|
||||||||
Most unjust firing? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 620
|
Most unjust firing?
Not doing a poll, but if there's someone wanting to do a poll, go ahead.
I think Liz's firing just tops everyone else's, as: * Lord Sugar himself admitted it was a wrong decision afterwards * Liz did not perform particularly badly in the task * Stuart - who was agreed to have been fired instead - was fired immediately after Liz the next week * Stella hated Liz, and admitted she was better than Stuart Others, I think, are less obvious - Katie's from series ten was quite unjust. She had been the standout contender up til' that point, and the only thing that stopped her was her business plan. She or Roisin would've won the job in the earlier series. Alex's from series nine was also unfair - reasons for his firing were only that he waited too long to become PM (despite volunteering three times prior), the poor product (which was Myles' idea anyway) and being brow-beaten by Myles. I mean, I doubt he would've won, but the reasons for his firing weren't fair. If there's any firing you thought was particularly unjust or unfair, mention it here. I suspect high numbers of mentions for a few of these... |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
There have been many that I have disagreed with, but if I was asked what I consider to be the most unfair, there is one that I think has no competition, and that is Miriam Staley from Series 1. She was fired in Week 10 after the first ever shopping channel task.
On this task, Miriam was the Project Manager and also took the presenting role, whilst her teammates (Paul and eventual winner Tim) chose the products and fed her directions in the production room. Miriam was a fantastic presenter - Sir Alan was extremely impressed by her performance, and the TV channel said that she could get a job there with minimal training. Despite this, the team lost because the other team also did quite a good presenting job, and they just had better products. As the presenter, Miriam wasn't allowed to choose the products that she would sell, and Paul and Tim did a terrible job - they didn't really think about what would sell, and their tactics were just to challenge what Saira on the other team wanted. Saira cottoned on to what they were doing at once, and made sure that she got all the best products. The fact that Miriam was fired when she was really the only person on her team to do anything good at all was an absolute travesty, in my opinion. I think that Paul should have been fired, but if Sir Alan had wanted to keep Paul, even firing Tim would have been far fairer than firing Miriam. There really wasn't anything more that she could have done on that task. Maybe she shouldn't have been Project Manager, but at the time they picked the PMs, they hadn't chosen the presenters, and when the time came to choose the presenters she was the only one who was any good at it. In addition to that, on the previous tasks it is my opinion that Miriam was generally a better performer than either Paul or Tim - she really only made one mistake in the whole process, which was spending too much money on cheese in Week 8. There have been many unjust firings since then, but I don't think any of them have reached the Miriam standard of unfairness. She is the only other candidate (besides Liz) that Lord Sugar has later admitted was the wrong decision. Other contenders that haven't been mentioned: Shazia from Series 4 (seemed to be the only person on her team to bring any organisation to the laundry task) Sara from Series 4 (clearly a stronger contender than her team made her out to be, especially when compared to Michael Sophocles) Raef from Series 4 (ditto) Kimberly from Series 5 (I didn't think she was that amazing, but I'd have liked to see her kept over Philip) Jordan from JA1 (he lost control of the first task, but he was clearly a very intelligent young man and I really would have liked to see a bit more of him) Edna from Series 7 (slightly unusual one, but I just think she showed more talent than Zoe) Harry H from YA2 (horrendously unfair firing based purely on a ludicrous format twist) Rebecca from Series 9 (very strong saleswoman, I don't understand why she was fired over Francesca) Ella Jade from Series 10 (she didn't do very well on that task, but on previous tasks she had been very strong, and she certainly wasn't in the same league as Steven and Sarah, the two who had gone before her) |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 620
|
Quote:
There have been many that I have disagreed with, but if I was asked what I consider to be the most unfair, there is one that I think has no competition, and that is Miriam Staley from Series 1. She was fired in Week 10 after the first ever shopping channel task.
