Apprentice fans were left underwhelmed by Wednesday-night’s show as Lord Sugar failed to deliver the first double firing of the series.
Viewers saw clothing entrepreneur Sarah Jayne Clark dispatched by the business mogul but were a little disappointed after he failed to follow it up with a second firing.
Clark, 25, had brought back Andrew Brady and Charles Burns into the boardroom, who both looked under threat after struggling to impress tourists during a historical tour of the Belgian city of Bruges.
Brady had oversold the beer-tasting side of the tour to punters while Burns managed to extend the walk by more than two hours after struggling with directions.
While Clark was fired, Lord Sugar told Burns to “stop being a commentator” before sending him back to the house.
He then quizzed Brady on why he should stay in the process and offered him a last chance.
Fans on social media accused Lord Sugar of “bottling” the double or even triple firing.
@Stevenjoe2012 tweeted: “when’s he gonna bloody start sacking two or 3 #TheApprentice.”
@TimmyLDN posted: “How did Charles get away with that? #TheApprentice.”
@Ivieh wrote: “Boooooo I’m gutted. Big Al bottled it, should’ve been at least a double.”
@Paulkrivo tweeted: “How did the two chaps survive that?! Could have sworn a double firing and Sarah-Jane going back to the house. Possibly worst decision.”
@2dividedbyzero posted: “it is with regret that Lord Sugar missed a fabulous double firing opportunity there.”
Clark herself was not too surprised.
She told the Press Association that she felt “really calm” in the boardroom, adding: “I think it was because I just knew 100% that I’d be gone, so it’s almost like I was just waiting for it.”
She continued: “I don’t think it was fair. I don’t think I did anything hugely wrong, I think people have made a lot bigger mistakes in the past.”
:: The Apprentice continues next Wednesday at 9pm.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel