An interesting interview with Debra re: this year's bunch.
She talks a lot of sense & I agree with her about Liz- something about her irks me...

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s108/...pprentice.html

She thinks Paloma's a fantastic candidate, much better than her rivals - 'nuff said.

Always loved Debra and still do after reading this. She seems incredibly down-to-earth.

I agree with her about Stella. I think that Stella is fantastic. I also loved Paloma, but after her attack on Wednesday night, she had to go. The only thing I disagree with is her opinion of Sandeesh. I really like Sandeesh

Debra commenting about someone else parading in her underwear

By the way, there is still that infamous scene with Yas in her bra and thong, Debs

Both moments caught by a cheeky cameraman, rather then anyone parading (by the way, I am still waiting for Liz in her underwear,half a bralenghth isn´t going to do it).

Gosh, this woman is so delusional it kinda hurts (hating on Liz, but then comparing her robot version from last year with Stella of all people ).

Maybe Liz reminds Debra of Yasmina somehow - the latter two didn't get on.

I did disagree with a lot of the things she said - except about Sandeesh though - she won't survive for long, imo.

She certainly has some interesting thoughts.

I agree with a lot of what she says, but Paloma made quite a few bad judgement calls - promising goods without a thought about how they would actually be able to produce them in the bakery task, the screw-up over exclusivity last week and poor product selection this week. It wasn't just her boardroom conduct.

Also, while I don't say she's wrong about Sandeesh, I'd have liked to see her giving it to Laura with both barrels instead, as I think she's very much the worst of this year's crop.

I think also that her group of candidates were not as innocent of cynical behaviour as she now remembers. I can reacall candidates specifically mentioning to each other fellow team-members mistakes that they could bring up in the boardroom.

All that said, I like Debra a lot and I'm glad life post-Apprentice is going well for her.

You thinking of Howard and Kate working out how Lorraine could take the fall over the buggy in the baby show task?
Thick as thieves those two. Until Kate put the hat pin in his spine the very next task Personally I think Debra was someone who didn't do that. Defended herself, rather than shift the blame away. She never appeared to say anything she didn't believe (and even though the Margate brochure was a silly lie, she was still unable to try and make it sound true for a moment)

I think Paloma brought Sandeesh back, after praising her, to provide two against Alex. Ok 1 1/2 maybe. Well that was the plan until Sugar spotted it and Paloma lost her plot and attacked both. Laura would have been a much less obvious choice. And so a cleverer one.

Agree it wasn't just the boardroom, poor products lost that task. Alex did well, very well I think. But she had already decided to cover her arse even before they got to Manchester. And there were the other screw ups you mentioned, which are inexcusable in someone who has nine years experience.

I like what she says that this years crop are the worst. I cant agree more

No way, series 4 were easily the worst lot (with only Sara and Raef as decent candidates, in every sense of the word).

Debra is spot on about Liz !!

In what way

Hope it is not the underwear thing,as those pics are to be found on the net (of Debra mind you, not Liz!).

I couldn't remember who it was who'd had that discussion last year; just recalled someone did.

I don't think Sandeesh was such a poor choice to bring in to the boardroom, even though Paloma had praised her. Paloma made it abundantly plain that she thought all her team had done well except Alex, and that she felt none of them deserved to be brought in. Someone had to be, though. I suspect Paloma's reason was actually just what she said it was; that Sandeesh had been poor in earlier tasks.

Simon, the ex-forces guy who fell apart in the photography challenge, was a decent guy too.

I agree though that the series 4 lot in general were the nastiest crowd ever. Jenny Celery, Alex Wotherspoon, Michael Sophocles, that Helene woman - and frankly Lee McQueen too.

I don't remember Lucinda being that bad either - despite what some may have thought about her berets!

But generally I agree that was a terrible year. The other Jennifer was awful too and Michael is probably my least favourite candidate ever.

I didn't mind Lucinda; she gave Sara some emotional support when the others were ganging up on her, and I think that's to her credit. All the same, she could be quite an annoying woman. Very prone to martyrdom, which is never attractive.

She keeps talking about Liz and underwear.

Is she just referring to the one scene from this week when we saw her bra briefly whilst her dress was being zipped up?

She does mention Liz's underwear a lot.

Mabey she enjoys thinking about girls in their underwear? Or perhaps she thinks talking about it will make more men read her blog!

I knew I had something in common with her

Series 4 was absolutely the worst series of the lot.

I agree Series 4 had awful candidates but Series 2 takes some beating; only the Badger, Michelle and to a lesser extent Ansell and Karen were any good, the rest were diabolical.

i consider Paul Tulip the best candidate ever.
He never lost a task. Can anyone beat that?

That statistic just makes him the luckiest candidate in that he did not fall victim to other candidates' idiocy at some point. There are some episodes where the PM is such a disaster that it doesn't matter what the rest of the team do to try and save it (S03E06 springs to mind).

Paul did look pretty good on the tasks, but the interview round showed him up for what he was. That comment of his about Big Issue vendors - what a knob!

Yep, that was his ultimate downfall. He was good in the tasks - he was the only candidate in S2 to win twice as PM - but when it came to acutally speaking up for himself in the interviews and in the boardroom, he totally fell apart. He was never in the boardroom until Week 11.

Funny, because given that he was able to speak up for himself before, you'd think he would have been able to do it in the boardroom. And you'd think someone who gave his all in the tasks would be serious enough about winning to write a better CV than that. If he'd played his cards right, he might have won, imo.

I wonder if there are any candidates this year who'll turn out like that? Come to think of it, it's half-way through and Liz hasn't been in the boardroom yet......we'll see.

Yep, pretty much. It was great entertainment, and Marrakech will go down as one of the best episodes, but that series had a unique kind of nastiness and incompetence to it. Sometimes it was difficult to watch. Very few of the candidates from it are often remembered positively - for me, at least.

The S5 candidates were of a somewhat better calibre, imo. I say that because they worked better as teams (Debra was right on that point) and there was less of the bitchiness and politics. It was also good to see one of the strongest female teams in the series after seeing the girls of S4.

I worry this series may be edging towards that standard - but hopefully they'll eventually show more creativity and teamwork soon.