If you had been Stephen.... (Traitors spoilers)

I think an interesting hypothetical question is whether those who would have thrown Rachel under the bus in the final vote would actually have had the opportunity to do so, iyswim (as in, both Steven and Rachel only made it to the final because they kept to their word - so if either of them had actually intended to backstab the other, would they have been able to keep the act up?).

Sad to see in the news today that Rachel's mother has died and so she won't get to spend the money on making memories for her family.

But Stephen liked her. And the question was "if you were Stephen".

I liked Rachel but I think if I had been in Stephen's situation, I would have voted her out at the last vote. But I'm really glad Stephen had more integrity than me as I love the fact that they both stayed faithful to their pact.

Does anyone remember Goldenballs, TV show presented by Jasper Carrott? At the end the players could choose whether to Split or Steal. I watched a lot of Goldenballs when I had a newborn!

Nah. I'd have voted to banish her. I couldn't stand her.

I kept thinking that whatever salary Rachel was on, her employers need to double it!

She'll be headhunted for sure. Who wouldn't want her on their team?

That gave me a good laugh, thank you 😁

I'm so pleased there turned out to be honour among traitors. What a team.

Looking at the results of the vote, I’m not surprised that more people, so far, have voted YANBU. It’s quite heartwarming to see that we are more inclined to value fairness (sometimes), just as we often, as a nation, get behind the “under-dog” in international competitions…
I do feel that both traitors did struggle at the end, but were ultimately pleased that their pact held up! Although traitors, their integrity towards each other was impressive.

His integrity and potential media career is worth more than the 50k he "lost". Stephen played a good game.

FWIW I don't think Rachel would have stolen all the money either. She went in very clinical and played her traitor role well, I think she would have stuck to her word too.

In his mind I’d guess he was thinking about how he would look in the real world when it aired if he screwed her over. Everyone remembers Harry doing this in the second series and even though it’s obviously just a game, it wasn’t a good look and he got some real flack for it.

That’s true. I did think ‘wow, I’d employ Rachel’.

I think Stephen is more likely that Rachel to have a media career after this, if that's what he wants. Having said that I'm not sure Rachel wanted one and the skills she displayed in the castle would definitely help her professionally if she wanted to change jobs. She showed a mastery of comms and crafting a narrative.

My prediction is that he will profit far more from the win than she does. Being likeable and consistent are key to this.

As is being young, open, seemingly uncomplicated and not having had to do the hard work of planning and strategising that got them both that far - so not suffering the reputational consequences of being seen as scheming, closed, complicated and always one step ahead. Essentially she did the work, he reaps the rewards.

I 100% would have done the same as Stephen.
I know full well its a game and you literally are supposed to take as much as you can but if I made an agreement I have to honour it.
Also I would worry that the public would forget its a game and think that is how I would normally behave if I took it..
I think im to sensitive to public opinion and trolls to go on the Traitors!

He did the right thing.

but if he had chosen differently I think we would have seen a different programme. It was edited to show that Rachel deserved it. They could easily edit in a way that made Stepen decision to keep it all seem fair.

by sharing both him and Rachel will be much richer in n the long term

I think he wouldn’t have got there without Rachel - look at the blubbering wreck he was over Fiona, seeing Rachel standing firm pulled him through. So it would have been unfair if he had dumped Rachel.

I think Rachel carried him for the first half of the show… her strategising was superior at that point.
He grew stronger and stronger as the show went on, and really played his part in the latter half, especially as so many faithfuls found him a likeable character and trusted him
with their thought processes. Well played both, very well deserved.

He wouldn’t have got that far without her and knew it - I think / hope.

Also his reputation and potential to gain from the exposure stood or fell by that decision. Being consistent, not confusingly nice / sneaky was important.

And he’ll have remembered how badly Harry’s antics played with people

I would love to think he’d done it just to be loyal.

I think he was a bright spark and realised he’d be much more popular this way, and will now make a lot more than the £50k ish that he “gave” Rachel.

So YANBU. I’d love to think I’d do it just to be nice but I also would only be in that position if like Stephen I had an eye on a showbiz career

He has a life to live post-show. Better to be known as someone whose word means something.

If have done what Stephen did and anyone who would do differently is a shit.

He made a verbal agreement that Rachel stuck to. He knew why she wanted the money (to have family time with her mother, who has dementia).

It would’ve been tempting but I wouldn’t have been able to celebrate winning the money if I’d shafted her.

Those saying it’s a game - well, yeah, but that doesn’t mean you have to conduct yourself like an arsehole.

Yep. Although as someone pointed out upthread he was probably not just convinced by her, but actually felt intimidated by her.

I think he did brilliantly given all the rollercoaster of emotions (doubts, fears, guilt, and hope) he must have felt over the last couple of days.

It's impossible to know what Rachel would have done but if you look at Hugo, Stephen threw him under the bus but Rachel didn't at cost to her later. So I'm not sure why Stephen is the good one and Rachel is seen more negatively.