Paul Potts wants to return to Britain's Got Talent - but how?
Paul Potts won the first series of Britain's Got Talent in 2007, and he would be up to return to the show - but not as a performer.
Paul Potts wants to be a judge on Britain's Got Talent.
The tenor, who won the first series of the ITV competition in 2007 with his performance of Nessun dorma, has been a guest judge on some international versions of the show, and now he wants to return to Britain's Got Talent to help decide which act will perform at the Royal Variety Performance.
Paul, 55, told Sky Vegas: "I’d absolutely love to do it [be a judge on Britain’s Got Talent]. I’ve already been a guest judge on shows in Korea and on China’s Got Talent, so I’ve had a little taste of it already.
"I actually came quite close to becoming a judge on a pop show in Germany as well. It’s definitely something I’d love to do more of in the future."
The star thinks comedians have to work harder to impress the judges, Simon Cowell, Amanda Holden, Alesha Dixon, and KSI, and the public - who ultimately decide the winner in the live grand final.
Paul explained: "All talents are welcome. Being a comedian is one of the hardest things you can do because you’ve got to entertain people for a set amount of time, and comedy is so subjective. What one person finds hilarious, another person just won’t get at all.
"The closest we’ve had to this kind of humour before was probably [2018 winner] Lost Voice Guy, and he came under very similar criticism at the time. But humour evolves, and different styles work for different audiences.
"For me, [2026 finalist] Ted Hill’s act worked, but it’s never going to work for everyone. That’s just the nature of comedy. It’s easy for people to criticise comedians because humour is such a personal thing."
If Paul became a judge, he would only use the Golden Buzzer "for something truly exceptional", otherwise he does not see the point in the feature, which allows Simon, Amanda, Alesha, and KSI to send a performer straight through to the semi-final.
Explaining why he thinks the Golden Buzzer should be scrapped, Paul added: "Before, you had the judges’ vote and the public vote, but a lot of the time, it ended up going to a deadlock anyway, so the judges weren’t really making the decision.
"The problem now is that the Golden Buzzer can play into one judge’s personal bias or preference. Once that Golden Buzzer has gone, everyone else is suddenly under more pressure because they can only get through by winning the public vote.
"It makes things harder for the other acts, and I’m not convinced it’s an improvement.
"I think the old system worked reasonably well, although maybe they needed an odd number of judges instead of four so it couldn’t keep ending in a deadlock.
"If there were five judges, someone would always have to decide instead of constantly pushing it back onto the public."
