We’ll Meet You At The Fire Pit | Traitors 2026 | Thread 13 | THERE WILL BE SPOILERS

[CaveMum]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/telly_addicts/5480370-end-game-the-battle-of-ardross-castle-who-will-triumph-the-pouting-milk-maid-the-interchangeables-jade-or-the-traitors-traitors-2026-thread-12-spoiler-free?page=1

Thread to continue discussions of Traitors 2026 (UK Version)

If you haven’t seen the Final of this year’s Traitors then stop right there and get yourself over to iPlayer.

Don’t say I didn’t warn you!

Players, the floor is yours…

Rachel and Farazz talked out age a a few times, she suggested he was banishing the old people for example. It’s much more likely it was a joke rather than a 22 year old trying to p off everyone over 40.

I loved watching the final, IT WAS A GAME and played out like a drama series, well done to the programme makers for yet another ending that we couldn’t have predicted.

Rachel now needs to survive the press and media attention. There’s already some ridiculous nonsense about her making millions and being signed up to an agent, in the mail that likes to fail…

Thought the Faraaz thing was cultural. I am Greek would call some people auntie or grandma depending my relationship with them. My DCs friends call me an auntie NewAgeNewMe.

I really wanted Faraaz or Jade to win but was happy with the joint traitors. They played a phenomenal game.

Thank you @CaveMum for all the threads.

Your child’s friends though. They’re young enough to be your children and Auntie is not the same as Granny

faraz is not a child . She’s only 42

he could have referred to fiona as granny because she is a granny

The finalist weren’t in the final due to great game
play or strategy. They didnt deserve to win

they were there because the traitors had managed to manipulate them. That’s the only reason.

@itsneverdullinull

I think Grandma os an insult if you’re 42 and the accuser is an adult

Rachel could have voted Stephen out early in the game. She could easily have betrayed him many times

There was a phase where everyone suspected him

Yes, I wasn't a huge fan of Faraaz to be honest, he was rude to people a few times I thought.

Viewers seemed to like him just because he was the youngest but he didn't add much to the game until the very end

I think he did it because he didn’t want to be the bad guy. He didn’t want to be the guy who cheated his fellow traitor. I also think he had a genuine friendship with Jack and the alternative was to vote Rachel and then tell Jack he was a traitor and Jack wasn’t wining. It was easier to vote Jack than betray him at the very end.
Had Rachel had an alliance at the end she would have thrown Stephen under the bus.
i do think Stephen played a clever game though. The people Rachel was close to - Amanda, Harriet, Roxy were banished or murdered. Whereas Stephen aligned himself with faithfuls who had little or no heat and he kept them in and that gave him the power at the end.
Had they murdered faraaz instead of Roxy things could have gone differently.

Rachel is an absolute queen!! Can not believe how well she played the game and how she managed to turn around the last day! I was so sure she was a goner. Genius! She had a clear headed focused plan to win and she managed to pull it off. Just wow. Obviously made an amazing alliance with Steven - who also played a brilliant game. So glad he stuck to the alliance as he wobbled so much in the last couple of days. When down to the last 3 there was no chance he’d vote for Rachel and leave himself into the final 2 with Jack. Absolutely love Rachel, ultimate strong clever focussed woman!

It really saddens me to hear the dislike of Rachel, it’s a game! She was calm and collected and she was never unpleasant or personal to anyone. I think within the group later on she was the only mum left and she seemed quite maternal to the others - we often saw her comforting people. That looked real to me - she kept in mind throughout that it was a game so in that sense was able to ‘dissociate ‘, they were eliminating rivals for strategic, not personal, reasons. She wasn’t a psycho, she was good at reading people and clever enough to work out the consequences of different options. She totally stuck by her agreement with Stephen whereas he wavered. If Stephen had voted for at the end he would have (rightly imo) been portrayed as a Judas and I’m sure he was aware of that.
Also Faraz has a broad Middlesbrough accent so not sure what culture that is that calls 42 year old women grandma, I thought that was just rude tbh. He was clever but v dull and somewhat graceless and didn’t really contribute anything, I’d have been v cross I f he have won!!

I think she would have known Faraaz and Jack would have both voted her out though, so we'd have got a faithful win. I think Rachel did have limited opportunities at that point, especially in a world where Jack seemed to be the most trusted player.

