I think she (Sarah) always gives female candidates a hard time, can't stand the competition, probably. She was pretty nasty on the Restaurant programme and I'm sure she has been on the YF panel before and come across as not very pleasant.
I actually don't think the hospitality degree is that important. I did a history degree and I would not call myself a historian because it is not my day job now. If fact she did state that her main interests lay in the management side of the degree which she now uses in her career.Her expertise is in recruitment, an area where she has done very well (if the profile is to be believed) so I think they were pretty rough on her to keep banging on about her degree on YF.

Is that the programme "The Restaurant" that still seems to provoke ire amongst various DS posters, particularly when it comes up as a side-topic on Masterchef threads? I didn't see it myself, but it appears to have passed into DS legend- indeed, the name 'Winkers' appears to have become a byword for reality TV injustice on here!

Back on topic, I did think that she was harsh on Natasha, and I couldn't understand where she was coming from. I'm sure it's entirely possible to study hospitality and not have an interest in food or cooking, and for that not to matter either.

I thought yer man Mark Frith was good, and was on her side, and Ed Byrne, despite giving her a ribbing (that's his job!) did it in an affectionate manner, and was apologetic about thinking it was right that she was fired.

The main criticism, and it's a general criticism of YF!, is that they left her sitting there like a lemon for half the show, while the guests chat and Dara shows clips and so on. If you're gonna do that, why not invite the candidate on at the end of the show for ten minutes or so- don't just leave them sitting around looking like a plonker!

So in summary, I didn't think she had a particularly rough time- I thought she fought her corner where she needed to, and came across well. Now if FHM could just persuade her to do a shoot with her dressed in her underwear, with a pinstripe jacket and hardhat...

I think Natasha was just one of the less interesting YF guests. Normally even the horrors come out pretty well but she was a bit blah.

The woman in the middle was awful towards her, a very bad panellist who seemed to miss the point that this is a light entertainment series as much as it is a '12 week job interview'.

Unless it was 'post-hoc' analysis, LS and her colleagues and then the YFd people picked up that she was knackered by the time this last task began.

Her state lead her to adopt a slightly detached approach where she made out that she couldn't cook, she had no interest in food and this was not her area of expertise, all things that contradicted, to a greater or lesser degree, things she had done and/or said before.

This situation didn't stack up.

In YFd, however, once she'd said that she was knackered and they had discussed this, there wasn't anywhere to go with the comments.

But thinking back, she was a bit detached before on the task where they were selling stuff in the market, choosing to concentrate on recording what was going on in her pad just a bit too much.

I've posted before how back in my corportate days, one of my senior bosses once described to me that in his definition of commitment, it was like in the meal of bacon and eggs, the chicken is involved but the pig is committed.

Natasha appeared to be a 'pig' when she was the editor of the magazine but reverted to 'chicken' mode for everything else.

In the earlier stages, you can sit back in the peleton as a chicken (to use Tour de France terminology) but by the latter stages, you are too exposed to hide and you've got to get out front and be a full on pig!

To change the balance of the YFd, they might be better with just one panelist as on such programmes if they have people on, they've got to let them speak, so actually, the share of time that the candidate actually contributes is quite small with the candidate effectively competing with 4 other people plus all the clips.

It's all a bit restrained/contrived really though as there are times when we get what they really think, like Natasha saying that she was ill with an aversion to Susie (is such stuff scripted?) but when they get on YFd, everyone else is a 'really nice person' or ' a great guy' - the mask is back on.

I'd prefer them to show different stuff to that we've already seen as opposed to going back over what has already covered - things they did in the house, for example.

I haven't seen YF yet. How many times did she end a sentence with 'yeah?'?

She must be one of the luckiest contestants in the history of the show to stay in so long. She's about as useful as a chocolate teapot IMHO – and extremely irritating with her misuse of the English language, talking utter nonsense most of the time.

Yes, but what happens when the chicken on a bike rides past a field of ponies?

I imagine that the ponies might muse that the chicken looks a bit odd with a cycling helmit on?

Mind you, if the pig was part of Team Sky, they'd never be able to set the bike up for it's short legs.

Does it become a big fish?!

The Big Fish is just one of the names of the guy who really controls everything that goes on at Grimsby docks.

He is known better to the docks underworld as The Codfather.

He smells what sells... and he smells of what sells, too

She's right. A degree in any subject doesn't make you an expert on it.

I haven't been watching You're fired this year as i find it a bit nasty and annoying. But i did see last nights one. The woman panalist really didn't seem to like Natasha at all, she just kept it coming, one dig after another. But Natasha took it all with good grace i must say.

I wish the panelists would give the fired candidate a chance to explain what they'd learnt from the experience (and about themselves) prior to laying into them. If they still fail to acknowledge to their flaws, then by all means point them out. But I think both Melody and Natasha realised their faults and so there was no need to harp on at either of them. That's why Ruby's attitude softened I think - she was too quick to judge Melody.

I agree Sid.

But the candidates only ever speak in bite-sized responses. They never expand on their points.

They sit there rather like the back of car nodding dogs; maybe they are briefed to be in this role?

The panellists go on and on.

Yes, I didn't rate Natasha that highly, but she definitely came across as a nicer person than Melody. What was up with her treatment on YF last night?

I didnt really like Natasha in the show. She spoke a lot of management crap, and looked down on people. Probably her way of compensating for them being stronger.

I wouldnt have given her a second look by the way she appeared on the show...but she certainly did look very nice on YBF. Amazing what a load of makeup and an hairstylist can do.

no but it should give you an idea of what is important when setting up a restaurant

Ie profit margins, how to run front and back of house.

In the car on the way to the task she was quick enough to let people know she had this degree and then chose not to share any of this knowledge with her team

I think both Susan and Jim should have approached this task in a more business like manner and at least thought about costings and profit margins but more blame has to attach to natasha as she knew from her degree no matter how long ago it was how to do this for a restaurent

Oh please! Melody made a lot of nasty comments about her fellow contestants than anyone this season, she's like a more inteligent version of S6's Paloma (keeps her mouth shut at the right time) Natasha came across more as an idiot who wouldn't listen to people not btichy or nasty in anyway apart from her comments to Susie.

I remember Melody being stubborn and not listening to her co-workers, but never really malicious. Natasha was quite bitchy towards Susan (last week especially) and she and Zoe had a catty exchange of words in that VT that was played on You're Fired near the start of the series. I don't think either of them were as bad as some of the candidates we've seen from series gone by though.

Most people look nice on YBF, its a big night out, not how they look every day.
The girls especially, do their hair and makeup every day, but they have the benefit of a professional to do it for them. It's no different that when you see someone at the annual Christmas ball or a wedding. Most people scrub up.

Anyway, I also thought she was quite charming, if still a bit too buttoned up.
She reminds me of Agent Starling from Silence of the Lambs, so tense and over keen because she is trying to compensate for and disguise the inadequacies she perceives she has.

Yes, BBC makeover worked wonders.

The 3 panelists were no harder on Natasha then the studio audience. The vote at the end was a sea of red banners -- was it 98%? I can't remember such a lopsided vote ever, maybe not even against Stuart Baggs the Brand.

When cornered Melody on YF came out fighting. Natasha was so knackered she just gave up, maybe deep down she was relieved to be fired.

The female panellist knew what she was talking about whereas Natasha has consistently just talked in meaningless soundbites throughout the series, shown no creative spark or business acumen. It was surprising that she didn't get booted out much sooner.

I thought Nat did OK last night , Mark Frith even said Jim should have gone as well , and had quite a few digs at him during the show . but then he went & spoilt it for me by saying he would like Susan to win .

Agreed