of nations which can participate if shows aren't to be too long or numerous (and because it IS the Eurovision Song Contest).

When Australia first came in and for a couple years later I could see Australia leaving if Eurovision Asia started up, but as Australia is due to participate until 2023 (so one year as if we were a Big Five member plus 7 further years) and we know the Reference Group unanimously voted to allow Australia in for the votes in 2016-2018 (and probably had to vote to even allow a five-year deal to be voted upon), its hard to see Australia being kicked out now unless there was a change in circumstances.
 

A-lister

Veteran
Joined
December 28, 2009
Posts
30,181
I have not judged or reproached you, A-lister. I have read your posts well (obviously the recent ones - I signed up not long ago). I understand well that you want to protect the brand and in large part I am with you.

I don't want Australia to be thrown out but, by virtue of its presence at the ESC, a "Wild Card" that guarantees a non-European presence is not unthinkable.

Here there are no better ideas than the others, I'm not right I'm not wrong, we are discussing to grow something we love.

I understand, yeah I just wanted to clarify (for those who might not know) that my approach was equal to Australia joining, I was never for that either (and I have nothing against Australia), so I am not picking and choosing here.

Of course we are just discussing, I never said there is a right or wrong here, but there are two different camps though I believe. I believe that the brand and concept is unique, and I just feel (from my perspective of course, people are free to disagree) that opening Eurovision to more non-European expansion will be the end of the brand as we know it.

I'm always happy to hear music from different places and get to know other countries, Eurovision however is a uniquely European brand and I feel it should stay that way. Also, creating a some sort of "Worldvision" is complicated for alot of other different reasons too.
 

ESCConor

Active member
Joined
September 26, 2018
Posts
190
Ive been thinking about this, but instead of the big 5, why dont the 5 best performing countries based off their qualification record over the last 5 years, along with the host country go straight to the final instead? I believe this should change every 5 contests.

I think this would give some of the big 5 like the UK for example, a wake up call to improve and tell them to sort it out and it would reward countries who are successful.
 

HayashiM

Well-known member
Joined
January 26, 2019
Posts
2,602
Location
Prague, Czech Republic
Ive been thinking about this, but instead of the big 5, why dont the 5 best performing countries based off their qualification record over the last 5 years, along with the host country go straight to the final instead? I believe this should change every 5 contests.

I think this would give some of the big 5 like the UK for example, a wake up call to improve and tell them to sort it out and it would reward countries who are successful.
The big 5 is there because of those 5 countries contributing the most money and also having the largest audience. It doesn't even make sense to establish any "merit-based" prequalifiers, since if it weren't for those large big 5 audiences, EBU would've probably been very happy with just shortening the show and cutting the number of qualifiers down.
Besides, under this idea, a "new big 5" country would've had a big advantage to also keep its status in the next cycle - a self-perpetuating prophecy of sorts.
 

MopManMoss

Well-known member
Joined
April 1, 2021
Posts
100
Ive been thinking about this, but instead of the big 5, why dont the 5 best performing countries based off their qualification record over the last 5 years, along with the host country go straight to the final instead? I believe this should change every 5 contests.

I think this would give some of the big 5 like the UK for example, a wake up call to improve and tell them to sort it out and it would reward countries who are successful.
Right but then you'd have tonnes of small countries and lesser economically developed countries being unable to participate because the burden of cost would be distributed more evenly
 

PollyWantsACracker

Well-known member
Joined
April 10, 2021
Posts
512
Now, let's see which songs have won in the period 2003 - 2008 when we had only televoting system and do we still remember / listen to these songs.

2003 - Sertab Erener : Everyway that I can - Still listening Sertab after that performance


2004 - Ruslana : Wild dances - amazing performance we all still remember, not my personal fav


2005 - Elena Paparizou : My number one - still listening to this song, amazing


2006 - Lordi : Hard rock hallelujah - I don't like the song, but it is one of the iconic wins of ESC we all remember


2007 - Marija Šerifović : Molitva - the best ever ESC winner, an iconic song, the most amazing vocal and staging at the ESC thus far


2008 - Dima Bilan : Believe - great song, great staging, great singer, but forgotten


Now, we may conclude that the winners during televote times were all performers whom we listened after the competition and are memorable winners we didn't forget.

We may also conclude that almost all of these songs were trully quality pop songs. You don't need a jury to confirm that.

But, they are all Eastern European, apart from Lordi.

So, why we have juries again after 2008?

So that the Scandinavian musical industry lobby can influence again the results and later on sell their songs to other competitors.

So that they can give a Swedish song from Malta 18329338 points, whereas the people will award it 30 pts as nobody actually liked the song that much to vote for it, plus we have to bear with a grim face of the contestant facing her downfall, but who thought she had won even before the competition had started.

