วีดีโอ

it wouldnt matter anyways. Her nails were a blatant violation of EBUs rules.

@@c_rpd6839 I didn't realise colours were against the rules 🙃

Who knows, maybe this has also contributed. But I think that 99.9% of the voters were not checking TH-cam performances during the final as they were watching the show live anyway

The artists tend to get too expressive sometimes 😅

@@JustESCAnalystYeah would be quite the rare thing 😂

Fair point! Did not associate it with this, but then it fits 👍

Thank you! 😉 in the next days I will release the video about 5 countries, which televoters stopped liking in the final in comparison to the semi-final! Don‘t miss 😉

Interesting theory! Might be really close to the truth, when you look at the result. Lucky Silia, as without these 24 points from Moldova and Azerbaijan - she would have been just 2 points ahead of Australia 🙃

👍😉 my pleasure!

I am glad you liked it 😉 be sure not to miss my next video, about the 5 biggest drops in the televote in the Eurovision 2024 👌

You were quick 😅👍

I loved her performance, but also adored her bravery and strength 👍

It feels so unfair, that one performance, which people have not even really seen has impacted the final results so much. Now we can only guess how the results could have been like 🤔

I did not skip anything, I just had to cut it from the video, which I upload to TH-cam :) it is just not allowed by TH-cam to post the song played entirely due to the copyright 👌 I hope you enjoyed the rest of the analysis though

I absolutely agree, would have chosen Denmark over Norway but still Georgia over Czechia 😉 😉👍

I think for Israel it worked both ways. Some juries have ranked Israel too low because of politics, but some others too high because of the whole situation with bullying and so on. You know, I love this entry, one of my personal favorites, but objectively this type of a song is not something the juries would usually put in their final top-5

@@JustESCAnalyst ok, thanks for your answer :))))

Which country you would have missed in the final? Norway or Georgia? 😉

@@JustESCAnalyst Joost Klein

I agree, but have you seen his performance at the jury show? If his voice would have not had those bad cracks - France would be the winner I believe 👍

Be sure to check my final results analysis video 👌

Interesting point, but well, they have definitely found some solution, cause their televote points are counted in the final alongside the jury points (Sammarinese televote is not 1:1 as the jury points and is also not similar to Italian televote). And when both juries and televote were counted in the semi-finals - they also had a separate Sammarinese televote

@@JustESCAnalyst No, there is no San Marinese televote, period, it's technically not possible. The scores that are presented as San Marino's televote scores in the final are a combination of other countries with similar voting patterns. It's basically an aggregate to substitute for the real thing as there is no way to separate San Marinese calls from Italian calls.

@@JustESCAnalyst From 2009-2015 San Marino only had a jury vote, and from 2016 onward, they have had this aggregate calculation average of a certain set of other countries that has acted as their televote score, so that - alongside their jury - they would have another set of points to give. There is and has never been an actual San Marinese televote.

Oh really? So an average aggregate like for example Belarusian jury had in the final of 2019? Do you know which countries they use for that?

@@JustESCAnalyst Exactly like the 2019 Belarus case. No, the EBU has refused to release which countries it's based on, even the San Marinese broadcaster doesn't know.

YUP

Czechia and Malta have definitely deserved qualifying 👌

Unfortunately Latvia and Georgia were rated very poorly by the juries in the final as you can see in my first table 😢 I also would have expected the juries would like them more than they actually did

My pleasure 😉 such a pity EBU does not reveal the real jury voting results from the semi-finals

@@JustESCAnalyst Oh! I didn‘t know that there are jury votes for the semis! So they vote, but it doesn‘t count?

exactly! Since the televoting was introduced, juries always kept voting. Just in case there will be a televoting issue, so that the backup jury score would be used instead (which happened on few occasions, quite often with San Marino which failed to receive a minimal required amount of votes). And in the last two years with the removal of juries from semis, it is actually the same. They still vote on an evening before the live show, but now their voices just do not count at all as long as there are no issues with the televote.

@@JustESCAnalyst Thank you! I didn‘t know that, but it‘s logical as a backup. Now I‘m a little bit wiser😉

Sarah has definitely deserved better! ❤️

I have noticed it too, but 2013 is a big exception, where Denmark won, Norway finished top-5 and all other 3 Nordic countries were in the final 👌

Eagle eye! 👍 have realized it after I have posted the video :) I mean Cyprus, mixed up these two countries. Thank you, the video about semi-final 2 comes soon :)

@JustESCAnalyst haha. Just a Croatian very involved this year in ESC 😁

But this year I am glad Slovenia has qualified because there was no jury 😅

♥️

The juries were often very supportive of Israeli entries, but Israeli ballads in 2010, 2013, 2019 were also always rated quite low by the juries. Eden did actually quite good with the juries in my opinion 👌

You are absolutely right! I have a couple, who are my close friends, who for example vote each and every year 20 times from both of their phones for the same country, because one of them came originally from this country. Even if they don’t like the song 😂 I think it is unfair, but so is their human nature and EBU has no way to stop such cases, except by eliminating the televote completely, which will not happen

@@JustESCAnalyst it’s a shame. We are emotional beings and maybe it’s just my (extremely) mild autistic tendencies to automatically separate my emotions from fact. I’m not always successful of course, but I try.. haha Btw your videos are great. I love your style and presentation and have an extremely camera-friendly manner (and face!), so please don’t think any of this is a criticism of the work you’ve done. I think it’s great and you should be very proud of this output. I covered ESC as press from 2005-2014 and stopped for a lot of the reasons above, and the runaway costs! Don’t even talk about the Baku costs and Malmö 2013, I’m already feeling the pain for those guys go head to Switzerland next year! Ouch! But seriously, great videos and lovely presentation.

