Well, she was afterwards. I just looked her up, and it said that prior to BB she had 'a job at MTV'. Whether it was making the tea or presenting something I don't know. She was a stunning looking girl anyway.
It wasn't while they were allowed to discuss nominations.
Oh ok, though BB was generally pretty hot that year on not allowing people to discuss nominations. I remember Darnell being banned, for example, for asking someone which two people they liked least.
I don't suppose she hated them, or even particularly disliked them, but irrespective of the person, it can be a bit uncomfortable watching someone nominating someone week after week, when that person has no suspicion that they are not pretty friendly. She nominated Mo and Rachel 6 times each (and I'm sure Meglos is right, it would have been 7 for Mo if she could); Rachel never nominated her, and Mo twice at the end. I think Mo really liked her until then, and would have liked to be friends with her.
I remember after BB Sara announced that she had taken a flat with Luke and Bex. I'm not sure that it ever came off, but it always seemed an odd idea.
Hmm that's interesting. She did have to nominate so would it have been better for her to rotate who she nominated even though it was pretty clear those 2 were the 2 she liked / preferred to be around the least
As for them having no idea, it sounds a bit like the 2 faced argument some HMs have called others that nominate them but seem to get on with them :D Sara wasn't unique in this.
I don't think it matters or is relevant tbh that Rachel and Mo rarely nominated her.
Well, she was afterwards. I just looked her up, and it said that prior to BB she had 'a job at MTV'. Whether it was making the tea or presenting something I don't know. She was a stunning looking girl anyway.
Sticking a load of young adults n a house for weeks on end and expecting them not to flirt is ridiculous. Darnell got himself into a tizzy. Sara could have probably worn a suit of medieval armour and he'd have probably still managed to get a stiffy in the hot tub.
Sticking a load of young adults n a house for weeks on end and expecting them not to flirt is ridiculous. Darnell got himself into a tizzy. Sara could have probably worn a suit of medieval armour and he'd have probably still managed to get a stiffy in the hot tub.
I don't think that's the point, which is why I called her 'oblivious' and not 'flirty'. A more empathetic person would have realized that Darnell was suffering horribly, and would have stopped climbing into his bed. You could argue that 'suffering horribly' was his default position, but still, no need to make it worse.
I don't think that's the point, which is why I called her 'oblivious' and not 'flirty'. A more empathetic person would have realized that Darnell was suffering horribly, and would have stopped climbing into his bed. You could argue that 'suffering horribly' was his default position, but still, no need to make it worse.
Him 'suffering horribly' (slight over reaction perhaps) still doesn't excuse him turning on her and being quite mean spirited over a sustained period of time. She saw him as a friend, which was why she was comfortable enough to get into his bed, dress up as a rapper (which I loved and thought quite sweet) and generally hang out with him.
The fact that she didn't want to f him shouldn't make him turn on her to the extent he did.
Well, she was afterwards. I just looked her up, and it said that prior to BB she had 'a job at MTV'. Whether it was making the tea or presenting something I don't know. She was a stunning looking girl anyway.
I can't remember the MTV specifics, but I think she may have been someone's PA. It seemed an interesting job from what she said about it (though again I don't remember the specifics). Anyway, it wasn't presenting or making the tea.
Where did you look up that she was a model? I know she's done some modelling since BB.
Oh ok, though BB was generally pretty hot that year on not allowing people to discuss nominations. I remember Darnell being banned, for example, for asking someone which two people they liked least.
Is that an implicit argument that B-Block couldn't have been discussing nominations, because "BB was generally pretty hot that year on not allowing people to discuss nominations" and so would have punished them if they had been?
One thing to remember is that the punishment was usually trivial: just time in 'gaol'. So it did not deter. Also, the rule-breaks that BB punished were ones that made it a bit too obvious.
Anyway, it was quite clear that Sara was being lined up for nomination, and she duly received 5 that week. Sara also received 5 the next week from the same HMs in face-to-face whiteboard nominations. That is almost all the nominations she ever received -- the only other was from Stu in week 9.
I suppose it could be argued that by then -- weeks 11 and 12 -- there weren't many non-B-Block choices for B-Blockers to make. I think week 12 might be explained by that together with those HMs having already nominated Sara the week before. Still, Mo didn't nominate Lisa in week 12 even though he had in week 11.
But in week 11 there was another factor: Rex and Kat wanting to save Nicole. It should also be remembered that Sara vs Nicole had been one of the subjects of Kat and Darnell's late night chats: should it be Sara or Nicole with the 'friends in the final'? Kat wanted Nicole; Darnell Sara. But by week 11 nominations, Darnell and Sara had had a falling out. (Darnell nominated both Sara and Nicole that week.)