On this task, Miriam was the Project Manager and also took the presenting role, whilst her teammates (Paul and eventual winner Tim) chose the products and fed her directions in the production room. Miriam was a fantastic presenter - Sir Alan was extremely impressed by her performance, and the TV channel said that she could get a job there with minimal training. Despite this, the team lost because the other team also did quite a good presenting job, and they just had better products. As the presenter, Miriam wasn't allowed to choose the products that she would sell, and Paul and Tim did a terrible job - they didn't really think about what would sell, and their tactics were just to challenge what Saira on the other team wanted. Saira cottoned on to what they were doing at once, and made sure that she got all the best products. The fact that Miriam was fired when she was really the only person on her team to do anything good at all was an absolute travesty, in my opinion. I think that Paul should have been fired, but if Sir Alan had wanted to keep Paul, even firing Tim would have been far fairer than firing Miriam. There really wasn't anything more that she could have done on that task. Maybe she shouldn't have been Project Manager, but at the time they picked the PMs, they hadn't chosen the presenters, and when the time came to choose the presenters she was the only one who was any good at it. In addition to that, on the previous tasks it is my opinion that Miriam was generally a better performer than either Paul or Tim - she really only made one mistake in the whole process, which was spending too much money on cheese in Week 8. There have been many unjust firings since then, but I don't think any of them have reached the Miriam standard of unfairness. She is the only other candidate (besides Liz) that Lord Sugar has later admitted was the wrong decision. Other contenders that haven't been mentioned: Shazia from Series 4 (seemed to be the only person on her team to bring any organisation to the laundry task) Sara from Series 4 (clearly a stronger contender than her team made her out to be, especially when compared to Michael Sophocles) Raef from Series 4 (ditto) Kimberly from Series 5 (I didn't think she was that amazing, but I'd have liked to see her kept over Philip) Jordan from JA1 (he lost control of the first task, but he was clearly a very intelligent young man and I really would have liked to see a bit more of him) Edna from Series 7 (slightly unusual one, but I just think she showed more talent than Zoe) Harry H from YA2 (horrendously unfair firing based purely on a ludicrous format twist) Rebecca from Series 9 (very strong saleswoman, I don't understand why she was fired over Francesca) Ella Jade from Series 10 (she didn't do very well on that task, but on previous tasks she had been very strong, and she certainly wasn't in the same league as Steven and Sarah, the two who had gone before her) ![]() I agree, hers was unjust. It really was a toss-up between the two for me. For the others you've mentioned - I agree with some, disagree with others. Raef's firing was unjust not just because of what happened, but because of the actual overall result being unfair. Edna I'd disagree with. She'd shown no skills throughout the competition I was aware of, whilst Lord Sugar gave Zoe some credit for admitting to her mistakes. Rebecca was excellent at sales, but she didn't get on with her team. They had it in for her from the beginning. Not helped by Nick dobbing her in as the "motivational speaker" person - hence, why she was fired. Ella Jade's firing was similar to Katie's - they'd both been very strong until the task that best suited their business plan. Ella Jade was quite good until then, but she really shot herself in the foot in the boardroom, then added insult to injury by begging LS to stay. If I could throw in some more (sorry!) Felipe's was definitely the most controversial. I didn't think it was the best move, but Lord Sugar was unfair by fining the whole team money for that one blunder, as it wasn't the most obvious of errors. Pretty much any firing from series eight. Bilyana, merely for her behaviour in the boardroom. Duane, for being given a winner's edit then being fired for one small mistake. Katie, for being shown to be weak, then getting stronger, then fired. Jenna, for being an able candidate ruined by one thing. All of series eights' firings were pretty much for the tiniest of errors, though most of the time, the PM's brought in the wrong people. Not a firing, per say, but the whole final of series seven was just wrong to me. Tom was one of the worst candidates that series, his business plan was poor but he won anyway. Helen or Susan should've won. Going back much further, Paul in series three was not so much a bad firing, but for the wrong reasons. Fair enough, the cheese wasn't "high-quality", but it was popular in France. Overall, LS does get it right most of the time. He just makes the odd blunder, I think. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
Raef's firing was unjust not just because of what happened, but because of the actual overall result being unfair.
Quote:
Edna I'd disagree with. She'd shown no skills throughout the competition I was aware of, whilst Lord Sugar gave Zoe some credit for admitting to her mistakes.
Quote:
Rebecca was excellent at sales, but she didn't get on with her team. They had it in for her from the beginning. Not helped by Nick dobbing her in as the "motivational speaker" person - hence, why she was fired.
Quote:
Ella Jade's firing was similar to Katie's - they'd both been very strong until the task that best suited their business plan. Ella Jade was quite good until then, but she really shot herself in the foot in the boardroom, then added insult to injury by begging LS to stay.
Quote:
Felipe's was definitely the most controversial. I didn't think it was the best move, but Lord Sugar was unfair by fining the whole team money for that one blunder, as it wasn't the most obvious of errors.
Quote:
Bilyana, merely for her behaviour in the boardroom.
Quote:
Duane, for being given a winner's edit then being fired for one small mistake.
Quote:
Katie, for being shown to be weak, then getting stronger, then fired. Jenna, for being an able candidate ruined by one thing.
Quote:
Not a firing, per say, but the whole final of series seven was just wrong to me. Tom was one of the worst candidates that series, his business plan was poor but he won anyway. Helen or Susan should've won.
