Minutes before the voting segment of the grand final of Eurovision 2022, the European Broadcasting Union sent out a brief e-mail saying that it had detected “irregular voting patterns” among the national juries of six countries during Semi-Final 2. 

Now the EBU has named those six countries: Azerbaijan, Georgia, Montenegro, Poland, Romania,  and San Marino. It has also made its allegations of wrongdoing more explicit, showing how the juries in these countries appeared to swap points.

Because of the serious nature of these allegations, and in the name of full clarity, we are re-publishing the entire EBU statement below.

Eurovision 2022: Six national juries swapped voted during Semi-Final 2 

EBU STATEMENT IN FULL

This year’s Eurovision Song Contest (ESC) was an enormous success in bringing hundreds of millions of people across the world together in unity and celebration.

As communicated on Saturday 14 May, the European Broadcasting Union’s (EBU) independent pan-European Voting Partner detected irregular voting patterns in the jury votes of six countries taking part in the Second Semi-Final: Azerbaijan, Georgia, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, San Marino.

The integrity of the voting, both by the national juries in each country and the viewers voting by phone or SMS, is essential to the show’s success. It is the EBU’s duty to all stakeholders, not least all 40 participating public service broadcasters, to ensure we can deliver a valid result at the end of each of the Live Shows. Any breach in the rules is consequently taken very seriously.

In the Second Semi-Final, it was observed that four of the six juries all placed five of the other countries in their Top Five (taking into account they could not vote for themselves); one jury voted for the same five countries in their Top 6; and the last of the six juries placed four of the others in the Top 4 and the fifth in their Top 7. Four of the six received at least one set of 12 points which is the maximum that can be awarded.

The pattern in question was detected as irregular by the pan-European Voting Partner and acknowledged by the Independent Voting Monitor, as five of these six countries were ranked outside the Top 8 by the juries in the 15 other countries voting in the same Semi-Final (which included three of the Big Five: Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom). Additionally, four of the six countries were ranked in the Bottom 6 of the other 15 countries voting in this Semi-Final. A jury voting pattern irregularity of such a scale is unprecedented.

 

 

As stated in the Eurovision Song Contest Rules and in the Official Voting instructions of the Contest, if votes by National Juries present irregular voting patterns (as may be detected by the pan-European Voting Partner and acknowledged by the Independent Voting Monitor), the ESC Executive Supervisor has the right to remove the votes concerned for allocating the ranks and to replace them with a substitute aggregated result calculated automatically to determine the final country result of these countries in the Second Semi-Final.

Given the unprecedented nature of the irregularity detected in the Second Semi Final, the EBU in consultation with the pan-European Voting Partner and the Independent Voting Monitor decided, in accordance with the Voting Instructions of the Contest, to exercise its right to remove the votes cast by the six juries in question from the ranking allocation in the Grand Final to preserve the integrity of the voting system. Consequently, the same procedure was followed and the automatically calculated substitute aggregate result has been used to determine the final jury results of the six countries involved, in the Grand Final.

These decisions were approved by the Chair of the ESC Reference Group, the Contest’s governing board, and the Deputy Director General of the EBU in line with the requirements of the Voting Instructions of the Contest.

The EBU has since discussed the jury patterns with the relevant broadcasters and given them the opportunity to further investigate the jury voting in their countries.

The EBU reconfirms its decision to replace the jury votes for these six countries with a substitute aggregate result in both the Second Semi-Final and the Grand Final.

The EBU also confirms the final rankings of the 40 participants in the 2022 Eurovision Song Contest.

The EBU, its Members and the Reference Group will continue to collaborate closely on safeguarding the integrity and success of an event that has been a unique platform for creative talent over 66 years, and looks forward to continuing to entertaining audiences worldwide.

ENDS

Notes to Editors

What is an ‘irregular vote’?

An irregular vote is detected if multiple security checks are triggered:

a) Deviation from the norm – Does the result reflect the overall taste of the other professional jurors? Bearing in mind that they are all music professionals requested to vote on the basis of the same criteria laid down under the Rules of the Contest (e.g. a national jury puts at the top of its ranking (a) song(s) that the majority of the others

b) Voting Patterns – Are there visible patterns of voting within the jurors?

c) Irregularities – Did the juries observe the Rules of the Eurovision Song Contest?

d) Reoccurring Patterns – Do other countries repeat similar voting patterns?

e) Are there beneficiaries – If deviations occur, who benefits from the result?

