....for the entire task!! She took no risk, she did not manage. She was actually worse than Melody in this task!!
Natasha only wrote in that stupid book....
She was far worse than Melody, she should be out. Sugar clearly wants her gone, the fine seemed to try to get rid of her, to no avail unfortunately.
Natasha done sod all, as per usual.
It was sad how she took out her frustrations on Susie.
I don't know how she has made it this far.
It was sad how she took out her frustrations on Susie.
I don't know how she has made it this far.
Completely and utterly over her head in this task.
That's twice now she's won as PM when she really shouldn't have - both times, it's the other team being more incompetent which saved her.
That's twice now she's won as PM when she really shouldn't have - both times, it's the other team being more incompetent which saved her.
I have a feeling the penalty Natasha's team incurred was Sugar's way of trying to ensure they lost so he could get rid of her!
What was she talking about when she kept describing herself as "operational"?
What was she talking about when she kept describing herself as "operational"?
Originally Posted by marvola45:
“Completely and utterly over her head in this task.
That's twice now she's won as PM when she really shouldn't have - both times, it's the other team being more incompetent which saved her.”
“Completely and utterly over her head in this task.
That's twice now she's won as PM when she really shouldn't have - both times, it's the other team being more incompetent which saved her.”
Everyone apart from Hele n Jim, Natasha and Susan have similar records, Tom not so good
[quote=-Sid-;51245859]I have a feeling the penalty Natasha's team incurred was Sugar's way of trying to ensure they lost so he could get rid of her!
What was she talking about when she kept describing herself as "operational"?[/QUOTE]
I still don't understand that bit either. She talked nonsense for the whole task. Natasha actually looked like a petrified & nervous little girl during the entire task. Susan (that Natasha accused as a "child") actually had more balls.
What was she talking about when she kept describing herself as "operational"?[/QUOTE]
I still don't understand that bit either. She talked nonsense for the whole task. Natasha actually looked like a petrified & nervous little girl during the entire task. Susan (that Natasha accused as a "child") actually had more balls.
[quote=capekdeh;51246928]
Yes, I totally agree, I was so pleased how well Susan handled herself, she stuck up for herself without making a big fuss but made sure that Natasha knew how she felt. I thought it was so out of order and patronising Natasha telling Susan to be quiet and that she was embarrassing herself when Susan was only speaking the truth. What a pity that Jim did not back Susan up at the house when he had been moaning about Natasha behind her back while they were doing the task. It made Jim look rather two faced, I think!
Originally Posted by -Sid-:
“I have a feeling the penalty Natasha's team incurred was Sugar's way of trying to ensure they lost so he could get rid of her!
What was she talking about when she kept describing herself as "operational"?[/QUOTE]
I still don't understand that bit either. She talked nonsense for the whole task. Natasha actually looked like a petrified & nervous little girl during the entire task. Susan (that Natasha accused as a "child") actually had more balls.”
“I have a feeling the penalty Natasha's team incurred was Sugar's way of trying to ensure they lost so he could get rid of her!
What was she talking about when she kept describing herself as "operational"?[/QUOTE]
I still don't understand that bit either. She talked nonsense for the whole task. Natasha actually looked like a petrified & nervous little girl during the entire task. Susan (that Natasha accused as a "child") actually had more balls.”
Yes, I totally agree, I was so pleased how well Susan handled herself, she stuck up for herself without making a big fuss but made sure that Natasha knew how she felt. I thought it was so out of order and patronising Natasha telling Susan to be quiet and that she was embarrassing herself when Susan was only speaking the truth. What a pity that Jim did not back Susan up at the house when he had been moaning about Natasha behind her back while they were doing the task. It made Jim look rather two faced, I think!
[quote=Darcyprincess;51247024]
I think Jim wanted to avoid another argument with Natasha. Jim had a bad history with Natasha. Remember after the firing of Ellie & Vincent, Jim & Natasha argued in the house.
Originally Posted by capekdeh:
“
Yes, I totally agree, I was so pleased how well Susan handled herself, she stuck up for herself without making a big fuss but made sure that Natasha knew how she felt. I thought it was so out of order and patronising Natasha telling Susan to be quiet and that she was embarrassing herself when Susan was only speaking the truth. What a pity that Jim did not back Susan up at the house when he had been moaning about Natasha behind her back while they were doing the task. It made Jim look rather two faced, I think!”
“
Yes, I totally agree, I was so pleased how well Susan handled herself, she stuck up for herself without making a big fuss but made sure that Natasha knew how she felt. I thought it was so out of order and patronising Natasha telling Susan to be quiet and that she was embarrassing herself when Susan was only speaking the truth. What a pity that Jim did not back Susan up at the house when he had been moaning about Natasha behind her back while they were doing the task. It made Jim look rather two faced, I think!”
I think Jim wanted to avoid another argument with Natasha. Jim had a bad history with Natasha. Remember after the firing of Ellie & Vincent, Jim & Natasha argued in the house.
I can't stand her either, and blaming Susan for not getting the treat was out of order. It's pretty clear that it was Jim and Susan who won the task.
From the start I can't recall anything outstanding that Natasha has done, she is only still there on the back of others who were on her team who were more productive. I hope she is out next week.
From the start I can't recall anything outstanding that Natasha has done, she is only still there on the back of others who were on her team who were more productive. I hope she is out next week.