There, let the music to the people. It is us who listen to the music in the end, or we don't.

You can't create a new star solely by winning the ESC if the people will not follow her or his music.

Also, some forgotten winner will not make the contest more popular nor better in terms of quality.

Therefore, the juries are completely inutile for both the contest and the people loving ESC and the European music in general.
 
Last edited:

Sammy

Well-known member
Joined
February 1, 2014
Posts
7,912
Now, let's see which songs have won in the period 2003 - 2008 when we had only televoting system and do we still remember / listen to these songs.

2003 - Sertab Erener : Everyway that I can - Still listening Sertab after that performance


2004 - Ruslana : Wild dances - amazing performance we all still remember, not my personal fav


2005 - Elena Paparizou : My number one - still listening to this song, amazing


2006 - Lordi : Hard rock hallelujah - I don't like the song, but it is one of the iconic wins of ESC we all remember


2007 - Marija Šerifović : Molitva - the best ever ESC winner, an iconic song, the most amazing vocal and staging at the ESC thus far


2008 - Dima Bilan : Believe - great song, great staging, great singer, but forgotten


Now, we may conclude that the winners during televote times were all performers whom we listened after the competition and are memorable winners we didn't forget.

We may also conclude that almost all of these songs were trully quality pop songs. You don't need a jury to confirm that.

But, they are all Eastern European, apart from Lordi.

So, why we have juries again after 2008?

So that the Scandinavian musical industry lobby can influence again the results and later on sell their songs to other competitors.

So that they can give a Swedish song from Malta 18329338 points, whereas the people will award it 30 pts as nobody actually liked the song that much to vote for it, plus we have to bear with a grim face of the contestant facing her downfall, but who thought she had won even before the competition had started.

There, let the music to the people. It is us who listen to the music in the end, or we don't.

You can't create a new star solely by winning the ESC if the people will not follow her or his music.

Also, some forgotten winner will not make the contest more popular nor better in terms of quality.

Therefore, the juries are completely inutile for both the contest and the people loving ESC and the European music in general.
Excuse me, but your listening habits or your taste/ judgement what quality is, does not equal the „we“ you constantly use. (except if you use the royal „we“, in which case, your majesty, I would still beg to differ :mrgreen:)
Therefore, you‘re whole reasonning is flawed.
For better understanding just say : „I don‘t like juries when they don‘t match my personal taste“ and nobody would object.:lol:
 

PollyWantsACracker

Well-known member
Joined
April 10, 2021
Posts
512
Excuse me, but your listening habits or your taste/ judgement what quality is, does not equal the „we“ you constantly use. (except if you use the royal „we“, in which case, your majesty, I would still beg to differ :mrgreen:)
Therefore, you‘re whole reasonning is flawed.
For better understanding just say : „I don‘t like juries when they don‘t match my personal taste“ and nobody would object.:lol:

These people were elected winners by televote from the WHOLE Europe.

I said I DON'T LIKE PERSONALLY AT LEAST 3 OF THESE ENTRIES. And that I liked basically only 3 of these winners.

WHAT DO THESE WINNERS HAVE WITH MY PERSONAL TASTE IF THEY WERE ELECTED WINNERS BY THE WHOLE EUROPE DESPITE ME NOT LIKING THEM?
🙈🙈🙈🙈

AND YOUR OWN COUNTRY GAVE EG. THE OBNOXIOUS RUSSLANA 12 POINTS. Not mine / mines. 🤣🤣🤣

LOGIC NOW? 🤣🤣🤣🤣 I'm not gonna go
into details of your logic as It could appear very cruel. 🤣🤣
 
Last edited:

PollyWantsACracker

Well-known member
Joined
April 10, 2021
Posts
512
LOL dude!
WHY DO YOU HAVE TO SHOUT? xroflxrofl

Oh it's not shouting, I wasn't that inappropriate nor angry haha.

I always use Caps Lock on this forum to convey sth important as the white letters on black screen simply blur in and look like spaghetti sentences. 🤣
 

GianlucaTomoe

Well-known member
Joined
September 11, 2015
Posts
2,586
Location
Birmingham, UK
  • Throwing Austria, Czech Republic, Georgia, Iceland, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Portugal, San Marino and United Kingdom out of the contest with immediate effect, and allowing them to come back only if/when they start to select good songs again. Keeping an eye on Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland as well. If they keep sending bad songs, they need to be thrown out too.
  • Allowing participation of non-European countries with big musical industries, such as USA, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, South Korea.
  • Ban to the participation of male singers
  • Abolishment of televoting, return to 100% jury voting with 10 people in every national jury
  • Ban to rock songs and other niche, unlistenable musical genres, such as metal and other shouty things
  • Ban to joke entries
  • Preventing fans to create hypes for horrible songs, even using censorship if necessary
  • Preventing diaspora and block voting in every possible way
  • Introduction of the 9 and 11 points
  • Fight against misogynistic statements from the fans and other kind of hatred against female singers in the forums and social medias
 

hzalfa

Active member
Joined
May 21, 2019
Posts
65
I'm quite surprised by the amount of people who want almost a complete overhaul of the contest. Personally the only change I strongly want it is an increase for the maximum length of a song to 3:30 minutes. I think the current time limit encourages entries written specifically for Eurovision rather than songs relevant to a country's music industry.
 