The final of that series was awkward, but for a different reason. It was the first business plan series, and it was evident that it hadn't really been thought through. Lord Sugar apparently hadn't looked at any of the business plans in advance, which meant that we had three very poor plans, and the one that wasn't (Susan's) wasn't quite ready for investment at that time, though he has invested since. Given the circumstances, I have no issue with him choosing Tom - which, contrary to popular belief, was not because of the nail file - the nail file wasn't even what he was offering, it was office chairs. Tom was chosen because as a young, enthusiastic inventor, he was someone who could be worked with to create a really great business, and the nail file decision was made after Lord Sugar had already decided to go with him. Quote:
Going back much further, Paul in series three was not so much a bad firing, but for the wrong reasons. Fair enough, the cheese wasn't "high-quality", but it was popular in France.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,744
|
There's so many.
But you have to remember that this show isn't fair. Alan Sugar can hire anyone he wants for whatever reason, and make up any reason he wants to hire or fire someone. The tasks probably mean very little. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 34,106
|
How can some of you even remember people from past shows? I never can!
I always wonder this, on forums like this one, x-factor, big brother etc... people seem to have such clear memories of the people who were on the show like 5 or 6 years ago. Mine is more of a, might recognise them if I saw them again, type of memory. Of course, there's a handful of big characters I sometimes remember, but the rest of them just blur into one. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,744
|
Quote:
How can some of you even remember people from past shows? I never can!
I always wonder this, on forums like this one, x-factor, big brother etc... people seem to have such clear memories of the people who were on the show like 5 or 6 years ago. Mine is more of a, might recognise them if I saw them again, type of memory. Of course, there's a handful of big characters I sometimes remember, but the rest of them just blur into one. It's very strange that my memories of the first few series of Big Brother are much clearer than those that came afterwards. People have even linked to photos of people who have been in it, I know that I actually watched the particular series at the time, but have absolutely no memory of the name or the face that's been linked to. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Rebel County
Posts: 17,761
|
Anybody who was on a team with Michael Sophocles and was sent home before him.
![]() Shazia, I still don't get how she went that week when Jenny C had made a horlicks of the whole task and you had Lindi and Jenny M overbidding and underbidding things and the 24 hour hotline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 34,106
|
Quote:
I know what you mean. Especially with Big Brother. For a very strange reason I can remember contestants from the very first 5 series quite clearly, but after series 5 I can't remember many of them, even less so remember what happened on the shows.
It's very strange that my memories of the first few series of Big Brother are much clearer than those that came afterwards. People have even linked to photos of people who have been in it, I know that I actually watched the particular series at the time, but have absolutely no memory of the name or the face that's been linked to. I am sort of the same with BB. I'm more likely to remember people from the first few series than the newer ones, only because I think I enjoyed those series more and was more into BB back then. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 629
|
Quote:
Generally he was just a much stronger candidate than Michael.
Miriam could have gone earlier, during the Farmer's Market task when she overspent on ingredients. The most unjust that in my opinion is Karen Bremner's in S2, fired for being a lawyer. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 53,387
|
IMHO Ruth Badger and Claire Young should never have been fired. I can't recall the circumstances that they were fired.. but having followed them ever since the show they're clearly very good business women and I think would have been a great success working for Lord Sugar at the various points they took part.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
My memory is just for faces I think. I never seem to forget a face, but there's people here would can name past apprentice candidates, tell you what week they were fired, how much money they made in a task, what Sugar said to them etc... I'd have no idea about any of that!
I am sort of the same with BB. I'm more likely to remember people from the first few series than the newer ones, only because I think I enjoyed those series more and was more into BB back then. Quote:
Everyone, ever was a stronger candidate than Michael.
Miriam could have gone earlier, during the Farmer's Market task when she overspent on ingredients. The most unjust that in my opinion is Karen Bremner's in S2, fired for being a lawyer. That wasn't the only reason Karen was fired. The mistake that she made was that for the second week running, she had been so confident that she was staying that she didn't say anything in her own defence, whereas Jo and Alexa made more of an effort to defend themselves. Also, she really hadn't done that well in the task. Her dinner jacket negotiation was awful - she spent ages trying to talk the guy down, and then it turned out that he didn't have what they needed in the first place. And she had been deemed partially responsible for the failure to get the tyre. Which isn't to say that I thought she should have been fired - Jo performed worse on the task, but Karen was far from fantastic. Her card had been marked from the first episode when she won as PM, but on very shaky ethical grounds which almost got them disqualified, she hadn't done very well on the task, she hadn't really tried to defend herself and Lord Sugar is sceptical about lawyers anyway. All these things added together meant that Karen was out the door, and I wouldn't say it was up there with the majorly unfair ones. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: I like to singy singy singy...