This is one of the times when the live feed mattered, and as backing for what I've said, I've found some comments from TonyVanDam who was a B-Block supporter and is a reliable source:
... Details of the infamous nomination talk?
I did see the infamous LF of the B-Block reunion meeting that was set up by Rex because he needed to stay away from Nicole after another one of their arguments. This meeting in the B-Block bedroom happen the night before Monday Nominations (which as a result Nicole, Lisa, & Sara were put up for eviction) and it was NEVER part of the highlight show at all. And yes, it was a controversial because BB never punished Darnell/Rex/Mo/Kat/Rachel at all for discussing nominations that night. Although the word "nominate" were never said by any of those HMs, there were too many hints that were mention within the conservation for the producers & the viewers not to notice them.
Since that one doesn't make it absolutely clear who was supposed to be nominated, here's what TonyVanDam said a different time:
Since we're discussing the producers not enforcing the rules, let us not forget about The Infamous B-Block Reunion episode on BB9 nightly LF. The very fact that Darnell, Rex, Mo, Kat, & Rachel were awake half the night dropping too many hints about wanting Lisa & Sara up for eviction should had been more than enough for the producers to have all 5 HMs punished for discussing nominations. But they weren't! And unless you were a fan of B-Block like I was, you would have been turned off from watching BB UK altogether because of the producers' double standards.
However, I think Rachel defended Sara a bit and stayed out of it apart from that. She nominated Lisa and Nicole that week, and Lisa and Rex the next.
In the end, however, Lisa and Sara each got £25,000 out if being nominated in week 12.
I can't remember the MTV specifics, but I think she may have been someone's PA. It seemed an interesting job from what she said about it (though again I don't remember the specifics). Anyway, it wasn't presenting or making the tea.
Where did you look up that she was a model? I know she's done some modelling since BB.
Is that an implicit argument that B-Block couldn't have been discussing nominations, because "BB was generally pretty hot that year on not allowing people to discuss nominations" and so would have punished them if they had been?
Up to a point. BB can be very inconsistent of course. But Darnell did get banned from nominating for asking, "which two people do you get on with least?" I didn't see the conversation Tony Van Dam is referring to, so I can't add anything to what he says.
In the end, however, Lisa and Sara each got £25,000 out if being nominated in week 12.
Yes, and it was probably the only occasion in which tampering with the money has brought about anything positive. You couldn't say it was high drama, but it was a likeable episode. I have sometimes speculated as to which pairings, if any, would have refused to share, and risked losing the lot. I bet there haven't been many. Marcus/ Sree perhaps had the right combination of enmity and stupidity.
I just googled her name and put together what came up. Here she is in Nuts, post BB: ... (giant Google search URL deleted) ...
When I click on that URL, it shows a wide variety of pictures. Only 1 or 2 seemed to be from Nuts. Anyway, doing some occasional modelling doesn't add up to being a model.
Up to a point. BB can be very inconsistent of course. But Darnell did get banned from nominating for asking, "which two people do you get on with least?" I didn't see the conversation Tony Van Dam is referring to, so I can't add anything to what he says.
If you're not arguing that B-Block couldn't have been (implicitly) discussing nominations, then what is the point you're making by repeating that Darnell was banned for asking "which two people do you get on with least?"?
It looks like you're trying to make it sound like BB was so strict that year that I must be wrong, and Tony Van Dam must be wrong, and so must everyone else who thought Sara and Lisa were being lined up for nomination.
But Darnell saying "which two people" looks like a pretty big clue, and the context may have made it even clearer. So I don't think BB would have to be very strict to pick up on it.
Anyway, when do you think that ban happened? The only time Wikipedia shows Darnell being banned, it was "as punishment for crossing the divide to hell" in week 9.
Yes, and it was probably the only occasion in which tampering with the money has brought about anything positive. You couldn't say it was high drama, but it was a likeable episode. I have sometimes speculated as to which pairings, if any, would have refused to share, and risked losing the lot. I bet there haven't been many. Marcus/ Sree perhaps had the right combination of enmity and stupidity.
It wasn't "tampering with the money", though, because it didn't take anything away from the prize.
Comments
Well, she was afterwards. I just looked her up, and it said that prior to BB she had 'a job at MTV'. Whether it was making the tea or presenting something I don't know. She was a stunning looking girl anyway.
Oh ok, though BB was generally pretty hot that year on not allowing people to discuss nominations. I remember Darnell being banned, for example, for asking someone which two people they liked least.
