Australian Survivor: Blood vs Water

Remove this Banner Ad

darko

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 28, 2016
10,404
16,452
AFL Club
North Melbourne
The only smart move Kristie did was end up in final 2 with a person who couldn't string together couple sentences.
 

checkraiseulite

Norm Smith Medallist
Jul 23, 2010
5,389
3,678
AFL Club
Hawthorn
George's jury management sucked. I'm sure Andrew loved being made to feel stupid about not knowing that George was hiding in the bushes. George's phrasing was shocking.

was clear andrew would never have voted for george and irrationally hated him during the game.

he was probably the most bitter, of a generally bitter, jury.

making him look dumb to emphasise his game play should have been a good idea.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Loonerty

TheBrownDog
Jun 1, 2008
52,664
69,895
Wollongong
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Chelsea
Tony did similar stuff in his final tribal in Winners at War, but he also had a much better rapport with the jury and was able to spin them as a funny joke.

George was not able to do that.
 

Ochre

WCE POTY
Aug 25, 2008
33,049
33,785
On The Line
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Claremont
Tony did similar stuff in his final tribal in Winners at War, but he also had a much better rapport with the jury and was able to spin them as a funny joke.

George was not able to do that.
But I'd argue that's more to do with the juries themselves than George/Tony.

George would have a much easier time getting Adam Klein's vote than Tony would have getting Andrew's
 

Macca19

Moderator
Jan 14, 2001
64,802
87,712
Albertr0n
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
MUFC, Orlando Magic
Listening to George's exit interview on the Brink of Reality podcast, he claims that Phil was actually the person he wanted out at the first vote, even though it seemed on the show he was targeting Mitch. Not sure how much of that is true or George rewriting history to make himself look better.

The way he explained it makes it sound legit. And its true, Mitch dug his own grave in the end.

I think he knew he was up against it at final tribal. Theres no shame in losing Hayley
 

getthefooty

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 30, 2008
9,112
4,012
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Based on what we saw I reckon George could've actually won the whole thing with a better pitch.

Imagine if he just went through the jury one by one and explained how he picked them off and the broader strategy at play. 'Wei - I suspected Flick had found a hidden immunity idol, and that she would keep this quiet and vote for me. I therefore used by rock solid alliance with Cara to vote for Wei, which would've enabled a split vote and Flick gone if she didn't have the idol, and Wei gone if she did. Cara - I knew that if I was stuck in a Flick - you - me final three, Flick wins immunity and then survivor. I needed Hayley to get to FTC and she needed me and therefore teamed with Haley to vote you out. Etc etc. He could've also gone into detail about some pre-merge plays if required.

Then he could've showed some humility by explaining he regretted was not trying hard enough at challenges and showboating when Emmett got voted out. He could've maybe played up some earlier challenges where he wasn't actually terrible (he did beat Flick in the running one for immunity and I recall an earlier one where he was vital to his tribe winning) to at least say he was about as comparable to Hayley for challenge strength as she was to him for strategic strength, which probably isn't true but he could've maybe spun it. He could've emphasised his relationship with Cara to highlight his social game - this was actually underrated IMO - he recognised he needed a (goat) ally that would follow him blindly so he charmed the socks off her. This was part strategic part social but any genuine friendship that assists in getting you to FTC is a social play IMO.

He might've gone into some of the above and we didn't see it, but there was certainly a hell of a lot left on the table from what we viewed.
 

phantom13

Moderator
Sep 12, 2007
21,056
28,642
Melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
Based on what we saw I reckon George could've actually won the whole thing with a better pitch.

Imagine if he just went through the jury one by one and explained how he picked them off and the broader strategy at play. 'Wei - I suspected Flick had found a hidden immunity idol, and that she would keep this quiet and vote for me. I therefore used by rock solid alliance with Cara to vote for Wei, which would've enabled a split vote and Flick gone if she didn't have the idol, and Wei gone if she did. Cara - I knew that if I was stuck in a Flick - you - me final three, Flick wins immunity and then survivor. I needed Hayley to get to FTC and she needed me and therefore teamed with Haley to vote you out. Etc etc. He could've also gone into detail about some pre-merge plays if required.

Then he could've showed some humility by explaining he regretted was not trying hard enough at challenges and showboating when Emmett got voted out. He could've maybe played up some earlier challenges where he wasn't actually terrible (he did beat Flick in the running one for immunity and I recall an earlier one where he was vital to his tribe winning) to at least say he was about as comparable to Hayley for challenge strength as she was to him for strategic strength, which probably isn't true but he could've maybe spun it. He could've emphasised his relationship with Cara to highlight his social game - this was actually underrated IMO - he recognised he needed a (goat) ally that would follow him blindly so he charmed the socks off her. This was part strategic part social but any genuine friendship that assists in getting you to FTC is a social play IMO.