If the answer to more than two of these questions is Yes then the pattern is considered as irregular and the votes affected by such irregularity are removed provided that the irregularity is confirmed by the pan-European Voting Partner (benefiting from 17 years of experience administering the ESC voting) and acknowledged by the Independent Voting Monitor.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
584 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Elizabeth
Elizabeth
1 month ago

I decided to run the math. If the points had been allowed to remain: Sweden would still have won the semi but with 340 total points instead of 396 Serbia would have finished second in the semi Poland would have made a bit of a points jump and made 3rd Australia would only have been 4th instead of 2nd Czechia and Estonia would have each been bupmed one rank lower by Poland overtaking them Romania would have qualified a bit more comfortably Finland would have been 8th Azerbaijan and Belgium would have rounded out the qualifiers (Yes, this means the… Read more »

Dida
Dida
1 month ago

Well, what about these “irregular votes” between these countries, EBU??? Australia gave points to: Sweden 12 Israel 10 Belgium 8 North Macedonia 7 Ireland 6 Australia received points from: Sweden 12 Israel 10 Belgium 8 North Macedonia 5 Ireland 5 Belgium gave points to: Sweden 10 Australia 8 Israel 7 Belgium received points from: Sweden 8 Australia 8 Israel 7 Sweden gave points to: Australia 12 Estonia 10 Belgium 8 Malta 7 Sweden received points from: Australia 12 Estonia 12 Belgium 10 Malta 10 In the case of these countries, the organizers did not report “irregular voting patterns.” Moreover, they… Read more »

Jghtl
1 month ago
Reply to  Dida

It’s not the same as these six countries

Sabrina
Sabrina
1 month ago
Reply to  Dida

So you really think and believe what you say is the same then why did belgium not gave any points to malta and their 12 points to san marino If i was a jury member i would probably gave sweden and Australia high points this year so in my opinion it’s not weird that sweden and Australia got many points and gave high points to eachother what weird is for example poland gave points to san marino i think you can figure out what i mean by that and basicly the only country who achieved to get into a top… Read more »

oinel
oinel
1 month ago
Reply to  Dida

totally agree. fake EBU fake eurovision

TheDrMistery
TheDrMistery
1 month ago

Anyone giving 12 points to San Marino can not be considered a jury of musical experts.

Edgar
Edgar
1 month ago

Why aren’t the aggregrated results of Georgia’s an Azerbaijan’s juries the same in the final? I mean they are in the same pot. So it basically has to be results of Armenia+Israel? Correct me if I am wrong

Edgar
Edgar
1 month ago
Reply to  Edgar

Edit: Armenia+Israel+Ukraine

Aisling
Aisling
1 month ago

I want to see how they originally voted in the grand final now

PURRRRRRR
PURRRRRRR
1 month ago

is it that hard to just not cheat? like damn

Halblenstein
Halblenstein
1 month ago
Reply to  PURRRRRRR

People

Daniel
Daniel
1 month ago

A lot of country juries have strange voting behaviours: take for example Germany in the second semifinal had given these results: 12- North Macedonia 10- Azerbaijan 8 -Romania 7 – Sweeden 6- Australia 5- Belgium 4- Estonia 3-Georgia 2-Israel 1-Finland And in the Grand Final: 12-Uk 10-Ukraine 8-Spain 7-Sweeden 6-Azerbaijan 5-Australia 4-Netherlands 3-Norway 2-Switzerland 1-Romania For Sweden Azerbaijan Australia and Romania there is clearly a voting iregularity here. And this not the only country with weird voting patterns so let’s not pretend this is a fair competition and actually see for what it is. The fact that not all jurors… Read more »

Una
Una
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel

Strawman arguments, lol.

Germany, of the big five, assessed 18 countries in SF2, and 24 in the GF.

As for their GF points:
UK and Spain are part of the big five so they did not perform in SF2.
Ukraine, Netherlands, Norway and Switzerland performed in SF1.

So they gave four countries – Australia, Azerbaijan, Romania and Sweden – points in both SF2 and the GF.

Daniel
Daniel
1 month ago
Reply to  Una

You clearly don’t understand the argument. The fact that they didn’t receive them in the same order when taking into account the results of the semifinal and final shows discrepancies with the votes given by the jury.

Kalla
Kalla
1 month ago

What an absolute shame, I thought from the broadcasters reactions EBU might have been making a big deal out of nothing. But this is clear cut for me that these were corrupt votes, and aggressively protesting this has clearly forced EBU to call them out.

And what a year to do it??? Surely this just plays into Russian propaganda. There should be serious consequences for these countries.