Hmm that's interesting. She did have to nominate so would it have been better for her to rotate who she nominated even though it was pretty clear those 2 were the 2 she liked / preferred to be around the least
As for them having no idea, it sounds a bit like the 2 faced argument some HMs have called others that nominate them but seem to get on with them
I don't think it matters or is relevant tbh that Rachel and Mo rarely nominated her.
Sticking a load of young adults n a house for weeks on end and expecting them not to flirt is ridiculous. Darnell got himself into a tizzy. Sara could have probably worn a suit of medieval armour and he'd have probably still managed to get a stiffy in the hot tub.
I don't think that's the point, which is why I called her 'oblivious' and not 'flirty'. A more empathetic person would have realized that Darnell was suffering horribly, and would have stopped climbing into his bed. You could argue that 'suffering horribly' was his default position, but still, no need to make it worse.
Him 'suffering horribly' (slight over reaction perhaps) still doesn't excuse him turning on her and being quite mean spirited over a sustained period of time. She saw him as a friend, which was why she was comfortable enough to get into his bed, dress up as a rapper (which I loved and thought quite sweet) and generally hang out with him.
The fact that she didn't want to f him shouldn't make him turn on her to the extent he did.
I can't remember the MTV specifics, but I think she may have been someone's PA. It seemed an interesting job from what she said about it (though again I don't remember the specifics). Anyway, it wasn't presenting or making the tea.
Where did you look up that she was a model? I know she's done some modelling since BB.
Is that an implicit argument that B-Block couldn't have been discussing nominations, because "BB was generally pretty hot that year on not allowing people to discuss nominations" and so would have punished them if they had been?
One thing to remember is that the punishment was usually trivial: just time in 'gaol'. So it did not deter. Also, the rule-breaks that BB punished were ones that made it a bit too obvious.
Anyway, it was quite clear that Sara was being lined up for nomination, and she duly received 5 that week. Sara also received 5 the next week from the same HMs in face-to-face whiteboard nominations. That is almost all the nominations she ever received -- the only other was from Stu in week 9.
I suppose it could be argued that by then -- weeks 11 and 12 -- there weren't many non-B-Block choices for B-Blockers to make. I think week 12 might be explained by that together with those HMs having already nominated Sara the week before. Still, Mo didn't nominate Lisa in week 12 even though he had in week 11.
But in week 11 there was another factor: Rex and Kat wanting to save Nicole. It should also be remembered that Sara vs Nicole had been one of the subjects of Kat and Darnell's late night chats: should it be Sara or Nicole with the 'friends in the final'? Kat wanted Nicole; Darnell Sara. But by week 11 nominations, Darnell and Sara had had a falling out. (Darnell nominated both Sara and Nicole that week.)
This is one of the times when the live feed mattered, and as backing for what I've said, I've found some comments from TonyVanDam who was a B-Block supporter and is a reliable source:
Since that one doesn't make it absolutely clear who was supposed to be nominated, here's what TonyVanDam said a different time:
However, I think Rachel defended Sara a bit and stayed out of it apart from that. She nominated Lisa and Nicole that week, and Lisa and Rex the next.
In the end, however, Lisa and Sara each got £25,000 out if being nominated in week 12.
Up to a point. BB can be very inconsistent of course. But Darnell did get banned from nominating for asking, "which two people do you get on with least?" I didn't see the conversation Tony Van Dam is referring to, so I can't add anything to what he says.
Yes, and it was probably the only occasion in which tampering with the money has brought about anything positive. You couldn't say it was high drama, but it was a likeable episode. I have sometimes speculated as to which pairings, if any, would have refused to share, and risked losing the lot. I bet there haven't been many. Marcus/ Sree perhaps had the right combination of enmity and stupidity.
When I click on that URL, it shows a wide variety of pictures. Only 1 or 2 seemed to be from Nuts. Anyway, doing some occasional modelling doesn't add up to being a model.
If you're not arguing that B-Block couldn't have been (implicitly) discussing nominations, then what is the point you're making by repeating that Darnell was banned for asking "which two people do you get on with least?"?
It looks like you're trying to make it sound like BB was so strict that year that I must be wrong, and Tony Van Dam must be wrong, and so must everyone else who thought Sara and Lisa were being lined up for nomination.
But Darnell saying "which two people" looks like a pretty big clue, and the context may have made it even clearer. So I don't think BB would have to be very strict to pick up on it.
Anyway, when do you think that ban happened? The only time Wikipedia shows Darnell being banned, it was "as punishment for crossing the divide to hell" in week 9.
It wasn't "tampering with the money", though, because it didn't take anything away from the prize.