He might've gone into some of the above and we didn't see it, but there was certainly a hell of a lot left on the table from what we viewed.
This is absolutely correct, 100%. It is a real shame that he didnt because it made the outcome an absolute bloodbath.

I suspect hed damaged the relationships too badly to win back votes but he didnt fire a shot and therefore never gave himself any chance.
 

squashface

Masten and Waterman
Feb 26, 2012
13,321
34,018
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
FWIW I thought George's opening pitch was actually quite good (or what they showed of it anyway), it was then the jury's followup questions where he fell to pieces
 

squashface

Masten and Waterman
Feb 26, 2012
13,321
34,018
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Really? If you compare it to Haileys would you still say it was quite good?
Yeah I thought they were both good. Hayley's was obviously better but at the point where they had both done their opening pitches I thought we could be on track for a good FTC and a close vote. Then Hayley wiped the floor with George thereafter.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Macca19

Moderator
Jan 14, 2001
64,802
87,712
Albertr0n
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
MUFC, Orlando Magic
This is absolutely correct, 100%. It is a real shame that he didnt because it made the outcome an absolute bloodbath.

I suspect hed damaged the relationships too badly to win back votes but he didnt fire a shot and therefore never gave himself any chance.

If JLP reckons we only saw half his opening pitch, maybe he did do that and it got cut. We dont know what else got cut. As i said the other day, i find it hard to believe that George, who talked and talked and talked and talked, suddenly just gave vague short answers to the jurys questions. I got no doubt there was a lot that got cut out.
 

phantom13

Moderator
Sep 12, 2007
21,056
28,642
Melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
If JLP reckons we only saw half his opening pitch, maybe he did do that and it got cut. We dont know what else got cut. As i said the other day, i find it hard to believe that George, who talked and talked and talked and talked, suddenly just gave vague short answers to the jurys questions. I got no doubt there was a lot that got cut out.
I can only judge what i saw, we all can only judge what we saw. By all means speculate on what JLP said but its not gonna get you very far unless you can find the edited footage.

Based on what we saw i thought he pitched badly and answered worse.

I also think his own hubris got the better of him and he thought he wouldnt have to give specific detailed answers and failed to curtail his own arrogance.

Personally i think his performance fit everything we saw all season. He may have been a brain but he wasnt particularly eloquent, patient or good at listening. Hailey was much more thoughtful and considerate and very clearly prepared well.
 

darrenmorgan

Premiership Player
May 2, 2005
4,824
11,088
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
If JLP reckons we only saw half his opening pitch, maybe he did do that and it got cut. We dont know what else got cut. As i said the other day, i find it hard to believe that George, who talked and talked and talked and talked, suddenly just gave vague short answers to the jurys questions. I got no doubt there was a lot that got cut out.

He said in his RHAP exit interview that he spoke for a long long time in his words: "where there is no limit on time, then i am going to use it". He said that he went through all of his strategic moves one by one explaining them in minute detail; which we didn't see really any of, and which made Hayleys pitch look a lot better this his than may have actually been the case. I suspect that most of that jury had made up their mind already and nothing that was said would have swayed them, hence why they edited to show Hayley as much more convincing at FTC. FWIW George has no bitterness whatsoever and said that coming second to someone with a game as strong as Hayley (in his words: one of the best Franchise players ever to win) then he's more than happy as runner up.
 

Ry009

Premium Platinum
Aug 26, 2002
17,838
21,496
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
MMA
I suspect hed damaged the relationships too badly to win back votes but he didnt fire a shot and therefore never gave himself any chance.

I don't think the jury were bitter, he just didn't present well at all, as such the vote tally was fair in the end. Simple as that IMO.

Im a big fan of George, but from what he presented at FTC, I would have voted for Hayley.
 

phantom13

Moderator
Sep 12, 2007
21,056
28,642
Melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
I don't think the jury were bitter, he just didn't present well at all, as such the vote tally was fair in the end. Simple as that IMO.

Im a big fan of George, but from what he presented at FTC, I would have voted for Hayley.
I didnt say bitter and very specifically didnt. I dont think they were bitter i just dont think they would have had any sort of social relationship with him at all. Agreed he pitched and answered poorly but even if hed done well and he and Hailey (who did amazingly well) were close in terms of pitch and answers i think they still vote Hailey because people actually liked her.
 

Lefthanded

Premiership Player
Sep 9, 2013
3,621
2,437
AFL Club
Collingwood
But I'd argue that's more to do with the juries themselves than George/Tony.

George would have a much easier time getting Adam Klein's vote than Tony would have getting Andrew's
I agree some of it would be the juries (one full of winners vs one loaded with people who may never have watched the game before) but would argue it is as much about George and Tony. Both are strategic but only one has a social and physical game.

George might get Adam's vote if he was against Flick but I'd favour it going to Hayley over George.
Tony would alienate some but I don't think he'd have much trouble getting Andrew's vote.
 