The only things that Natasha has done that are memorable are emorable for all the wrong reasons,
the blow your load was so bad taste it was comletely cringworthy, her constant Yeah make me want to throw something at the tele
and her blaming Susan for loosing the task when she herself had do oviously missed the whole point of the tast was really unfair ( said as a nod to Susan but no less true for that)
She has scrapped thorugh this far but her card is marked a I am sure Lord Sugar wnats her gone now to the point of manipulating rules to get her out of the programme
the blow your load was so bad taste it was comletely cringworthy, her constant Yeah make me want to throw something at the tele
and her blaming Susan for loosing the task when she herself had do oviously missed the whole point of the tast was really unfair ( said as a nod to Susan but no less true for that)
She has scrapped thorugh this far but her card is marked a I am sure Lord Sugar wnats her gone now to the point of manipulating rules to get her out of the programme
Originally Posted by shefair:
“The only things that Natasha has done that are memorable are emorable for all the wrong reasons,
the blow your load was so bad taste it was comletely cringworthy, her constant Yeah make me want to throw something at the tele
and her blaming Susan for loosing the task when she herself had do oviously missed the whole point of the tast was really unfair ( said as a nod to Susan but no less true for that)
She has scrapped thorugh this far but her card is marked a I am sure Lord Sugar wnats her gone now to the point of manipulating rules to get her out of the programme”
“The only things that Natasha has done that are memorable are emorable for all the wrong reasons,
the blow your load was so bad taste it was comletely cringworthy, her constant Yeah make me want to throw something at the tele
and her blaming Susan for loosing the task when she herself had do oviously missed the whole point of the tast was really unfair ( said as a nod to Susan but no less true for that)
She has scrapped thorugh this far but her card is marked a I am sure Lord Sugar wnats her gone now to the point of manipulating rules to get her out of the programme”
oh me too! its so annoying!!
Originally Posted by capekdeh:
“....for the entire task!! She took no risk, she did not manage. She was actually worse than Melody in this task!!”
“....for the entire task!! She took no risk, she did not manage. She was actually worse than Melody in this task!!”
I think you're forgetting that she also wore a hat.
Originally Posted by capekdeh:
“....for the entire task!! She took no risk, she did not manage. She was actually worse than Melody in this task!!”
“....for the entire task!! She took no risk, she did not manage. She was actually worse than Melody in this task!!”
It was a two day task, of which we saw about 40 minutes of what went on. Of which there was two teams, each with two sub-teams. On that basis, you probably saw about 10 minutes of what she did in a 48 period! So your claim is a bit OTT, unless you followed her throughout the two days! Therefore, are you Nick Hewer?
Originally Posted by thorr:
“It was a two day task, of which we saw about 40 minutes of what went on. Of which there was two teams, each with two sub-teams. On that basis, you probably saw about 10 minutes of what she did in a 48 period! So your claim is a bit OTT, unless you followed her throughout the two days! Therefore, are you Nick Hewer?”
“It was a two day task, of which we saw about 40 minutes of what went on. Of which there was two teams, each with two sub-teams. On that basis, you probably saw about 10 minutes of what she did in a 48 period! So your claim is a bit OTT, unless you followed her throughout the two days! Therefore, are you Nick Hewer?
”
well....last night episode did not put Natasha in a good way at all. Had she done something great, they would have shown it on telly. All we saw, she wrote in the book, and posed in front of the stall.
Originally Posted by thorr:
“It was a two day task, of which we saw about 40 minutes of what went on. Of which there was two teams, each with two sub-teams. On that basis, you probably saw about 10 minutes of what she did in a 48 period! So your claim is a bit OTT, unless you followed her throughout the two days! Therefore, are you Nick Hewer?”
“It was a two day task, of which we saw about 40 minutes of what went on. Of which there was two teams, each with two sub-teams. On that basis, you probably saw about 10 minutes of what she did in a 48 period! So your claim is a bit OTT, unless you followed her throughout the two days! Therefore, are you Nick Hewer?
”
We saw enough of her 'executive' decisions to have a good idea what she was like. My 10 year old son would have had a better business plan for the task than her last night.
Refusing to buy more stock after it was drilled into them before they left that was what the task was all about is unforgivable. I think she comes accross as naive at best thick at worst.
Originally Posted by jdayeh13:
“She was far worse than Melody, she should be out. Sugar clearly wants her gone, the fine seemed to try to get rid of her, to no avail unfortunately.”
“She was far worse than Melody, she should be out. Sugar clearly wants her gone, the fine seemed to try to get rid of her, to no avail unfortunately.”
The fine was there for effect. He obviously knew what the actual figures were and clearly calculated the amount of the fine so it wouldn't sway the decision.
It doesn't matter to Sraln who tags along with the 2 finalists until we get to the final. Obviously he isn't going to make her the Apprentice.
And if he really really wanted to fire her, he could just fire her, regardless of whether she won the task or not.
Originally Posted by cookie_365:
“And if he really really wanted to fire her, he could just fire her, regardless of whether she won the task or not.”
“And if he really really wanted to fire her, he could just fire her, regardless of whether she won the task or not.”
He might be able to but it would have to be for something much more serious than than winning a task that he designed so badly that it didn't achieve what he wanted it to achieve.
