Almost as soon as Eurovision 2016 went off the air Saturday evening, chatter turned to the grand final voting — and it hasn’t stopped. So many twists and turns and so many things that we just have to talk about. We’ve pulled out eight of the biggest talking points so far. Some we have discussed. Some we haven’t. In either case we want your opinions.
Australia would have won under 2015 voting system
How much difference a year can make. The decision to switch to the new 2016 voting system led to one of the most exciting ends to a contest ever, with everyone left to wonder whether Ukraine – and then Russia – could snatch the title away from Dami Im. It proved to be a double blow for Dami though, as not only did she lose her lead on the night, but it turned out she would have won the contest under last year’s voting system.
Danish juror gives the wrong points
Danish juror Hilda Heick showed just how wrong things could go in the voting. In her votes, she managed to rank the songs in reverse order, putting Georgia as her favourite as well as ranking Ukraine highly. With her correct votes, Ukraine would have received no points from the Danish jury in the final and Australia 12. Thankfully, it wouldn’t have changed the overall result, but it would have made the televotes even more nerve-wracking by the end.
Sweden’s jury points to Azerbaijan & Malta
Nepotism or just personal taste? That was the question on many people’s minds after the Swedish jury votes came in. Jurors who had personal connections to Azerbaijan and Malta (both acts included Swedish backing vocalists and songwriters) awarded them high marks. It’s fair to say that this was a little bit more blatant than some of the other voting controversies.
Armenia’s jury votes
Sweden aren’t the only country to have raised eyebrows with their jury vote, though. Amongst several other cases – more of which we’ll get to – Armenia’s jury seems stands out in particular. With consistent votes across all five jurors, particularly within the top ten, the independence of the jury has been called in to question. The EBU deemed the votes to be good and proper, leading many to wonder just what the boundaries are for a jury to vote within.
Ukraine and Russia’s votes
It seems that not all love is lost between Ukraine and Russia, at least. The Ukrainian televote gave Russia’s Sergey Lazarev the maximum 12 points, whilst the people of Russia responded with 10 points to Jamala. This seems to be a good example of the music winning above politics. Unfortunately, the Russian and Ukrainian juries didn’t quite see it the same way as the rest of the country: Russia’s jury ranked Ukraine 24th, whilst Ukraine’s jurors ranked Lazarev 22nd – making them one of the many countries who didn’t award Russia any jury votes.
Lithuania and Czech Republic’s jury vote
For the second year in a row, Lithuania’s jury seems to have made a very obvious statement with their votes. Four of the Lithuanian jury members ranked Russia’s Sergey Lazarev dead last in the final, with the fifth juror ranking him 22nd. This time, however, they were not alone: the Czech Republic’s jury had three members rank Russia last, whilst a fourth placed Sergey in 24th place. In contrast, the Lithuanian public ranked Russia 3rd, whilst he was the second favourite of the Czech public.
Iceland only country not to vote for Jamala
In 2012, it was Italy who bucked the trend and were the only country who didn’t vote for Loreen’s “Euphoria”. Well, this year it’s the turn of Iceland, who awarded no points at all to Jamala’s “1944”. This was the case for both the jury vote (where she placed 15th) and the televote (narrowly missing out on a point in 11th). Don’t worry Iceland, we’re sure that the Ukrainian team won’t hold it against you next year. And no, we don’t know what the dog’s about either.
United Kingdom jury awards 12 points to Georgia
Sure. Having already awarded points to the likes of Australia, Ukraine and France, it seemed like the UK’s jury points were really up for grabs. But they snubbed the more conventional popular options like Russia, Belgium, Malta and instead opted for Georgia. Certainly an odd choice, but in defense of the UK jury, Georgia also found fans in the Polish and German juries to name two. Perhaps less defensible is the fact that the UK jury ranked Sweden 24th. Maybe you should have kept quiet, Christer…
There are, of course, lots more things still to talk about with Eurovision 2016 and we’ll be covering even more topics over the next few days. Let us know what your favourite moment of the grand final voting was and what else caught your eye down in the comments!
Malta got 7 points from the Swedish jury, which means they were their 4th favourite. They also placed 4th overall from all the jury votes so I don’t see how you can find anything suspicious. They also got 12 points and a few 10s.
Azerbaijan, on the other hand is a bit weird, but quite understandable as it was a catchy typically Swedish pop song, and she performed quite well.