Jonkonfui
Jonkonfui
1 month ago

The fact that 2, 4 or 25 countries have similar voting patterns can be suspicious but it can never be proof enough to cancel their votes. It can be a coincidence. So I suppose EBU must have more blunt evidence against these countries. How

Anna Annita
Anna Annita
1 month ago
Reply to  Jonkonfui

Exactly. Actually there iare no proofs at all. Ofcourse there is a pattern of cheats…but still no proofs. There is no judge in the world…to take seriously this pattern as a proof. EBU prevails in north korea (cuz europe becomes…north korea without brakes).

Msig
Msig
1 month ago
Reply to  Jonkonfui

It is statistically impossible for the jury votes of those 6 countries not to have been rigged. That’s the proof!

Spencer
Spencer
1 month ago

True, the proof is in the pudding, BUT who has the means (and money-?) to orchestrate this? Think about it, It’s an incredibly difficult task to get 30 jurors complicit in this.
Artists? – definitely not
Broadcasters? – unlikely
Music producers? Highly unlikely
Betting syndicates????? Hmmmmmm.., that is the big elephant in the room that no one is mentioning. Just thinking out aloud.
Thoughts?

willchrisiam
willchrisiam
1 month ago
Reply to  Spencer

You do realize that members of the jury get selected by the broadcaster? They don’t get drawn randomly from a pool of all the eligible individuals. Broadcasters approve the decision, Heads of Delegations get together with a plan and then they invite their friends who could be easily bought/convinced to vote how they are told. It’s not rocket science.

Whisker
Whisker
1 month ago
Reply to  Spencer

There are ways to do this quite effectively and efficiently, and it isn’t always about money. Corruption has been around since such a long time. a situation like this could be managed easy-peasily.
Anyways, how much were jurors in each jury paid for their services? It’s not like they work for free.

Hannah
Hannah
1 month ago
Reply to  Spencer

The delegation

Michael crosse
Michael crosse
1 month ago

Hardly new voting behavior Phil coulter would probably have won with congratulations in 68 but for some “ strong canvassing “ by Spanish powers that be thou Spain did have a v good song still well spotted by esc bosses

pmsbm
pmsbm
1 month ago
Reply to  Michael crosse

Wasn’t it Cliff Richard?

Michael crosse
Michael crosse
1 month ago
Reply to  pmsbm

Yes cliff sang it Phil coulter wrote it

Kim
Kim
1 month ago

DQ them would have been more of a deterrent. They didn’t get away with it this year so what happens next year , other countries then go we’ll find another way to fix the result in our favour that way didn’t work. I’m sure this has been going on for years but the EBU has new blood in it and they are currently doing their jobs and weeding out the cheats. I feel sorry for the artist but a DQ would be a big deterrent to cheating especially if announced on air that due to irregular voting and conspiring between… Read more »

Ethan
Ethan
1 month ago

also I feel really sorry for this year’s contestants from these countries. I hope they’re doing okay and not wondering (in the case of Azerbaijan, Poland and Romania) if they qualified for the Grand Final just because their broadcasters’ tricks

Ethan
Ethan
1 month ago
Reply to  Ethan

I mean, imagine you go to eurovision with all your excitement just to discover afterwards that your broadcaster attempted to buy your way into the final. I know I’d probably doubt myself

nikki
nikki
1 month ago
Reply to  Ethan

I just keep asking myself what determined the Polish jury to act the way they did. This year, they sent a talented artist. He was a sure qualifier. Why the hell would they do something like this. They had it all. I feel extremely bad for Krystian, WRS and the rest.

Hannah
Hannah
1 month ago

It’s speculated the reason they didn’t tell the delegations until the grand final was they didn’t want the participants of the cheating countries to be penalised by other jurors or the public.

Daniel
Daniel
1 month ago

The EBU should also report which countries did not have their own telephone / SMS voting or had technical problems and their viewing results had to be determined by certain other countries’ viewing voting. San Marino is one of those when it is possible to calculate as they have never been able to have a telephone poll and have the same telephone country number with Italy, and they themselves go out with it. There are probably clearly more than San Marino who have received it than what the EBU has agreed to for some time, as in those times the… Read more »

Colin
Colin
1 month ago

i want the juries to: Be *professional* singers, musicians, composers, lyricists, and choreographers of *different ages*, and doing music of *different genres*. To have at least 10 of them per country. Have a stick non-disclosure agreement that prevents them from discussing their points. Be legally bined to watch all the performances and listen to all the songs 2-3 times. To have translated lyrics available. Have to write written reports on why the voted for each entry the way they did. Have standardized criteria on what look for. Sure, musical preferences are and should be different, but there have to be… Read more »

Colin
Colin
1 month ago
Reply to  Colin

*strict non-disclosure agreement…

willchrisiam
willchrisiam
1 month ago
Reply to  Colin

I’d also include producers and movie/theatrical directors.