Lefthanded

Premiership Player
Sep 9, 2013
3,621
2,437
AFL Club
Collingwood
The thing about George's strategic game is that he was at the bottom from the start and still managed to get the right players to work with him at the right times to keep him alive. He orchestrated big moves.

Hayley's strategic game wasn't as good. She made some strong moves and she was the best all round player but George's strategic game basically got him to the end.
Sorry I don't agree and below going through George's tribals is why:

1. Found an advantage and based on edit was targeting Mitch. Phil went home. Could at least argue his strategy to save Wai was good but even that was flawed as Wai didn't become a strong ally of George's.
2. George part of minority that voted Laura. Mitch went home. Not George's move.
3. George got most votes but saved by Cara's idol play. George seemed genuinely shocked that Cara would do that for him at the expense of her own game so I doubt it was him orchestrating it.
4. Joey sent home. Moved orchestrated by Hayley
5. Daini went home. George orchestrated split vote against Rachel and Georgia but it fell over because of anticipated idol play and Cara voting wrong. Some of that failure lies on George.
6. Laura voted out. George orchestrated that but it was a pretty straight forward majority vote. The majority was not cobled together by George's brilliance but by the fact that it was a Brawn majority working with a Brain reject (Cara) and George by default as Cara was the only person he'd formed a genuine bond with and that bond was cemented by Cara's move to play her idol for George. Laura saved by twist and only Shannon went.
7. Majority votes out Georgia
8. Majority votes out Rachel. George's strategy used for how to split votes in case of idol play.
9. Majority votes out Simon. Move made by Dani. Sub plot in case of idol by Hayley.

From there George started to come into his own and orchestrated Kez going home (need Hayley idol to make it work), saving Cara / sending Laura home and sending Wai home - 3 big moves.

3 big moves after stumbling through 9 tribals with a lot of dumb luck and one friendship cemented by the other person and saved by Haley's move to get rid of Joey.

Hayley on the other hand had the strategy to get into and go along with majority alliance early, flip that alliance on it's head by getting rid of leader Joey at the right time, major move to split the Brawn majority alliance by clever implied use of her idol that saw Shannon go, sub plot to get rid of Dani in case Simon played one of his two idols, correct saving of her idol at two tribals meant it was then available to be played in a move that was more George's, throwing George under the bus to save herself as result of twist, learning from getting voted out and being humble.

I'd argue that if George had as much strategy as Hayley he would have won because he'd have been more humble at FTC and he'd have had more moves and more friends.

I also rate George's move that sent Wai home as the same as Hayley's to put votes on Dani when Simon went - the effect was just very different because an idol was played in one and not the other.

George was clearly better at reading that Flick had an idol and at finding idol's / advantages (but Flick would never have had that idol in the first place if George had made sure his ally Cara knew that playing the idol when she did was a dumb move).

Edit: yes Hayley was saved by the redemption twist (after being screwed by the 1 person voting twist) but George was saved by the Cara non elimination twist. If Cara had gone home he wouldn't have had a majority Brawn alliance to work with, his only functioning alliance to that point had been that formed by Hayley.
 
Last edited:

squashface

Masten and Waterman
Feb 26, 2012
13,321
34,018
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Don’t think George lost it with he’s pitch, he blew it with the answers to the questions he was given, to me most of he answers it seem to me he was just repeating himself and giving nothing new, like a politician
Fantastic question. I can’t wait to answer your question. This is a question I’ve been so excited to talk about. Anyway, here I go with your question. The thing is about your question
 

phantom13

Moderator
Sep 12, 2007
21,056
28,642
Melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
Don’t think George lost it with he’s pitch, he blew it with the answers to the questions he was given, to me most of he answers it seem to me he was just repeating himself and giving nothing new, like a politician
Probably fair, he was behind on the scorecards from the pitch for mine, got KOd in the late rounds with the questions.
 

Willo_

Trust the Process
Apr 27, 2010
33,838
57,542
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
76ers, Melbourne Roys
Don’t think George lost it with he’s pitch, he blew it with the answers to the questions he was given, to me most of he answers it seem to me he was just repeating himself and giving nothing new, like a politician
yeah that was my feeling, his opening pitch probably was strong, because he had pre-planned it and worked it out, his lack of social game hurt when he got questions thrown at him as he just couldn't adjust or read the situation.
Hayley meanwhile did exactly what David did last year, owned he moves, owned her mistakes and basically charmed the pants off them
 

DIG

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 7, 2003
10,079
6,169
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
This is a bit of a get out though isn't it. Obviously the game is set up so that whoever the jury votes for wins the game, but we can still argue about the merit of the juries' vote. If everyone just said 'oh yes, Hayley deserved to win because the jury voted for her and that's the game' it would be a pretty boring discussion wouldn't it. Yes the rules are designed the way they are but we can still have an opinion that the jury f’ed it.
Yep, absolutely spot on. Hayley was a deserved winner, but it’s pretty hilarious to think anyone else this season would be too (purely cos the almighty jury said so)!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad