I had a look at Car Magazine's test of the C5 2.0 HDI - and they too were quite positive about its ride and handling (Citroen C5 2.0 HDi CAR review | Road Testing Reviews | Car Magazine Online).
As already pointed out, one of the other Wheel's journalists and judges - Mike McCarthy - was far more complimentary about the C5's ride and handling. But obviously not enough to argue for its inclusion in the final testing.
As for the "electric" steering, I had a look at the specifications of Australian spec C5 at New Car Prices - Latest Offers - Dealers - Citroën Australia Official Site. The V6 variant has "Variable power assisted steering according to speed". So, not electric. The wrong terminology has obviously been used in the magazine. However, putting this aside, the testers didn't like the feel and feedback provided by the steering.
Now, as has already been noted, the C5 is not the first European car to fail to impress Australian journalists as much as it does European journalists - and it won't be the last.
Conversely, cars that Australian journalists give favourable reviews to - such as the Commodore VE SS (Vauxhall VXR8), Mazda6 or Honda Accord Euro don't impress European reviewers as much.
It may come down to the way the cars are set up for each continent. It may come down to the very different market conditions and pricing of the cars on each continent. Or it may be an anti-Europe bias amongst Australian journalists and and anti-Australian/anti-Japanese bias amongst European journalists.
Whatever it is, we shouldn't be surprised when a car that is given high marks by journalists on one continent doesn't impress journalists on another continent.
Now, even if the C5 had made it into final testing, and even if we put to one side the question of dynamics, the C5 probably wouldn't have had a chance of winning. Unfortunately the C5 would struggle against the value criteria.
Why? Well - the Citroen C5 2.7 HDi Exclusive costs A$62,990.
Compare this with a top of the range Ford Falcon G6E Turbo which is similarly equipped, of similar size, arguably similar quality, and has much better performance (though poorer economy). The Falcon costs $54,990 - a full $8,000 cheaper than the Citroen. And then when one considers that Citroens tend to depreciate even more than Falcons do, the Falcon looks like much better value. Not to mention that the Falcon is arguably the better all-round car in Australian conditions anyway.
Or to take a diesel engined European rival - the Volkswagen Passat 2.0 TDI wagon, which costs A$46,990 compared to the Citroen C5 2.0 HDi Exclusive Wagon which costs $57,740. The Volkswagen is more than $10,000 cheaper, representing excellent value when compared to the Citroen. Not to mention that the VW is much quicker (0-100km/h in 8.8 secs for the Passat against 0-100 in 13.3 for the C5) and slightly more economical (6.8L/100km for the Passat against 7.1L/100km for the C5). And I haven't even mentioned that in the Australian market the Volkswagen would be perceived as the higher quality and more prestigious car and holds better resale value. Now the Passat is not eligible for this year's COTY award (as it is not a new car to the market), but for any car to win it will be compared to its market place rivals, and the Passat is a rival to the C5.
So, case closed your honour. The C5 struggles against the Value criteria, so its chances of winning were always going to be low.
If I was spending my own money and had the choice between the Passat and the C5, I'm afraid the Passat would appear to be the obvious choice to me. And this is the same sort of equation that the COTY judges will have to weigh up.
Having said all this, I'm sure the C5 is an excellent car in many ways. I'm especially convinced that it would make an excellent second-hand buy in a few years time for someone who doesn't want a German executive sedan or a "boring" Australian or Japanese sedan. And personally I quite like the looks of the C5. However, I don't think it is Car of the Year material - at least not in the Australian market.