Quote:
Originally Posted by zummy
Russell's ego did him in, not Natalie's play or commentary!
|
Totally agree; their play? (Mick & Natalie), final comments & bland non-strategies were irrelevant in the game or outcome, they served and continued to exist in the game only at Russell's pleasure...like lint in his pocket; they could have been interchanged with any other player in the final 3 and Russell still would have lost because the jury was offended by his manipulations, scheming success, arrogant attitude, connection to the hated Shambo & bold moves in totally dominating the game. Russell's big mouth/ego and belief that the jury could be stand-up objective enough to vote without malice/hurt feeelings was his undoing. Had I played in this game, would have hated Russell but there is no way anyone but he would have gotten my final vote - it's a back-stabbing truth-twisting cut-throat game; always has been. Let's hope for a half-dozen Russells next season, and a couple of Fairplays to boot - that's what makes for a unpredictably entertaining show not a tribe of hiding under a rock Micks & Natalies...IMHO.
