....and wins! He lost because he would not bring in a male as long as there were females he could sacrifice, LS was well aware of this and didn't like it.

It does.

But if I must address your points...


Hardly a fact, barely an opinion.


Leah messed by disobeying the PM countless times.
Natalie messed up by not doing anything.
Alex also messed up by not doing anything.
Neil and Kurt messed up by TRYING to do something.


Bullshit point. You trust the sub-team leader to go off on their own, that has been stated countless times in the series. The PM can't spoon feed the Sub-team leader.


Mmm. There could be something in that, but she doesn't get herself heard, only in the boardroom, as Sugar said.


LOL, he was in Boys Vs Girls tasks for the first three weeks, and last week I can't recall him actively keeping away from the females in his team.

Now answer me this, yes or no, Leah STARTED the feud between them in tonights episode.

There were a few examples in tonight's episode which indicated he didn't think much of the two girls - asking to speak to Neil when he was on the phone, completely ignoring Natalie when she was trying to contribute... I did get the sense he was a bit chauvinistic. There was no good reason to bring both girls back in tonight. Leah I could maybe understand only because they were at loggerheads but that was more personal than anything else. Natalie? That was just stupid, especially after both Neil and Kurt's major errors had been highlighted by LS.

she seemed a bit extreme

wonder if she took the same offence when LAS made a comment about women on last weeks apprentice

An opinion just about everyone except a handful of you, seem to agree with making it very likely to be the truth. Occam's razor and all that


Natalie was not allowed to do anything or did that whole bit in the car not seep through to you?
Leah's only mistake was not 'disobeying' him more (a fact supported by LS himself) - he was a dictatorial idiot on this task.and would rather Leah had been more of a Natalie... luckily she has a bit more about her than that!
Anyway by your logic why did he not bring Alex in instead of Natalie.... oooo I wonder LOL!


I think you missed my point. He said Leah was responsible for the mess up by a member of her team as she was team leader. Ergo Zee is responsible for the mess up in his team as he is the team leader/PM. If he had come back with 6 items to their 1 I could see his logic, but it was just an excuse he used to justify bringing her into the boardroom and one he couldn't explain when the comparison was pointed out to him on 'You're Fired'


Yes but as pointed out by the episode in the car he didn't want to enage her.


But you don't recall him actibvely engaing any either do you?


Maybe, but I am not surprised really... he was being a prat and anyway that doesn't make him not sexist! As witnessed by the phone call with Leah when she was outside the mall... all she said was she thought the mall was a better idea and he immediately said 'put Neil on the phone'... the subtext of which was obvious for all, but you it woudl seem, to see!

Bringing leah was always obvious from his point of view.
Bringing Natalie was a strategic move because she didnt do much and she was in the boardroom in the past.

I don't think bringing kurt was an option.
Kurt made a very good sale and his mathematical error did not cost them.

Bringing Alex would have been bad because he would have decimated zee

It was always going to be between bringing Natalie and Neil, but zee had more of a chance bringing Natalie.
I don't think he was being sexist (I'll have to rewatch later) or unintentionally being sexist but Zee would have gone out no matter who would be brought in the boardroom.

So him asking to put Neil on the phone makes him a sexist?


Or is it possible that she wasn't listening to him and he was asking Neil, a more level headed person with no axe to grind to talk sense into her and go with the initial brief they had agreed on. If some idiot on the other line was going against what we had agreed on, and was rolling their eyes at me with sarcastic comments, I would also want to talk with someone I am friendly with and who could possibly listen to me and get my message across to the other team.

She did her level best to sabotage the task and wasted crucial time going to the mall only then being told to turn back, which made her even more angry, if that were possible.

Not in isolation, maybe not, but in the context of his overall behaviour towards the women on the show it provides a good concise example of it.

It's the populist view spoonfed to you by the BBC. I'm not going along with it. Simple as that


Natalie could have made herself heard if she wanted to. She has no problems shouting people down when LS is about. She never declared her upset while working with Zee in the task itself. Only in the boardroom. He could have brought Alex in, but Alex hasn't been in the BR yet. Natalie has. Kurt should have gone in though.



