Survivor: Season 41(US)-[**SPOILERS**]

seligehgit

I was pretty sure Xander would win,shocked he received no votes.

However he certainly became overconfident post Ricard's vote out.There was a distasteful arrogance when he misread the jury opinions re the merits of Erika's game.It definitely aggravated the jury.In addition he was extremely patronising towards Heather.

He stumbled at the final tribal council when queried re his awareness.I thought he'd to a degree retrieved his fumble but evidently not.

Erika words certainly swayed the jury but I'd still have voted for Xander.

Ricard was definitely hurting pretty badly post his vote out and Xander lost any chance of his vote after the IMO needless pretence that he'd play his HII to save him.

I think Ricard would have walked it if he'd made final 4.

Foxtrol

I thought Xander had it in the bag until the final tribal but in hindsight a lot of that was down to Erika not getting the edit she deserved. She was targeted by multiple members of the jury throughout the game but the edit never really showed us why (just telling us that she was 'smart' or 'sneaky'). I don't want edits to give away the winner but you have to build some narrative for it or it creates frustration.

Kirby

The survivor subreddit really tried hard to push for the narrative that Erika was an amazing player and the edit did her dirty. That there were hours and hours of amazing strategic and clever footage of her controlling the game......and the producers chose not to show it.

I'm not buying it for one second. They work with what they have and that's the footage they got. Eirka was no goat. She was smart and usually ended up on the right side of the vote for a reason. But she was a total passenger to many of the votes and this idea of her being the man behind the curtain and the viewers just not seeing it........is a stretch.

Most viewers thought Xander had it in the bag because next to Ricard, he played the best game. Xander had absolutely no shot of winning. I'm just going to call a spade a spade. There was no way that jury was going to let a white man win it. Wrongly or rightly, with the climate in America at the moment a jury made up of minorities wasn't going to vote for him.

The final tribal was actually pointless btw. The jury had made their mind up going in so Xanders stumbling answers and Erika's smooth answers had no bearing on the outcome. The jury has confirmed this on social media.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118389286#Comment_118389286

The words of many of the jury throughout the game disagree with your opinion - they were gunning for Erika at multiple points claiming she was a huge threat yet the edit never really showed why they believed this. The editors either chose to not include these elements of Erika's game or Erika made the jury completely paranoid about her gameplay that wasn't there - an action in itself worthy of getting votes at the end.

Most juries go into final tribal feeling which way they are going to vote in advance, it is on Xander if his gameplay, relationship building, and jury management was so poor that they had 100% made up their minds beforehand and then to make matters even worse he followed it up by having incredibly weak final tribal answers.

As for complaining about a minority filled jury, imagine how every minority player has felt in nearly every one of the previous 40 seasons when practically every one was packed with a white cast, not even getting into the heavily white final juries. If you want to call into question the legitimacy of this winner based on the demographics of the jury then you're calling into question every other past winner. The dynamics of final tribal voting are always driven by the cast and what is going on in wider society at that point in time - just because you don't like who it may have helped or hurt doesn't make it any different to other seasons.

Kirby

I neither liked nor disliked who it did or didn't help. I never said that so that's just your own projection talking.

Claiming that in the current climate, with a cast full of minorities.....that one of the minorities was ALWAYS going to win isn't exactly a bombshell. It's common sense. Nowhere did I "call into question the legitimacy" of any win. Again, that's your own thoughts talking. There is no such thing as a legitimate win or an illegitimate win. The person who wins, wins. That's the game. People can argue over who they think played better, and I will partake in that, but what we say has no bearing on the winner. The jury does, and to a large extent, the producers who pick the cast. Which we can see this season.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118729689#Comment_118729689

If you want to go down this pedantic road, I never said you liked or disliked who it did or didn't help, nor did I say you were calling into question the legitimacy of the winner. Your post was written in a vague way to give you plausible deniability, which you are now using, so I purposefully also caveated mine by saying 'If you...' regarding your thoughts. If you didn't feel that way then none of the rest is relevant to you.

Your post smelled very strongly of someone who was annoyed about minorities potentially getting the same benefit that white players have received since the show began and you now suddenly felt the need to highlight this fact. If I look through the old survivor threads will I see you noting during every previous season how a majority cast of white contestants were more likely to vote out a minority contestant?

Kirby

I'd rather you keep your opinion on what my post "smelled like" to yourself. If you are going to quote me, quote my words. What I actually said, and not what you imagine I said.

Cheers.