Una
Una
1 month ago
Reply to  Colin

I agree. I love the idea of writing a review on which they based their rankings!!

I would add:

  • broadcaster cannot instruct them on how to vote. Broadcasters must explain to them the rules for voting and make them sign whatever indicating they will respect the rules.
  • jury members must listen to the songs before the live dress rehearsal show. Thus they will be familiar with the lyrics as well. A jury member should not vote after watching the performance for the first time in the jury show.
Hugobolso
Hugobolso
1 month ago

They penalized Channel because thev100 yeard british ruleta wants Sam Ryder in her birthday. If this isnt corrupción what its is. They could penalty the “corrupt” countries penalti loosing points, nulified the votes, or just taking the public vote x 2. But no. More votes to Ukraine, Cornelia and Lizbeth choosen Sam Ryder..
Im perplex, that none noted that UK, UKRAINE and Sweden are the big winners from all these. Maybe most are UK people. CHANEL WAS THE BEST AND WAS ROBBED BY THE BROADCAST. PERIOD

Kalla
Kalla
1 month ago
Reply to  Hugobolso

I highly doubt the Queen follows Eurovision lol.

Jonas
Jonas
1 month ago
Reply to  Kalla

Prince Charles named the 1996 winner as one of his favourite songs.

Jonas
Jonas
1 month ago
Reply to  Jonas

The King and Queen actually visited the Ahoy for the contest in Rotterdam last year. Royalty can have taste. Nikkie even interviewed a The Queen.

Hannah
Hannah
1 month ago
Reply to  Hugobolso

Queen Elizabeth could’ve still invited Sam if the UK came 3rd. The EBU explains in its rules how the aggregate results are calculated and RTVE accepted the decision so get over it.

Midnight Gold
Midnight Gold
1 month ago
Reply to  Hugobolso

The stats will always have mister Sam Ryder finishing 2nd ahead of Chanel, as he fully deserved to. Nothing you can do about it.

AMAAN STORM
AMAAN STORM
1 month ago
Reply to  Hugobolso

Another one who is just moaning about Spains result instead of celebrating just how amazing it is to have made the top 3 after years of bottoming (ooh err!).

You forget the UK haven’t won! They came 2nd. But the Brits aren’t crying about their result. They’re accepting it as a victory because they’ve scored the highest position at Eurovision since 1998! Not only that but Sam got the UK their highest ever points in the process.

I suggest you go lie down and take a moment to celebrate Chanels victory!

Nora
Nora
1 month ago

This years eurovision just made me so sad; The EBU needs to have an open and transparent discussion about the politicisation of the whole competition and openly admit it exits and has for years. I’m not bitter about Ukraine and we can all agree the war is horrific. However, the Ukraine delegation and other countries made openly political war comments during the show. No one I know has been fined about it unlike Hatari in 2019 that showed the Palestinian scarfs and got a penalty. Not to mention when countries have an ongoing conflict they have simply not participated in… Read more »

Sova
1 month ago

I calculated bit different outcome of semifinal 2 (compared to some users result posted before), but with the same qualifiers: Sweden 340 Serbia 244 Poland 221 Australia 198 Czech Republic 191 Estonia180 Romania 161 Finland 154 Azerbaijan 120 Belgium 116 San Marino 89 North Macedonia 72 Montenegro 72 Israel 65 Georgia 64 Cyprus 63 Ireland 52 Malta 43 Fake aggregated votes are so far from realistic ones that even these sold (if true) votes are more close to what we would expect those countries would vote for. for the final none published the results from these countries, but we would… Read more »

Hugobolso
Hugobolso
1 month ago

I dont think its fair just an excuse to give Sam Ryder the seccond place. If they anulated the votes Chanel should be number 2. If the penalty the countries loosing half of their votes Chanel also should be number 2. Italy Broadcaster also said publically bad words about Chanel who recibe zero votes from juro and public. But none judge Italy. Not only but also Berlusconi the Former Italian Prime Minister and the Rai owner is the owner of Spain RTVE main competición but none complaint about Italy because today is consider a Western Rich Country. Is espero to… Read more »

MaryFT
MaryFT
1 month ago
Reply to  Hugobolso

We have an amazing word to describe Spanish bad losers in Portuguese: ressabiados. Now you want to discuss Italian votes? Go look into your votes and try to explain how in world 4 Spanish juries vote Azerbaijan as number 1.

Midnight Gold
Midnight Gold
1 month ago
Reply to  MaryFT

Your jury gave their pointless booty shaking 12 points while the shameless Spanish jury gave nothing to poor MARO. Sums up their envy and their awful taste.

