[Alf Stewart]

Yes, I did enjoy Hannah Waddingham presenting.

just imagining her marching Mel out of the commentary booth shouting Shame!

Me too. I was dubious when I heard the news but she really was very good. I can see her getting a lot more presenting gigs.

[Andrew]

Yes, I did enjoy Hannah Waddingham presenting.

just imagining her marching Mel out of the commentary booth shouting Shame!

Me too. I was dubious when I heard the news but she really was very good. I can see her getting a lot more presenting gigs.

Presenters for BBC live entertainment shows are usually so predictable so it was nice to see such an out there choice for once

[DeMarkay]

Is it time that the jury vote goes? It’s been 7 years since the change and it’s been proven that the juries know absolutely nothing.

[Jon]

Why? Maybe they’ll find someone just as good or even better than Petra, they wouldn’t be presenting it had Sweden not won either and I doubt you’d have said the same thing. I believe she works for a rival channel in Sweden so it’s unlikely she’ll be back and they’ll probably want to try something else.

I’m very aware that they wouldn’t be hosting it if Sweden didn’t win. Not sure what implied that.

You know that people can have personal preferences right? Plus, they are Eurovision’s most popular hosts.

The point is even if your preferred duo don’t present, you’re probably going to find who ever does to be more like them than what any other particular host countries presenters might be like.

So if you’d watch the show without them presenting if it was outside Sweden why wouldn’t you watch the show without them presenting when it’s in Sweden. Make no sense.

[XIII]

Hannah was great but I'm not sure if she'll be doing a Saturday Night show anytime, she's going to be too busy with acting gigs.

[Jon]

Is it time that the jury vote goes? It’s been 7 years since the change and it’s been proven that the juries know absolutely nothing.

If the jury vote was exactly the same as televote there would be no point in it. The fact it is different helps to justify its existence. Of course the juries don’t know nothing they’re just going to look for different things than the public given they’re industry experts. 

The split jury/televote is also what allows the exciting finale.

[aaron_scotland]

Atleast the OB trucks will have a short drive for next year!

[bilky asko]

Is it time that the jury vote goes? It’s been 7 years since the change and it’s been proven that the juries know absolutely nothing.

Sweden came first with the juries and second with the televoting. No huge disagreement really between the two, and I suspect your strength of feeling is because your preference came second.

[JosiahStuart]

I believe that the major reason why Finland won the televote (and SF1) because there were too many fangirls that think Käärija is hot. I'm extremely annoyed that we had another year of (almost) maxing out the televote points.

[Stooky Bill]

I hadn't heard the UK entry being performed on stage until last night and she was very quiet in the mix. Thought it was a half decent song, sounded lots better on radio/video although possibly in hindsight a bit too quirky lyric-wise and not the same positive vibe as some of the others

Great staging though, but as I said last night a really bad place in the running order. Not only is last the kiss of death, but she came after the crazyness of Croatia - you can't follow an act like that. She got lost in the show somewhat, it deserved batter than that

Sweden is an odd winner for me as it made no impression at all, another year when I wake up and hear who won, and have to find it to watch as I can't remember anything about it!

---

Interestingly it seems the subtitles don’t work on the signed version, which seems a bit odd.

A bit, but the number of households that would need both is probably very very low

---

Fair enough if you know for sure! I just didn't quite understand why the BBC would be blanking stuff if they had access to a clean feed.

As I've already said in an earlier post - I suspect the commercial free version is just free of sponsorship in graphics, but not in VT segments. I'll have to try and compare the two when I can, but that makes sense as its straightforward to have multiple graphics engines, but less so to run multiple versions of video clips. 

Also as said above (and in the article above that) the BBC gallery have the main version available too so need to have the blanking available should that be used

Going back to the issue of clean versions, I had a chance to compare.... 

The sponsor logo appeared on the stings throughout the show it looked like it was added downstream of the actual sting, if so it was easy to omit it from the 'clean' graphics output. It came on and off screen after and before the animation to make it easy to blank too if need be 

The credits were the same on both, so yes the BBC either ran their own over the top either in full or part