Gitte

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2018
Posts
324
Location
Belgium
  • Throwing Austria, Czech Republic, Georgia, Iceland, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Portugal, San Marino and United Kingdom out of the contest with immediate effect, and allowing them to come back only if/when they start to select good songs again. Keeping an eye on Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland as well. If they keep sending bad songs, they need to be thrown out too.
  • Allowing participation of non-European countries with big musical industries, such as USA, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, South Korea.
  • Ban to the participation of male singers
  • Abolishment of televoting, return to 100% jury voting with 10 people in every national jury
  • Ban to rock songs and other niche, unlistenable musical genres, such as metal and other shouty things
  • Ban to joke entries
  • Preventing fans to create hypes for horrible songs, even using censorship if necessary
  • Preventing diaspora and block voting in every possible way
  • Introduction of the 9 and 11 points
  • Fight against misogynistic statements from the fans and other kind of hatred against female singers in the forums and social medias

giphy.gif
 

heke1988

Well-known member
Joined
March 4, 2018
Posts
1,362
Location
Finland
  • Throwing Austria, Czech Republic, Georgia, Iceland, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Portugal, San Marino and United Kingdom out of the contest with immediate effect, and allowing them to come back only if/when they start to select good songs again. Keeping an eye on Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland as well. If they keep sending bad songs, they need to be thrown out too.
  • Allowing participation of non-European countries with big musical industries, such as USA, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, South Korea.
  • Ban to the participation of male singers
  • Abolishment of televoting, return to 100% jury voting with 10 people in every national jury
  • Ban to rock songs and other niche, unlistenable musical genres, such as metal and other shouty things
  • Ban to joke entries
  • Preventing fans to create hypes for horrible songs, even using censorship if necessary
  • Preventing diaspora and block voting in every possible way
  • Introduction of the 9 and 11 points
  • Fight against misogynistic statements from the fans and other kind of hatred against female singers in the forums and social medias

1. No

2. No, because time-zone issues with USA, Canada, Mexico and Brazil.

3. Why?

4. No, because ESC is entertainment and it is made for the audience

5. No, rock/metal music is listenable music, you aren't just used to listen it

6. Joke entries could be fun, so banning them isn't good thing

7. How?

8. That's impossible, because people have right to vote any entry, even it is annoying

9. That would be interesting, although more time will go to calculating results

10. How about misandristism against male singers?
 

hpp0

Member
Joined
May 9, 2021
Posts
25
From the ones that haven't been said, the one that I would really like to bring back is the 2016-2018 way of presenting televotes. If we are lucky and the winner is high in the ranking like this year, the winner gets their spotlight, but in 2019 you would have to write down the points to realise that Norway won. Even Sweden came off as a not so liked entry when in reality it was 9th in televoting.
Thought they say it's for tv purposes to keep the suspense, I feel like it's more to cover up the differences in jury and televoting and it really takes away from the people's ranking which should be the most important part.

From the ones that have been said, from the realistic ones:
-No pre recorded vocals
-Reform the juries to be at least more people and all relevant to the music industry
-Make people on stage at least 7 so that there will be some symmetry

From the not so realistic:
-Language rule to make a come back
-Random running order and if it happens for many songs of similar style/performance to be back to back then do a few changes
 

A-lister

Veteran
Joined
December 28, 2009
Posts
30,181
  • Throwing Austria, Czech Republic, Georgia, Iceland, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Portugal, San Marino and United Kingdom out of the contest with immediate effect, and allowing them to come back only if/when they start to select good songs again. Keeping an eye on Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland as well. If they keep sending bad songs, they need to be thrown out too.
  • Allowing participation of non-European countries with big musical industries, such as USA, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, South Korea.
  • Ban to the participation of male singers
  • Abolishment of televoting, return to 100% jury voting with 10 people in every national jury
  • Ban to rock songs and other niche, unlistenable musical genres, such as metal and other shouty things
  • Ban to joke entries
  • Preventing fans to create hypes for horrible songs, even using censorship if necessary
  • Preventing diaspora and block voting in every possible way
  • Introduction of the 9 and 11 points
  • Fight against misogynistic statements from the fans and other kind of hatred against female singers in the forums and social medias

Wow a horror edition :lol:
 
Top Bottom