MaryFT
MaryFT
1 month ago
Reply to  Midnight Gold

God I was not very happy with my jury votes. But if you look at jury names it makes sense. There is no point to discuss jury taste unless is to change something. I do agree that juries have to be linked to music industry somehow or we will keep giving jury points to booties.

Slymn
1 month ago
Reply to  Hugobolso

Their aim was that Ukraine did not become the first. they were not successful

Luo
Luo
1 month ago

Fake votes is what they need,
Fake votes is what they breathe,
They’ll die with it,
It’s UNFORGIVABLE!

florinho
florinho
1 month ago

Interestingly, ebu’s system has failed to locate that Austalia got the exact same points its jury gave in the same order. They gave 12 to Sweden, they received 12 from Sweden. They have 10 to Israel, they received 10 from Israel. They gave 8 to Belgium they received 8 from Belgium. Is this a coincidence or an example of double standards?

Sova
1 month ago

This is just assumption with no proof. It seems logical but this is not proof. and to make it worse, they gave 6x12p to Sweden, and 6x10p to Australia…. There are many solutions but this one is far from perfect. Even excluding these 6 countries from votes in these 6 cases, and moving everyone scored lower just in their place in all these juries. Cause this makes it really subjective, ok, if there is pattern with these countries it is ok, if there is pattern with those countries, hm it is strange. even if it is true… anyone with enough… Read more »

Anoni
Anoni
1 month ago
Reply to  Sova

Well tbh, there is no possible way to confirm or deny this allegation. Or, well, the broadcasters would obviously deny it, they have no other choice, but can we really trust that? This is the closest to evidence. It is more believable because this voting pattern was seen in more than just 2-3 countries. The bigger the sample size, the more accurate the results after all. The fact that half of these countries had songs that weren’t as popular with fans or juries otherwise also makes it more suspicious. We can argue that this is bias and that there were… Read more »

Kim
Kim
1 month ago
Reply to  Sova

Oh please is this your first Eurovision or have you just realised how many countries vote for each other no matter what – hello Greece -hello Cyprus, hello Italy -hello Malta. Everyone has been doing it for years – the Nordics and the Baltics all do it . The issue is juries communicating and conspiring with each other during judging and making deals to ensure their artist and song reaches the final.

Una
Una
1 month ago

Spain’s *parliament* discussed the “oit points* of their spokesperson one year, and that is *much less* than the situation of the six in 2022.

https://wiwibloggs.com/2014/06/03/oitpoints-carolina-casado-english-votes/52232/

Kalla
Kalla
1 month ago
Reply to  Una

Just read the article. I can’t believe that was even a thing lol

Orpheus
Orpheus
1 month ago

I was all for uncovering this conspiracy but Montenegro actually made some valid points about all of the western countries exchanging votes. I’ve changed my mind. Stay resilient, little country, together you can take down the corrupt leaders and make way for the underdogs!
Justice for Georgia 2022, best song of the year!

Anoni
Anoni
1 month ago

I feel like there is a lot more going on with the juries than just these six countries swapping votes, it’s just that they were too obvious about it… The only solution is not to trust the broadcasters. Select juries that have nothing to do with them and are professional musicians in some kind of way. It is a fact that some broadcasters are really suspicious and rigged even in their own countries. I saw a lot of Romanians comment about their broadcaster during the national finals and we’ve seen the disregard they have about their own contestants with Roxen… Read more »

Jonkonfui
Jonkonfui
1 month ago

I dont understand why would a country do this… I mean, why is it for a country so important to get a good result or even to win? People are happy for a couple of weeks but that is it. A country does not get any economical benefit by winning Esc nor a political one. So what is so important for a country about winning or getting a good result at Esc?

NickC
NickC
1 month ago

Have any of the cheaters responded yet?

Doris
Doris
1 month ago
Reply to  NickC

You mean the ones that make the running order ?

Trattofon
Trattofon
1 month ago
Reply to  Doris

The running order is decided (and has been for several years) by the broadcasting company of the host country, in this case the Italians (RAI). It is not a conspiracy by EBU, the Nordic countries, or the Illuminati.

Meckie
Meckie
1 month ago
Reply to  Trattofon

You spread wrong Fake news, running order also this year was decided by a Dutch man. Wiwibloggs already reported about it here.

Trattofon
Trattofon
1 month ago
Reply to  Meckie

Fake news is a bit harsh don’t you think? The information I can find are generally something like this: “…the running orders are based on that allocation draw and have been sequenced by Rai to create the most exciting shows possible.” (from Eurovision.tv about the draws of the semi-finals). The nationality of the person(s) actually creating this “most exciting show possible” is, if I understand this correctly, the producers (in this case RAI) choice. Personally I couldn’t care less wether he (or she) is Dutch, Greek or South-African though.