Albeit its drawbacks, jury voting needs to remain 50/50. Without it, we’ll see the likes of Poland, Serbia or Lithuania winning in no time with an average entry.
The Georgian entry had a strong British flavour. It reminded me of bands like Kasabian. I wasn’t surprised that they liked it! It was also to Eurovision standards probably the most contemporary entry. That is something that the British jury has always been very favourable to. Good for them to reward it. It’s possible they discussed it. Personally, I wouldn’t mind that a jury would just come up with 1 list after talking all the entries through. I was more shocked about any professional jury giving points to songs that just were performed very badly (Azerbaijan comes to mind). The… Read more »
What are You all complaining about? Russia gave 10 points to Ukraine because of the Ukrainian diaspora in Russia and Russia as usual got 12 p. from Ukraine because of the many Russians in the Ukraine. That is it. And it Gas always been like this. Where is the surprise? In fact, Russia is the biggest minority in so many exSoviet countries. Why can’t you see that Televoting results are extremely biased. You always complain about the juries because your fabourite candidate did not win. You however never Point at the flaws of the temevoting system.
As an Australian (who are lucky to be in Eurovision), I am proud of Dami’s performance but I believe the people got it about right Russia then Ukraine,Poland, Australia. The mainstream media instilled Russophobia after a US financed coup in Ukraine aided by openly nazi forces is what has driven a wedge between Russia and Ukraine. Just check how many Ukrainians support their government.The Ukrainian and Russian people do not hate each other. The dodgiest part of the contest was the jury voting of Lithuania, Czech republic, Georgia and Estonia. Let the people sort out the politics and the Eurovision… Read more »
Aron F.
In voting system from 2009 to 2012 , country who finished first with televote, last with juries, would got from 3 to 12 points from that country.
In voting system from 2013 to 2015, country who finished first with televote and last place with juries, would got from 0 to 12, but chance to got some points is minimal. Only if we had 1 in televote last with juries, 1 with juries last with televote and many similar postion 2 nd with televote 25 with juries, 2 nd with juries 25 with televote.
@Ivan Browdy
In the old system, if the jury gave 1st place to a song and the televote last (or vice versa), the song would have gotten 0 points, because they combined the rankings. Now it would get 12 points from the jury and 0 from the public, which is 6 points in the old system.
@Ivan Browdy
It’s all about the ranking. The original rules state that the ranks of the jury and the televote are combined to make a final rank then points are then distributed according to the final rank.
This is awesome! Thanks wiwi!
I feel i should point out that two professionals ranking songs in the same order is not statistically impossible; however it is statistically improbable. Subtle difference. 🙂
I read in The Guardian (UK newspaper) that the UK jury loved the Georgian band so much because it’s as if they were formed in the UK: the look, the sound, the lyrics – all cried out British!
I add: They gave a much stronger musical and vocal performance in the Grand Final compared to the Semi, so the rise in marks does make sense from a professional standpoint.
Another shocking fact is how the IRISH jury gave NIL points to Australia, whilst the voters there gave 6 points. Ireland was one of the few juries to award nothing to Dami Im. Why????
WTF were the UK jury smoking when they awarded “douze points” to Georgia? Maybe they were on an acid trip?? LMAO!
Why Australia would won esc with old voting system??? I don’t understand???? The results would be the same ( just divide it by 2)
I can understand Iceland. Both jury and televoters didn`t give any point Ukraine. Maybe song 1944 isn`t their taste of music. Iceland is specifical as like as Australia. Australia decisions are also so interesting.
@Rambamba
That’s why the Ukrainian televote gave Russia points and the Russian televote gave Ukraine points.
@CookyMonzta
I agree but don’t you find it weird noticing that the Russian juries gave Israel dead last place, while they were in the top 10 of the juries overall?
There is one funny thing about televoting : it’s the results from Serbia which are very interesting. Serbia got 80 points from televoting and they “amazingly” earned 6 “12 points” ! (from Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, FYR Macedonia, Montenegro, Slovenia and Switzerland) so out of the 80 points they’ve earned from the televote, 72 come “directly” from their geographical and historical situation or diaspora (Switzerland). The 8 remaining points are both “4 points” from Austria & Italy. With that being said, I’m absolutely not hating on them ! Good for them ! And to be fair, the same voting situation… Read more »
The best thing would be stopping countries voting when they’re not competing – Big 5 in semi-finals and non-qualifiers in the final.
