[Pete.]

Originally Posted by Quasar

If it was a vote to save then yes it would be a pisstake to voters. It isn't vote to save so what's the problem.

Because people voted to evict Chloe and Jack only for producers to evict Sam instead. The prize money was irrelevant at the end of the day

[Good King Glennceslas]

Originally Posted by Petemitch

Because people voted to evict Chloe and Jack only for producers to evict Sam instead. The prize money was irrelevant at the end of the day

It was completely random though

[LukeB]

Originally Posted by Quasar

It was completely random though

A twist that was obvious Sam was going to go even if she had 1k tbh, they didn't even talk about the money they based it on who they are closest too.

[RodHull]

Originally Posted by Quasar

It was completely random though

It was anything but random... it was a clear production decision to get rid of Sam or at an outside chance Jack they knew damn well chloe would never be picked by danny or christian. It was 99% sam 1% Jack

It was poorly executed and ill thought out not to mention as unfair as when they shoved Nikki back in during her year after she was voted out. People have saved Sam each week only to see her evicted in a piss poor 'twist' which more or less guaranteed shed be picked.

Had the twist been one of them had to go and they could take the amount on their board to leave there and then that would have been more interesting, still **** but better than this which was basically just a sly way for BB producers to evict someone they perceived as dead weight.

The irony being had they reverted to VTS weeks ago shed be gone anyway