Suralun specialises in illogical firings though. He could have used Lorraine speaking up against the idea as a reason for firing anyone who didn't.

But I think Kimberley would have gone whoever she brought in because she had her chance at PM and she really can't blame anyone else. Nooral might be quiet and not do much - as the editing shows - but Kimberley didn't present any reason for saving her over someone who is just quiet and unproductive - I can't see what he would have picked on in order to justify giving her another chance.

You have to be able to handle people who get angry and sulk and get the ones who want to work, working together and isolate the sulker. SA kept saying in the boardroom was that it wasn't a therapy session, he also pointed that she went with Philip's idea because she couldn't stand up to him.

There's nothing wrong with having a bad idea. We've seen before that the person with the bad idea doesn't get fired for it. It's even happened this series, with Ben on the fitness task.

The main argument for Philip is that he bulldozed the team leader into accepting the bad idea. I don't agree with this, but even if it's true, it's the team leader who comes off worse.

There was an argument for bringing both Philip and Lorraine, namely that their bickering is what wasted so much time and killed the creativity and stopped other ideas. However, Kimberly doesn't seem to use that argument much herself, especially not against Philip.

I think Kimberly showed a lack of boardroom savvy, and failed to understand why she lost the task. It wasn't because Philip and Lorraine had bad ideas, it was because nobody else had a good idea.

Sir Alan has demonstrated that he will use anything and everything as a reason to fire someone. Just because you've done everything asked of you on one particular task does not mean you'll be safe. Indeed he may well use it as an excuse (i.e. you should have done more).

Noorul managed to (almost) achieve the impossible last week. He had the majority of viewers wishing he could be fired even though he had led the winning team. The only way he could have eradicated that overwhelmingly negative impression is by seriously impressing this week. He didn't. He was as invisible as ever. Had he been brought back I'm pretty sure he would have gone. I reckon Sir Alan is dying for the chance to get rid. He's an absolute waste of space in the context of the programme.

However, people are right in saying that hindsight is a wonderful thing. The obvious thing to do in these circumstances is to bring back those who have had a direct impact on the failure rather than those who have had an indirect one by sitting back, not contributing and wating to be told what to do. Having said that, we are into series 5 now. Maybe the candidates should have learned to think beyond the obvious...?

Exactly what he did to Anita (at least as far as using the supposed 'overspend' goes).