Re: MrBrightside MAY 17, 2016 @ 7:17 PM “Of course Eurovision IS about politics. Have you noticed this – when the voting is starting on the screen there is no artists’ names or titles of the songs. Only flags and names of countries remain. Isn’t the message for the audience pretty obvious? “Vote for a country, not for a song”. Sad, but you cannot deny it :<" That's so the various national broadcasters have room to put the specific phone numbers on the screen. Check out some of the YouTube "recap" videos from channels other than the official Eurovision one:… Read more »
Televoting is a joke.
Get rid of the televoting diaspora bias, bloc-voters and neighbour voting.
90s system is the best.
Live orchestra, song in official languages only (less impact of Swedish and Greek-French teams on the contest) and just the professional jury vote (with a wider selection of professionals up to 20 people in each country).
A song in russian or ukrainian will struggle to win again with the jury thus problem solved. Both United Kingdom and Ireland fortunes rising like a phoenix. If eastern europe decides to withdraw, it will get even better.
What’s this fuss about Malta getting 7 points from the Swedish jury? It’s not like they came last. The ended up in the 4th position from jury alone since they absorbed many other high points from other countries! Some of these are just conspiracy theories.
Removing the jury would be stupid. Smaller countries are always at a disadvantage and suffer from diaspora.
Thanks!
@Jonas There are only Russian phone operators in Crimea, thus Russia.
Do voters in Crimea count toward the Russian results or the Ukrainian results?
@mad-professor: You could be right, about Georgia’s song sounding like a British song. Something about their video always reminded me of the Buggles’ 1979 video for “Video Killed The Radio Star”. Should it be any surprise that the U.K. jury gave Georgia 12 points?
We had situation that from 2009 juries pushed so hard few countries in contest Sweden,Malta,Azerbaijan,Ukraine,Israel, Italy, sometimeLithuania especially in semi and in that group from period 2014 2015 joined 3 new countries Australia, Belgium and The Netherlands.
@ESCArgy: Regarding Russia and Ukraine: The televoters on both sides were an example of good sportsmanship, without a doubt. As far as the juries are concerned, methinks it was more about strategy than sociopolitics, because I think they saw the bookies’ boards before the competition (RUS #1, UKR #2), and neither one wanted to give the other ANY advantage at all, and left it to the other countries. 21 juries left RUS blank, but 18 juries left UKR blank; the difference-maker being that UKR got 12 points from 11 of them. As for Israel, if it hadn’t been for the… Read more »
And we had situation that in 2015, 2016 Serbia is on last place in Estonia with juries in 2015,2016 and last with televote , and in 2015 was last in combined voting televote plus juries. Serbia got 0 points from Estonia in final from 2007 to 2016 .
The Danish jury ‘accident’ should never have happened. The Russian jury video should never have happened. Jury members (apparently) colluding should never have happened. Surely the EBU can afford to have someone on hand in the voting countries to make sure that isn’t the case. Better still, fly the jury to the venue and get them to vote in a controlled situation. On the same performance as televoters. Then when someone screws up only in the final rehearsal, the general public won’t wonder why they got a low jury score after getting it right on the big night.
Sweden should consider themselves lucky that they got all of 1 point from the UK.
@Jonas
Of course: it’s not at all that they voted for Georgia as it was the most British sounding song in the contest, but because it was a ‘novelty act’ (completely ignoring the fact that it wasn’t).
and BTW, this year’s Eurovision is full of politics, scandals, hatred between countries… it was created to unify european countries so they can join for one night and celebrate together. now it’s everything about corruption, rivalry and who gets more points from the neighbours and have less haters… It’s a shame!!!
For me is shock was when Malta gave 12 points to UK from their juries. And 12 points to Malta to Montengero, we knew that head of delegation of Montenegro was member at Malta national final.
And we every year from 2013 had surprise voting from Germany , in 2013 we had 12 points to Hungary, in 2014 12 points to Denmark, in 2015 12 points to Russia and this year 12 points from juries to Israel.
No wonder that the UK gave 12 points to Georgia. The song sounded totally brit pop, like Oasis or Blur, IMO it should have ranked top 10 at least
I agree with Someone, Norway’s jury votes are strange too – 0 points for Sweden??