But I believed what she said, I think making a promise meant something to her, and she'd watched/played enough games to know you actually need to work as a team. Thought Stephen might turn on her but when they were down to four, but I think their comments when voting were a good way to signal to each other that they'd stuck to it. I generally like Traitors doing well but Season 2 was obviously a tough end to watch, seeing someone who had trusted the wrong person, and him celebrating alone felt odd. This ending I was happy about - it's been a great season for traitors' teamwork, some clever strategy, and actually seeing players keeping a promise.

i think we would have turned on Stephen if he had voted Rachel out in the end.
how could he have met afterwards after doing that.
he wasnt that type
he will be remembered for being a good sport

Agree.
I think it actually ended the best way it could.
Both Rachel & Stephen were amazing from the get go. They navigated some really tricky situations, especially Rachel, and they absolutely deserved their win.
Watching Uncloaked afterwards I felt like the other players were genuinely pleased they had won.
It would have been good TV but very awkward if it had been Stephen & Jack at the end.

Disliking Rachel because she lied well is a bit odd - that's literally the point of the game. She did incredibly well and helped Stephen get to the final. Stephen literally said he realised early on that he wasn't good at manipulation, so went with being friendly.

Bear in mind there's a huge amount of editing. Each person will have a story and character the producers want to portray, and they don't have much time to do that, so everything you're shown will back up that story. They're making an engaging TV show.

I thought the 'grandma' thing was an in-joke that we just weren't shown - potentially Faraaz has someone in his family who is in their early 40s and a grandma, and as Rachel has young children they might have laughed about that together.

Faraz was very rude to call Rachel a grandma, Im glad he didn’t win!

I think Fiona has some issues to discuss with a professional psychologist

I hope Jade goes on to bigger and wonderful things, amazing young woman

I hope James gets some financial gain out of the experience, hilariously crazy

Rachel has been the best traitor ever! I’ve watched all the series and it’s the first time I’ve not been rooting for a faithful to win! She’s amazing, what a brain!

Stephen bare face lied all through the game, but apparently is given a free pass? Whereas if Rachel lies, oh she's awful...

How many times did we see Stephen look his pals and game players in the eye and say "I'm a faithful/not a traitor"... So many!!

I also thought the grandma thing waa some kind of joke between them as Faraaz repeated it several times.
I was so worried it would be a repeat of S1 where the stupidest, laziest people won. Thank goodness brains and hard work won.

No- she made her luck

It's very interesting how so many posters are convinced Rachel would have thrown Stephen under the bus, with no evidence. There were many times she could have done that. When Jessie was deeply suspicious of him during Librarygate, for instance. But she didn't.

Unless you have a crystal ball, it seems odd to crucify a woman for what she didn't do!

Absolutely

Absolutely. Rachel made some very bold moves for a traitor - announcing at one breakfast that she had worked out who a traitor was, suggesting to Faraaz it might be him.
She put herself out there to move the game on and drew attention to herself which was risky play but very brave. No hiding and just hoping to get to the end.

She was probably the best player there has been so far.

Yes, all her moves were so bold and risky. Sometimes foolhardy, I thought. But they must have gone down better in the castle than on screen. And in the end, she was a brilliant judge of character. The way she built an alliance with Faraaz in one day! 😵 She's amazing and I expect will go on to great professional success.

I thought it was amazing telly and the best ending to a series apart from the celeb one. The one where Harry won felt a bit sad/hollow and it's annoying when undeserving faithfuls win.

I assumed the edit had missed out a lot of moments where Stephen was talking about doing Rachel over but saying '...but I'm committed to the pact' but from Uncloaked it sounded like he was genuinely torn.

I would love to see the cut footage from the tower as they clearly agreed a plan for the endgame, which they then finalised in a snatched convo- To banish Jade, Faraz then Jack. It's an underrated tactic (which we also saw Alan and Cat attempt) to use strength in numbers by traitors to overule faithfuls. I loved how they did the mercy killings of Reece and Roxy and banished Jack rather than kept him in to announce they were traitors (although wouldn't have been possible if he was voting to banish again). I did wonder if they might hint to him at what was going on at that point, which Stephen artfully did.

I agree there is some misogyny going on with our perception of Rachel. I also didn't warm to her until the last few days, but now delighted a female traitor has won and with integrity.