AllThingsNordic.eu
1 month ago

Good job, EBU. No need for extra drama. The ranking is fair and the EBU has the right and responsibility to check for frauds. I still want the juries to cast their votes, so we can have songs like Marius Bear’s in the final, even without the approval of the televote.

Jonkonfui
Jonkonfui
1 month ago

I dont think it is a good job. Ebu should have let them have their votes and then, privately, address these countries. What Ebu did, making up those countries’ votes based on what neighbouring countries voted is absurd. I dont think ebu dealt right with this matter.

Anoni
Anoni
1 month ago
Reply to  Jonkonfui

Maybe they didn’t deal with it the right way but at least they did something about it and called them out. It’s a really messy situation and simply disqualifying them and giving them no voting rights would really skew everything. If they were left with the rigged votes then the countries would believe they can get away with it so they’ll be motivated to do it again… Ranging from what EBU did, to giving them a stern talking, a fine or most serious case scenario – banning them for a number of years, is the only type of punishment that… Read more »

Liam
Liam
1 month ago
Reply to  Jonkonfui

You’re spanish I wonder where this view is coming from hmm

Jonkonfui
Jonkonfui
1 month ago
Reply to  Liam

No. I am perfectly fine with the result as it is… But i really think it is kind of absurd to cancel a country’s votes because they are too similar to another country’s votes and then make up a different voting based on what nearby countries vote…
They could at least have cancelled these countries votes without substituting them by Ebu’s made up votes.
I think it doesnt make sense what Ebu did.

John
John
1 month ago

My country Greece was also part of this coalition, but couldn’t vote in the second semi, in the final our jury ranked Azerbaijan first, Poland second, and Romania fourth, while in the past our jury has also rated highly songs from those countries, and the Kirkorov participants. The EBU should search what was the real number of countries that participated in this coalition and punish them severly. One future punishment would be to cancel their jury votes and award 12 points to every country that didn’t cheat. I am very dissapointed by this and I hope that a solution is… Read more »

pmsbm
pmsbm
1 month ago
Reply to  John

This. And Spanish jury should also be investigated, their results look fishy.

PP77
PP77
1 month ago

This 6 countries can t compete in 2023 and maybe 2024,2025. If EBU allow to compete in 2023 , many don t wath Eurovision again. Many viewers list 2022 thanks to politics.

Peter
Peter
1 month ago

So as long Sweden is receiving 12 points and Nordic countries are voting for each other for years it is fine. Song from Sweden was yuck, but EBU decided to give Cornelia 12 points by acclamation ??? Shameful EBU. Can someone prepare analyst of Nordic countries voting for each other in just last 10 years? Greece and Cyprus not even mentioning.

bjonndrogg
bjonndrogg
1 month ago
Reply to  Peter

Here are som statistics for you from the last 5 contests. In 2022: In the semi Norways jury gave 3 points to Denmark and 2 points to Iceland. In the final the Norwegian jury gave Sweden 8 points (lots of other countries gave Sweden 12 points, but not Norway). and they gave Iceland and Finland 0 points. Swedish jury gave Norway 3 points, 0 to Iceland and Finland. In 2021: Norway gave Malta 12 points in semi and final, so did Sweden. Norway got 2 points from Sweden in the final. In 2019: Norway gave 12 points to Czhec Rep… Read more »

Meckie
Meckie
1 month ago
Reply to  bjonndrogg

2021 Malta was a Swedish production song, 2019 Switzerland and Cyprus 2018 was when Sasha Jean Baptiste made the staging, she is Swedish. So Sweden gave points to Sweden basically.

Helene
Helene
1 month ago
Reply to  Meckie

Well that is not the question. Here people say the nordics help each other when it is not true. And There are usually at least 10 songs with Swedish production teams in Eurovision. This year the Swedish jury gave 12 to Spain without any Swedish influence ..

Vivian
Vivian
1 month ago

Their names have already been made public, right? Wouldn’t be a bad idea to just… I dunno, drop the names more openly so the world knows who caused the unnecessary ruckus in both the semi- and grand final

Rantik
Rantik
1 month ago

EBU was blind in 2021, they didn’t react to the exchange of 12p. between Poland and SM or Moldova’s extra-suspicious-success in the semi. They could at least show some concern. I think EBU’s inaction has created the condition for this scam

Michu
Michu
1 month ago
Reply to  Rantik

EBU was blind to a freakin’ playback on Junior Eurovision 2020 (and released a statement full of lies), so I wouldn’t expect much from these clowns.

