Well after William Hartnell was finished with the part they came up with an original way to continue the show, Regeneration of the main character to a new appearance thus allowing different actors to take on the role to let the show continue.

However over time we have had Doctors who have been in the role for 4 years such as Jon Pertwee, we have had some stay 7 years such as Tom Baker, and some has stayed for 2 such as Peter Davision, who I believe was warned by Patrick Troughton not to do more than 3 years.

However thus far into this new series we have a Doctor Who stayed for less than a year (no CHRISmas special, :lol: ). and if we are to believe the press another who will be doing two and a half years. Question is now in this time of television where 'type casting' is deemed rampant in UK television (whereas in America they don't seem to worry about it much probably as they are clever and lock talent in contracts) and the high profile Doctor Who will bring to an actor/actress has the ability to renegerate the Doctor and change the assistant so easily become a damaging problem to the show.

I don't know what was going through Christopher Eccelston's head when he took the offer and agreed only one year with Russell (apparently, I think he would have liked him to stick around longer as we all did). But possibly his career could have done with a boost and Doctor Who was that boost, which for him was all over after one series. Fair enough its his life and his career and I don't have anything against his decision to leave apart from his reason to leave - 'type-casting' (after one series???), which does ring bells in my mind that he was in it for a quick boost. At least have the decency to admit the truth or come up with an at least plausible reason!

Now I don't know if this maybe the case in Chris's instance but I for one am slightly worried about the fact that rengeneration sets a get out of jail free card for any actor/actress who takes on the part of The Doctor as they can replace them so easily in comparison to other shows which may have them locked in a part of several years. However I do not want to see the days of stability of the show such as that during the Tom Baker era gone forever, its nice when we get a great Doctor such as David Tennant to have him around for some time. Alas Regeneration has made it so easy for him to leave the part and also the Doctor after him etc. etc. This makes the case of actors acquiring the part for a year just to heighten their profile and not for actually being in it for the show.

I leave you with this comment, The X-Files lasted for 9 years and when it finished Mulder (although to a less extent) and Scully were present. After 2 series of Doctor Who we have lost both artistes who were present at the beginning. I know Doctor Who involves regeneration and changing of companions, but with the latest speculation of Tennants departure I feel that the show possibly could suffer from the constant changing after what seems to be a short time of the main character. I would therefore now say that the ability to regenrate The Doctor has become a problem for the show and that now in the days of apparent rampant 'type-casting' we will never see a Doctor such stay for as long as Tom Baker (considered the best by many) who stayed in the part for 7 years, which I feel is a shame.