After the show my favourite is Georgia, some can’t imaging it while they hate the song themselves, but they really caught my attention and I voted for it together with Netherlands, who sang well and had the best song(after show) as well.
So Hilda’s 12 points to Georgia was an accident… At least UK’s 12 points were correct, and I understood that. I usually call Nika and YGL “Psychadelic Beatles” and I think the UK jury agreed
@ESCFAN
I do agree with you re. juries and small countries – however i must mention that Chiara placed second in 2005 with a ballad sung 3rd in the running order in a final full of over the top loud acts. And the voting was 100% televoting in a year when diaspora and neighbour voting were the number one highlight of the night. So I do believe with an act that stands out Malta, and other small countries can still make it.
@ESCArgy Agree. Most Ukrainians hate Russians and most Russians hate Ukrainians. However I don’t think that the 6 million Ukrainians living in Russia hate Ukrainians living in Ukraine (maybe only the 500,000 refugees that have rescued to Russia in 2014)
@ESCArgy Agree. Most Ukrainians hate Russians and most Russians hate Ukrainians. However I don’t think that the 6 million Ukrainians living in Russian hate Ukrainians living in Ukraine (maybe only the 500,000 refugees that have rescued to Russian in 2014)
Could it be the UK jury was as confused as the single Danish juror who voted upside down?
I do love the jury votes as they are needed to counteract the diaspora votes. Without the juryvotes it would be almost pretty impossible for any country without a significant diaspora to score well. But there are so many inconsistent jury votes this year and I actually think that there should be a system were the jurors dont know what country each of the songs come from. UK pretty much ALWAYS give high marks to Sweden and THIS year they rank Sweden 24th? It is obviously JUST BECAUSE of Christer Björkmans comments earlier. They are not impartial when they deliberately… Read more »
This is a good compilation of all the drama that’s been going on, except I would change the UK giving Georgia 12 points for Poland being massacred by the juries. It may be kind of odd, but I don’t think it shows any sory of corruption, they just decided to vote for something with a british sound.
R.I.P eurovision 1956 2016 eurovision became a joke first of all australia nearly won the contest and if iam not mistaken its eurovsion right? and they said they are thinking to let usa and china in to what a joke i have nothing about thse countries but they are not from europe its like puts brazil argentina ecc ecc in the european football cup .. and what about small country like malta they go so well with the jury votesmost of the people around europe they where saying its a winning song and one of the best there is very… Read more »
@Rambamba
Most Ukrainians hate Russians and most Russians hate Ukrainians. No doubt. The answer to my question, on the other hand, is debatable. What do you think?
Of course Eurovision IS about politics. Have you noticed this – when the voting is starting on the screen there is no artists’ names or titles of the songs. Only flags and names of countries remain. Isn’t the message for the audience pretty obvious? “Vote for a country, not for a song”. Sad, but you cannot deny it :<
Odd choice is 12 pts for Georgia? Omfg they have the best song. Because you are gay and you dont understand good music, it doesnt mean it is odd choice. Opinions of wiwi editors are really funny. More and more, nobody cares about your gay opinion 😀
Does no one really find Norway’s jury vote suspicious or is it just me…
I find it puzzling that the chief UK juror thought that Georgia was 7th best in the semi final on Thursday yet 2 days later she ranked it number 1 choice
@ESCArgy
thank you! this year we have had an open and honest national final for the first time. i hope next year the song will be good too )
I calculated that under the old voting sytem the Czech Republic would have gotten just one measly point from Croatia, and Germany would get 7 points, 3 from Georgia and 4 from Switzerland.
@ESCArgy the sam about Ukraine. Ukrainian jury gave Russia the last place, while Ukrainians voted for Russia… Russophobia? Nazism?
Norway congratulations on the dag! (Today they celebraste that we in sweden decided that ok, they can A independent country! BUT wath out, maby we will change our minds! ; )
Well Norway, what do you say!
”Trist att Frans ska få lida för att Sverige proppade dit Norge i hockey-VM tidigare idag!”.
Kanske hade han rätt.
”Sverige klager på at Norge ikke ga dem 12poeng i #Eurovision . Vel, søta bror, KARMA kalles det…”, twittrar norska ”Hockeydokka”.
Obviously Malta will not win without juries’ votes. Malta had a winning song yet they got 21 in televoting. Wow and people talk about politics being over and done with. The juries are there to stay or else small countries might as well leave the contest for countries like Russia to compete alone.