I haven't missed it. It's tosh, the sub team is responsible for themselves, if they mess up then it's their fault as the PM is not physically with them. The sub team could have found more products if they were good enough to do so.



I can't guarantee the guy isn't sexist, but I can give him the benefit of my doubt. Zee just viewed her as a weak candidate and didn't entertain her opinion, it isn't the first time that's happened, is every instance of that sexist?



He worked with the women in his team with no issues. Meanwhile Luisa was insulting Jason downstairs...sexist?


Leah was being totally obnoxious! Throughout the episodes, other members have identified that! She wanted PM, didn't get it, appointed HERSELF sub team leader, when has that EVER happened!!?

She was a certain candidate for the BR tonight!

He was fine with Uzma last week, he also got on with Louisa

Maybe Natalie is so crap and irrelevant that nobody takes her seriously? You'll find Zee wasn't the only one with that opinion today, Nick suggested his two team members had nothing to offer. Karen said the same thing about Natalie, she doesn't say or do much.

Oh dear ... you haven't missed it yet you clearly have! It's a wonder you can operate a computer really

I haven't missed it. The dope on the panel is wrong. You are wrong!!

Natalie was sitting with Kurt when he made the mathematical error

If Kurt had not been there then maybe Natalie would have also made the error because she didn't seem to know the conversion either.
There were some hints that he looked down on woman but I wouldn't say his boardroom choices were part of that - Natalie seemed a bit of a passenger and Leah seemed really quite unlikable to me

I thought the woman on YBF was alright, comment about the train journey was maybe a little clumsy though

This lady didn't come across well. Nicky was fair but kind with it.

My wife says she got it right. His looks far outshine his business prowess.

Felt like she had a massive problem with the guy and it was misplaced. Maybe she should take her own advice and not judge people when she doesn't know them.

Just a little useless fact for you all: did you know that Miles Jupp, the man on the panel of 'TA: You're Fired', played Archie on the children's programme, 'Balamory'?!!!

Yep, everyone is wrong except you

At the end of the day you have failed to grasp the point I made, a point so basic even my cat can understand it. I suspect I know exactly why this is, but the forum rules prevent me from saying things like that although you can't stop me thinking it.

She was a right miserable cow.

I don't like Zee, but she dismissed him for not being able to take criticism from people he didn't know - and then criticised him, despite not knowing him.

All that and her audience-pandering really irritated me.

I'd rather have seen Andy Parsons on there!

What's wrong with being sexy?

She really had it in for Zeeshaan.

I think she was blinded by his persona, which was magnified by the show.

The Apprentice always highlights the worst traits in people, hence why it is such compelling viewing.

Zee deserved to go & some of the accusations against him seemed to be valid, but he did not deserve the treatment that she dished out on You're Fired.

Zee did come across as sexist but I don’t think him taking Natalie into the boardroom was necessarily because she was female and more to do with him thinking she was the weakest candidate in his team. Part of that was based on her performance in other tasks.

Natalie adopted the same approach when she was in charge, taking Sophie into the boardroom for not doing anything rather than those who made mistakes that led to their loss.

The members of his team who made mistakes also had done positive things, Kurt got a good deal and Neil did negotiate well even if it was for the wrong item. The other 2 were stood right by him so it was really a team error, whilst neither Zee nor Natalie spotted the inches to centimetres error.

You are seeing what you want to see here. Zee wanted to speak to Neil because he would talk more sense, NOT because he's a man!
At work I have 5 people in my team, one guy is a terrible communicator so I always ask one of the girls for updates rather than him. Does that make me a sexist? Or is this sort of behaviour ok in your world, because I'm "disciminating" against a man, not a woman?

No no, sex-ist...there's such a fine line between stupid and....clever.

Oh really! You are seeing what YOU want to actually. She was sub team leader and he was happy enough to blame her for the failure of the sub team yet when it came to the crunch he would rather talk to Neil and treat him as the sub team leader ..... and then after only a few words from her... I could understand it if they had argued for a few minutes or more, but after one short sentence..... why was that I wonder? Hmmmm


No it makes you a bit of a fool for having a team where communication is obviously important yet one member of it can't communicate. You should go on The Apprentice, you sound ideal