PP77
PP77
1 month ago
Reply to  Michu

Yes, countries who made pre recorder video in Poland for JESC sang live and finished bad in points, winner and many sang on playback

Slymn
1 month ago

If the scores were like this, the finalists wouldn’t change

3art
3art
1 month ago
Reply to  Slymn

that’s why the EBU released them only yesterday, as it took a couple of days to calculate a result that wouldn’t upset anyone of being robbed of qualification

Dani
1 month ago

To mez this is first and foremost most disrespectful for their own representatives. Like imagine if they qualified, got so happy, only to discover it was just die to some shady vote swap act. That would be hella sad.

Dani
1 month ago
Reply to  Dani

me* due*

Doris
Doris
1 month ago

It’s more obvious that these countries just voted strategicaly according to the odds since they were not given qualify or borderline (Azebaijan) they put at the top countries that were not given qualify to try maximise their chance to qualify. They just didn’t knew that the others would do the same. So EBU claiming they swapped their votes is just ridiculous, they don’t even know the strategic votes they are now forcing some countries to do because of their favoritism on some countries with the running order. In that case why Spain, Greece jury weren’t dismissed in the final since… Read more »

Mikael Bjerregaard
Mikael Bjerregaard
1 month ago

Luckily it seems that none of the NQ cheaters would have benefitted enough to make it into the grand final even if this fraud had not been discovered. The math have probably been done elsewhere, but as I calculate it, this would have been the result in semifinal 2 with the rigged votes from the 6 countries:

  1. Sweden 346
  2. Serbia 240
  3. Australia 207
  4. Czech Rep. 201
  5. Poland 194
  6. Estonia 193
  7. Finland 162
  8. Romania 153
  9. Belgium 120
  10. Azerbaijan 105
  11. San Marino 93
  12. Montenegro 71
  13. North Macedonia 65
  14. Israel 65
  15. Cyprus 64
  16. Georgia 59
  17. Malta 43
  18. Irland 40
Adam Carleton
Adam Carleton
1 month ago

Wow if Ireland had come last in the semi 3 times in a row and this time with a decent song I think they would withdraw.

Torino Wonderful
Torino Wonderful
1 month ago

We know that some countries like Lebanon don’t participate, because they want Israel out and conditioning like this is not acceptabile. But is not equally bad what Azerbaijan is doing, meaning they participate, but their commentators are speaking over Israel song and the viewers can’t hear it? Commentators should not be allowed to speak over songs.

Ron
Ron
1 month ago

I thought Israel and Azerbaijan were besties since Israel was very busy sending weapons to Azerbaijan to kill/displace the Armenian inhabitants.

random russian guy
random russian guy
1 month ago
Reply to  Ron

They are in fact besties. Commentators were rude to the contestant because of his sexuality.

Alik
1 month ago
Reply to  Ron

Ron stop making childsh comments against Azerbaijan.

Nils
Nils
1 month ago

Can anyone confirm that? Torino Wonderful was very busy spreading lies and fake news in the last couple of days …

Torino Wonderful
Torino Wonderful
1 month ago
Reply to  Nils

Obviously you are that kind of person who overuses the words “fake news”. For you, fake news is anything you dislike.

Nils
Nils
1 month ago

Shouldn’t be too difficult for you to name a source for your claim if your right, should it?

Nils
Nils
1 month ago
Reply to  Nils

*if you’re

Dani
1 month ago

Funny Israel still got 10 points from Azerbaijan televote nonetheless. Still shameful for the Azeri commentators.

Malin
Malin
1 month ago

Feel sorry for fans from this countries. Not their fault, but their shame!

Thanos
Thanos
1 month ago

Wow, that’s unacceptable. The EBU did correctly to stop this but I am also not sure that the method with the aggregate results is also fair. They should have just cancelled the jury voted from the countries that cheated instead.

Thanos
Thanos
1 month ago
Reply to  Thanos

*votes

Hannah
Hannah
1 month ago
Reply to  Thanos

It’s done by computer based on the SF pot, to hear people talk, you would think EBU made up the points… it was a computer. It’s within their rules. It wouldn’t need to happen if countries didn’t cheat

Thanos
Thanos
1 month ago
Reply to  Hannah

I am aware of how it’s done. And I still don’t agree with it. Previous voting patterns and other things the AI uses to decide who the votes will go to are irrelevant with the way juries would vote in the current year. If juries cheat their votes should be disqualified. Anything else messes up the results.

