Does it ever make someone not look like a total d***?

I get why they think it'll make them look good. They're imagining people thinking they're some kind of highly principled individual, willing to nominate a friend for the 'greater good'. No matter what the reason is: they need to learn this is not the right way to behave, it's done because the 'friend' feels they'll be happier outside, the 'friend' thinks being nominated will motivate them to change....yadda, yadda.

It's so transparent and calculating. People think that by not nominating who they're expected to nominate and instead put up people who they're close to, they'll appear even-handed but instead they just look like a sneak.

John nominated Darren because he fully expects the public reaction to be "That must have been really hard for John, I respect him for making such a difficult decision" - not concern over Darren smoking at all.

Personally I think he finds Darren a threat to win.

Throw your mate under a bus - save his life. Yes, very considerate and caring.

Good post! By nominating his friends for the reasons you've said, it also means he didn't have to put his neck on the line and nominate anyone else for any actual valid reasons which may have run the risk of him being less liked by some.

This way he gets to remain popular and looks 'noble'.

I wish Jonathan hadn't walked ... I don't think he would have lasted much longer without calling John out.

I think this will massively backfire on him, and I really hope it does if he feels he can fool people in such a transparently pathetic way.

It's so 2015

Having a friend stab you is more likely to drive someone to drink than smoking does.

How true. If John was genuinely concerned he would have had a private word with him, not used it as an excuse. There must be other people in the house who he doesn't get on with. He nominated Darren as he sees him as a threat, it was just pathetic and cringeworthy.

10.46pm: John: "He's a lovely person Darren, a lovely person."
Is that why you nominated him?

Can someone please remind me who it was that nominated a friend in a previous bb. I remember them saying it was for someones own good etc.

Correct, especially for someone whose confidence is as fragile as Darren Day's.

It's an awful reason. He so obviously sees Darren as a threat to win. If I was in the house and I was playing the game, Darren would be one of the people I would think could be a big threat for the win, but I wouldn't try and take him out this early on, especially not when viewers would have watched me befriend him. John is a terrible game player.

Its like when james nominated austin.. friends should never nominate each other to teach them a lesson its like the worst thing you can officially do to someone in bb

James nominating Austin shocked me even more last year as they were stuck together like glue for weeks before he did it! And he won the show hmmmm maybe John is thinking on that lines or am I being cynical??

It always pays to be cynical when viewing BB.

I think the James nominating Austin situation was different. I remember watching James on The Apprentice and he always had a very warped view of things and reasoning behind doing things. I genuinely think he thought he did the right thing. Also, Austin was behaving like an absolute prat.

Looking down the nominations there are quite a few people who appear close nominating "friends". It simply shows that there are few clear or rigid alliances. At least it makes the nominations a little less a foregone conclusion apart from the obvious easy targets.

Personally I saw it more as a cowardly nomination face to face. John knew he would be able to "make amends" with Darren.

I suspect everything John does is for the cameras. The advice, the comforting, the admonishing - and taking the high ground in most discussions.