To me it simply beggars belief that posters can write such horrible negative stuff and ascribe all sorts of motives and reasons for perfectly normal behaviour whilst at the same time swear almost blind devotion and adoration at another. It's like they know the house mates personally.

It all seems a bit unhinged or deranged to me.

We've hardly seen her yet.

She seems fine to me, so far. I havent heard of any reputation - I didn't even know there was a Nolan called Linda till last week.

How so?

she told Jasmine and Luisa that they could be coming across as bitchy as they were saying that Casey was in the hot tub with the two guys to get camera time - fair enough, perhaps she was trying to warn them to check themselves (or whatever the term is!)

- I didn't think there was anything wrong with that, but she did start snapping a bit at Jim, but not sure whether it was tongue in cheek, or she's like that - time will tell. If we actually get to see her on Highlights show a bit more, we won't know what she's really like at this rate. Perhaps the older HMs swan off to bed much earlier than the others so there's not much to show of them and the younger ones stay up trying to cop off with eachother so BB want to show what they get up to.

Darn not having Live Feed !!!

I knew about her sister but not her husband dying or her cancer so that makes me even more perplexed about the irrational antagonism directed at her on here by a handful of people. That's an awful lot of grief to go through in such a short space of time (just done a google) and it makes me want to root for her even more.

I've caught a couple of sour glances occasionally, but she's been the epitome of loveliness up until now. Perhaps her true colours are yet to be shown - or just maybe, she's mellowed and been humbled by the crap hand she's been dealt over the past few years.

She was having treatment for breast cancer whilst her husband died. That really isn't a reason to want her to win but .......by God she's had a hard time of it - lost her mum too within a similar time frame.

Beats me why people want to post horrible stuff without giving her a chance. Personally I couldn't stand Jum Davidson but I'm prepared to wait and see before I start posting negatively.

It's all about what they're like in the house IMO.

Not in mine. If I disliked a HM for how they'd behaved outside CBB, I woudn't want them to win or even to have a long stay. Indeed, I'd rather they'd not been picked as HMs at all.

I'm not saying there's no way they could change my mind. (For example, I like Louisa well enough in CBB but couldn't stand her in The Apprentice.) But I don't think there's any good reason to see CBB as a fresh start with a clean slate rather than as continuous with what happened before.


So I take it you're not someone who thinks it's all about what they're like in the house.

Totally agree, Linda, AFAIK has done nothing to warrant the nasty comments made about her.

She's had a s**t time, losing her husband to cancer while dealing with her own cancer, then not long after that, she loses her Mother & only last year lost her sister to cancer.

Now I'm not saying that's a reason to like her, however, what I do like & greatly admire about her is the way she's coped & dealt with the lousy hand she's been given.

As for her claiming benefit, so what? As I said in another thread, she's more than likely worked all her adult life, paid tax & therefore is perfectly entitled to claim benefit. Who is anyone to judge her and say she should immediately have returned to work after the last few terrible years she's had.

As for saying she said claimed benefits in order to gain sympathy, utter rubbish, she was taking part in a task & I don't think she could have said it in a more matter of fact way if she tried.

Do you have any actual evidence that she's not?

Something can be a conversation and also involve seed-planting; and something can be a fact and also a plea for the sympathy vote.

You have one interpretation; the ones who dislike her have another. Neither side can read her mind or prove they're right.

Anyway, it seemed a while back that some disliked her for how she was (on BOTS?) while her sister was in CBB; others seem to have other things from her past. (Sorry, but I don't remember the specifics.) It seems a bit like people disliking Louisa because of how they thought she was in The Apprentice.

She seems ok to me so far, but then I haven't seen very much of her. I don't like the way she suddenly dropped her objections to Jim Davidson, since it suggests she never did fell as strongly as she was making it sound; and older HMs are seldom good value, imo, and often try to control things, so I'm not enthusiastic about having her in the house.

In response to something ^^^^ up there. I never said it was all about what goes on in the house. Of course I have opinions on them that I know. I don't claim to do a clean slate approach. I simply said I try to not let it cloud my judgement. We all know that the media can hype up stories and people can be misrepresented. I simply like to see (and judge) with my own eyes.

Yes, I'm pretty much the same, clean slate, and let's see how they come across in there. And Linda, to date, has done nothing to make me dislike her, and a few things that have made me like and warm to her. It's not that I want her to win, as such, more that I want her to have a 'fair hearing', and I'm really disliking what is coming across as spiteful, manufactured negativity about her - particularly when no one has actually yet come up with anything concrete as evidence of why she should be disliked.

Did anyone say she claimed benefits in order to get sympathy?

I thought the idea was that, to gain sympathy, she mentioned that she'd been on benefits. It was her telling people, not the original claim, that was seen as a bid for sympathy.

It seems to be part of and spring from the Loose Women / Nolan hate that appears to fester on here for some. The fact that completely separate individuals fill the Loose Women panel and The Nolans seems to have passed many by. Hate one, hate em all.

You said:

Oh forgive me ..............so sorry I wasn't a little clearer. I do hope my subsequent post has cleared up any misunderstanding

Sorry, but I don't understand that. Are you saying that none of the Nolan's appear on Loose Women? I thought Coleen Nolan was one of the panelists for a while.

I am not interested in proving anything, I asked for reasons why she is disliked and to date, no one has provided anything concrete to validate that dislike. An opinion re how she behaved on BOTS (in terms of suporting her sster, I'm guessing?) does not qualify as a valid reason imo, but thanks for at least offering some context to the dislike.

I like her so far.

I agree. What is she supposed to have done to upset so many people to such a degree the outrage is pretty startling on here

Yes, it has, and thanks for clarifying.

Anyway, even if I stick to what I've seen, then for Jim Davidson, I saw him in Hell's Kitchen; and I've see some of what Liz Jones has written. But I agree that the media can hype up stories and misrepresent, and so such things have to be evaluated with some care.

No and I can't see where you got that from what I said Coleen did indeed appear on Loose Women and Denise Welch who was also disliked quite a bit on here appeared on the Loose Women panel but not The Nolans.

Oops I think I get what you mean. I meant separate in that just because you may not like 1 Nolan it doesn't mean you will dislike them all and just because 1 Loose Woman panelist gets your goat it doesn't mean they all will

Perhaps I've worded it wrong but are you not splitting hairs here?
I wrongly said it was suggested "she claimed benefits in order to gain sympathy" when in fact I should have said it was suggested she mentioned she'd been on benefits to gain sympathy.

I didn't get it from what you said: I couldn't work out what you meant and took a guess at what you might have meant.

You said "completely separate individuals fill the Loose Women panel and The Nolans", which certainly looks like it's saying The Nolans and the Loose Women panel have no one in common: that no one was in both, so that they'd be filled by completely separate individuals.

And I have to say I still can't quite work out what you mean. Sorry, but I just can't see what you mean or what conclusions we're meant to draw from it.