TugaJoe
TugaJoe
1 month ago
Reply to  Thanos

Disqualify the votes will also messed up the results, will penalize all other countries that have done nothing wrong and can’t receive the points from 6 countries. Disqualify the votes will even benefit that 6 countries.

Is only logic disqualify the votes if you disqualify the countries in the semi. But then you penalize the singers and all the countries because the actions of the jury and/ or broadcaste.

LaVoixCZ
1 month ago
Reply to  TugaJoe

Yep. The only other solution, in these rare cases of potential jury frauds televote could be doubled. But here we go again with San Marino, they desperately need a demoscopic jury af instead of that shady aggregated televote.

Henry
Henry
1 month ago

The fact that some guy was saying “Here are the Azerbaijani national jury points” while presenting a completely made up result…… don’t get me wrong, they did the right thing. But they were kinda lying to the audience in my opinion.

Hannah
Hannah
1 month ago
Reply to  Henry

What do you expect them to say? He said “we have a problem there” for one of them. They want to minimise the scandal in front of 200 million people. It’s done by computer.

Julian
Julian
1 month ago

And 6 countries are a bit too few. If you can get to 10 countries from that point you can punish their vote as irregular.

Julian
Julian
1 month ago

One option is fraud. On the other hand chaotic juries are impossible, people talk, they share musical tastes, they meet some contestants for example I remember in Romanian national final they invited Vladana (Montenegro) she was not impressive for the casual viewer but the TV commentators were like ‘Vladana this, Vladana that’, whatever. In democracy with freedom of choice you cannot be forced to have the same vote as the majority, is the other way around you can and will coalesce to support a minority. Otherwise just cut the crap of naming them ‘national juries’ and give half the vote… Read more »

willchrisiam
willchrisiam
1 month ago
Reply to  Julian

Gee, I wonder why they invited her…

Gaga
Gaga
1 month ago

If Azerbaijan could get away with ethnic cleansing against the Armenians in 2020, I’m not shocked they could rig voting results. They always take advantage of European values such as forgiveness, a second chance opportunity, presumption of innocence etc and they fool Europe around. . .so, they have to be investigated. Justice should be served.

Ron
Ron
1 month ago
Reply to  Gaga

They also know Europeans love the Azeri caviar so they’re busy buying them up…

Alik
1 month ago
Reply to  Gaga

You are armenian. That’s why you talk like this. Stop it

Shannon
Shannon
1 month ago

Disgusting behaviour, I won’t be supporting these countries anymore. The contest should be fair for all.

Baltics, Balkans, Nordics, Greece with Cyprus and so on vote similary, due to the cultures being tied together, which is fair. You go to Romania and then to Moldova, but there’s little difference – where as you go from Italy to Iceland and it’s a different culture in many ways.

Sam
Sam
1 month ago

I’m glad most people are coming around again to the reality of the situation; that these countries have cheated but there are still a fair few in the comments who lack an understanding of mathematical probability…
Moving forward, the broadcasting union just HAS to do something because the alternative is simply waiting until it inevitably happens again next year. Being able to fine the broadcasters might be a start?

Fast Food Music Lover
Fast Food Music Lover
1 month ago

All these countries putting Georgia at/near the top… They have wonderful music taste!

Fast Food Music Lover
Fast Food Music Lover
1 month ago

Probably need to clarify. I don’t mean that sarcastically lol. I really like the song.

Thanos
Thanos
1 month ago

And San Marino as well 🙂 . I had both Georgia and San Marino as qualifiers.

Sabrina
Sabrina
1 month ago

It’s good to see EBU finally doing something about this, though it probably only happened because those 6 countries haven’t even tried to hide their combination. What I’ll never understand is how hard it is to be transparent about this. If they had these compelling data on their hands since thursday, why take a whole week to tell what they know?

Maybe the next step is to be more rigid about who can be on the jury. Demand some standards and increase the number of jurors are things many fans ask for years and years.

Nils
Nils
1 month ago
Reply to  Sabrina

I’ve read a comment suggesting the EBU should pick the national jurors and not tell the national broadcasters beforehand. I think that could be a start.

Jess
Jess
1 month ago

And yet we are still waiting for a statement regarding Azerbaijans violation of ebus code of ethics when they talked over a CHILDS entire performance

Gaga
Gaga
1 month ago
Reply to  Jess

So many violations by Azerbaijan every single year. What is Azerbaijan doing in this contest until now in the first place? What is EBU waiting for to throw them away for good? I understand they send good Swedish songs and composers make money on Azerbaijan’s entries (perhaps that squad is advocating for Azerbaijan not keep them in). But enough is enough.

Alik
1 month ago
Reply to  Gaga

In your dreams