Thank you so much 😉 very interesting, I am sure you have a lot of nice memories from those times. But the costs are, indeed, extreme. Luckily nowadays you don‘t really have to be there in order to cover the contest as a press 👌 but I am still glad I have at least visited one show in Malmö 🇸🇪

Then you have found a right channel 😉 be sure to subscribe to not miss the video about the Semi-Final #2 ✌️

🤣 with all the love to Hera, this entry was just a mistake. I hope she had fun nevertheless 😅

But either way maybe it’s time for the juries to continue voting in the semifinals, because now with them out of the semifinals, the juries have fewer choices to choose in the grand final and potentially there will be fewer songs that the jury would like. Hence these few songs would have more concentrated jury scores. And it led to issues where they came off as ‘biased’, like how they gave Sweden 15 sets of 12 last year and Switzerland 22 sets of 12 this year.

@@jason256-8 you are so right about this! Especially I was able to see it with the second semi-final qualifiers when all of them except of course Switzerland were not really liked by the juries at all 😅

Eurojury was based on the music videos and not on their live performances. Australian song was one of a few radio-friendly ones in this semi-final and it really came alive with this live performance 👌 Also don’t forget that, ranking all 37 songs at once, juries would had Australia rather in the middle of their tops, meaning not giving points. But choosing just among 14 other semi-finalists, I am sure they would have to give points to Australia

@@JustESCAnalyst Eurojury also asses the song quality which as it showed the Australia song is a bad light. The performance live wasn’t enough to overcome the reality that the song just isn’t very good. Possibly but the same argument could be made for all the other songs it was competing with. I suspect with a lot of people that they think just because it’s Australia it would automatically be liked by juries despite the grave signs that don’t support it.

She did so well! Be sure to subscribe and check my results analysis videos 😉 I hope you will learn something new

Thank you, Diego 👌 You are right about the vocals, but they were actually not really bad. Her voice is not strong, but she was just singing in quite a delicate way and she has hit the notes. I believe the juries would vote for this one as it is one of very few potential radio-hits from this semi-final. Modern pop track but not a trashy europop, which juries usually do not appreciate 😅

@@JustESCAnalyst Yeah, Luna's song felt very current and in line with current music trends, so maybe the juries would have loved it. And it may have been one of the rare ocurrences in which Poland gets more points from the juries than from the televote, haha

We need the jury because if the final is just televote it will result in novelty and joke entries being entered every year like in the 00s.

The juries are very important cause the televote is too much influenced by politics and attracted to catchy performances rather than judging who has better voice, more modern song and who can have an international success in the future

Because the public can't be trusted and vote for the populist song, rather than a good song. 2023, remember that? There is NO WAY you could even entertain the Finnish song being a "better song" than Sweden's, IMO, but certainly was "better entertainment". The public can't discern the difference, unfortunately.

@@AppNetEnt I absolutely agree! If we want it to be a SONG contest and not a "performance" contest - the juries are of course required. But they often of course also pay a lot of attention to the vocals and professionalism of the singer, rather than at the quality of the song. So many things could be improved :)

@@AppNetEnt and yet France, Iceland, Serbia, Cyprus and Norway all had jurors that voted Cha Cha Cha higher than Tattoo. Those juries all gave higher points to Sweden. In fact, 14 jurors overall gave Finland 12 points. I'm not trying to prove that Cha Cha Cha is better. I'm saying that even with the guidelines given by the EBU to jurors while scoring, they dont all think the same and vote the way you expect them to. I do not want a televote-only final. That would kill Eurovision.

Yes, it is a very impressive score there!Just Israel and France did not let it become an absolute maximum. Actually 212 of 216, not 214 of 218, but it does not matter so much 😉

Thank you 😉👌

Baby Lasagna has absolutely smashed the competition in his semi-final 😉👌

Nah m8, #CrownTheWitch

@@oliverqueen5883 they really brought THE performance of the year! And it is super impressive, that they were ranked so high with the juries too!

So happy for her she has not only qualified but finished in the final top-10 🇵🇹💪🏻

@@JustESCAnalyst yes and that was my goal! 🥰

They are definitely a very well-deserved winner! You are right, last days before the final were just hilarious. Nemo breaking the trophy was like a cherry on top of this cake of disaster 🎂🍒😅

Baby Lasagna definitely proved with his actions he should not be associated with these tricky judges ;) The new videos are coming soon 😉

I also absolutely do not understand, how the Eurovision community was sleeping on him. I definitely saw this coming, that the judges will support his entry 👌