BB27 USA - starts 10 July

[Rison]

Nope

Get of the bandwagon.

Using your same logic, Kaitlyn in BB20 wasn't responsible for failing to win re-entry into the game by completing the puzzle - which is a ridiculous stance. From a purely competition standpoint, saying that a HG has no responsibility for losing a competition is ridiculous when they had every opportunity to win.

 

[kamui]

She failed hard at the competition and at one point,

She might have not been able to complete a task within a certain timeframe, but Big Brother is not about winning a competition. It's about convincing your fellow housemates to keep you in the house. That's what's different from Kaitlyn. She lost the social aspect and merely had a second chance. I don't think anyone would have complained if Rachel was nominated because of not completing the task.

With Rachel not even being at the end of the chain and getting evicted because she failed to understand the competition or whatever and thus not being able to do the possible, it actually makes it worse than her being towards the end of the chain and getting evicted because she wasn't able to do the impossible.

 

[Rison]

As I said, I'm talking about her losing the competition itself. I originally said that the twist component of it still sucks. I'm not defending that.

But its her own fault she lost at that stage with that time limit - regardless of whether the consequence was elimination, just being a Have-Not, or none at all. Her performance was laughably bad.

 

[Kingston]

Get of the bandwagon.

Using your same logic, Kaitlyn in BB20 wasn't responsible for failing to win re-entry into the game by completing the puzzle - which is a ridiculous stance. From a purely competition standpoint, saying that a HG has no responsibility for losing a competition is ridiculous when they had every opportunity to win.

No I’m not. Kaitlyn failed her individual comp for an extra chance at playing after being voted out. Rachel lost a comp and was eliminated. Huge difference.

 

[Zcsund1234]

I just watched the episode and I see a lot of comments online suggesting Rachel screwed it up for herself. Whilst I do firmly believe this twist was fucking bullshit I do have to agree that Rachel overplayed it. I understand she wanted the judges to have power but when its a sudden death elimination my thinking would be to try and lay low and not be picked at all. I don't see risk of elimination worth the potential of being HoH, I'd rather risk the other side having power than going home. She fumbled the challenge pretty bad and might have even failed it even if she had gone second or third.

HOWEVER, she still was eliminated by a comp and not a vote so that does kind of rule above all else for me. If they had just done a normal double eviction (I understand that Block Buster is to blame for this issue) and she was voted out I would have been way less pissed to have lost her this early.

It could have been workshopped to instead automatically nominate her (or whoever else failed to finish it/slowest time maybe even?) or some sort of flash vote could have occurred. IDK I'm talking out of my ass right now and I get that since the episode aired on Tuesday it would not be ideal for feeds to be down for 5 days straight, but seriously a snap vote and eviction would have been a better solution.

I enjoyed this challenge in reindeer games so I can get why they wanted to use it for a regular season, but seriously eliminating someone this way is ridiculous. Give her a caveat of some sort for failing the challenge, automatic nominee, no veto play or something like that. LITERALLY ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN THIS!

I guess the episode was fun to watch despite the circumstances, but what a sad way to lose Rachel. At least Tyler still looks fine.

 

[Brekkie]

Completely agree Rison. If Canada had done this it would probably be considered an absolutely amazing twist. I think if anyone other than Rachel had gone it would have passed by with little fuss.

The big mistake here is the 5 day delay in broadcasting which just left a vacuum the complainers have filled, and leaving it till this stage of the show to have such a twist.

 

[kamui]

If Canada had done this it would probably be considered an absolutely amazing twist. I think if anyone other than Rachel had gone it would have passed by with little fuss.

Most people online would probably deny the second part of the quote.. but I agree. There would be a lot less uproar if it was any other person but Rachel. And a group of people that wanted Rylie to be ejected outside of the regular eviction cycle, can't now convince me that they would have been mad with Kelley or Vince being evicted that way.

But I still think that there would have been some uproar. There would have been a few more positive voices for sure, just based on mentality. Canadians never cared that much about Canada's Vote and criticism was mainly voiced by people from the US (at least that's my impression anyways). But I don't think that changing the core eviction mechanism would have went well with Canadians either.

I mean, I remember Channel 5 having a few evictions when housemates were able to evict somebody without a prior vote and that not going well with their audience either... and the C5 crowd didn't really care about the format otherwise.

 

[Brekkie]

Twists where producers manipulate a desired outcome rightly get called out but world wide have regularly been twists where people re nominated outside of the regular process as a result of a task, though the difference is usually the eviction process remains the same (I.e. the public vote). So would perhaps have been fairer if this twist resulted in two nominees then voted out the usual way but TBH don't think that would have placated the Rachel-stans.