Posts: 17,646
|
I concur with most of these, particularly those in S4 where detestable liars seemed to prevail over better candidates, Miriam and Karen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,283
|
Quote:
IMHO Ruth Badger and Claire Young should never have been fired. I can't recall the circumstances that they were fired.. but having followed them ever since the show they're clearly very good business women and I think would have been a great success working for Lord Sugar at the various points they took part.
![]() They both lost the final. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 375
|
Lucinda springs to mind. Should have made it to the final.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: England
Posts: 1,856
|
Quote:
Lucinda springs to mind. Should have made it to the final.
While not necessarily an unjust firing, I think Sara Dhada, from the same series, was fired too harshly. Sir Alan seemed angered with her and it came across as brutal which I didn't think she deserved. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 4,431
|
Alex in season 9. Myles, Neil and to a lesser extent Jordan seemed to be conspiring against him by not letting him be PM. Then those 3 would be an absolute disaster the next week
Duane in season 8 was excellent before his shock firing |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Swansea
Posts: 1,972
|
I have to go with Karen in S2. I know she didn't exactly perform well the week she went but for me Jo and Alexa were weaker than her that particular week. The task was a disaster from the start with Jo spending far too much time faffing around in the room instead of getting out there and negotiating and all Alexa did was write stuff on a white board which was absolutely pointless and wasted precious time.
Had they gone out sooner, chances are they would have had the time to locate the tyre. If it hadn't been for Ruth and Michelle that week, they would have lost the task by a huge margin. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Up the creak without a paddle
Posts: 5,542
|
Quote:
Anybody who was on a team with Michael Sophocles and was sent home before him.
![]() Shazia, I still don't get how she went that week when Jenny C had made a horlicks of the whole task and you had Lindi and Jenny M overbidding and underbidding things and the 24 hour hotline. ![]() Shazia should never have been fired, the mistake occurred after she left the laundry room was entirely Jenny C's fault, Jenny C got her comeuppance for the Marrakesh task. Miriam & Liz the most unjust firings of TA didn't do anything wrong |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Kingston Upon Thames
Posts: 1,863
|
We've now come to a point where Lord Suggs has berated an entire team repeatedly and fired Felipé over a "false" skeleton because "it didn't fit the specifications required" while, in the latest episode, a candidate was given praise for thinking outside the box for getting a toy dinghy instead of an actual dinghy for just £10, essentially Lord Suggs has made himself out to be rather contrary, and now in retrospect with that context, the firing of Felipé was highly unfair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
We've now come to a point where Lord Suggs has berated an entire team repeatedly and fired Felipé over a "false" skeleton because "it didn't fit the specifications required" while, in the latest episode, a candidate was given praise for thinking outside the box for getting a toy dinghy instead of an actual dinghy for just £10, essentially Lord Suggs has made himself out to be rather contrary, and now in retrospect with that context, the firing of Felipé was highly unfair.
To be honest I don't see why people find that so hard to understand, I feel like I spend half my life clarifying why that skeleton wasn't accepted on this forum. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,010
|
Liz Locke's firing, most definitely. She was a high-achiever throughout the show.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 211
|
Miriam from Series 1.
An excellent candidate all round (certainly streets ahead of Saira), but more than that she was fired on a task (the TV Shopping Channel Task) on which it was generally agreed she had performed excellently. There was one, relatively minor, subjective mistake that she made on the task and for some reason Sugar battened on to it and fired her. I think perhaps she was the victim of some female jealousy from Margaret Mountford, who pushed for her to be fired (following a task in which as I say she had done very well) |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 211
|
Paul from Series 2.
Was an extremely strong performer throughout the entire Series, but then was fired in the Interviews episode. A couple of the interviewers took a strong dislike to him, thinking he was just some brash salesman. Then Sugar fired him on the basis that "you haven't really stood out/done anything throghout the whole series". In fact he had done and contributed a hell of a lot. It was just that, ironically, he had won every task he was in/managed and never been taken into the boardroom so Sugar didn't know anything about him. I think even Nick Hewer said as much in "You're Fired" |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
Paul from Series 2.
Was an extremely strong performer throughout the entire Series, but then was fired in the Interviews episode. A couple of the interviewers took a strong dislike to him, thinking he was just some brash salesman. Then Sugar fired him on the basis that "you haven't really stood out/done anything throghout the whole series". In fact he had done and contributed a hell of a lot. It was just that, ironically, he had won every task he was in/managed and never been taken into the boardroom so Sugar didn't know anything about him. I think even Nick Hewer said as much in "You're Fired" |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:35.




