Amazing Race Australia eliminates Big W ladies

They were fun while they lasted, but unfortunately, Tracey and Anne-Maree just didn’t last long enough.

The giggly workmates were eliminated from The Amazing Race Australia last night.

The women became the second team to be sent packing in the Seven reality series, following Ryot and Liberty last week.

Last night the women were in Hong Kong where the final challenge required them to arrange a series of symbols representing the Chinese Zodiac hat to be arranged in order of chronology. There were just a few hints given to teams to assist.

While many teams struggled, friends Mos and Mo gave up which threw them into an immediate 4 hour penalty.

Had Tracy and Anne-Maree been able to complete the task they would have been safe, but they too gave up in despair, putting their 4 hour penalty behind Mos and Mo. After 3 episodes, one of the most favourite teams was cut from the race.

78 Comments:

  1. What a pack of whingers. Get off your high horses and grow a brain. If you’re reading a tv blog then you should expect spoilers. Don’t visit the site until you’ve watched the episode. And if you’re to stupid to read it before you see the show, don’t annoy the rest of us with your trivial complaints.

  2. The younger members winning – that’s predictable. Mos and Mo and the big w ladies were favourites because they knew they arn’t the most fit physically. Sad to see them go. As for spoilers, well, I taped it and just watched it without ever knowing anything beforehand. Just avoid these type of news sites and you’ll be fine. (PS I read the Sydney Morning Herald and I dont see any spoilers there. In fact, if I see anything remotely related to TAR:A I quickly shift my eyes; I advise for you all to do the same!)

  3. I’m also with @Get Real

    That’s the price you pay people for getting the rest of your TV news piping hot from David. He’s timely, he’s got the latest, that’s why we read it. (Or, when I’ve taped an ep to watch later, don’t read it.)

  4. Neil – With 12 variables (which is to say signs of the Chinese zodiac) there are 479,001,600 possible combinations. To fit them all into the space of 4 hours you’d need to try 33,264 of them each second 🙂

    Still, 479,001,600 to 1 is better odds than simply giving up.

  5. “Paul says:
    May 31, 2011 at 11:50 am
    Does anyone else think the way Joey mimics the local accent in last night’s show, she does it in a racist sort of way?”

    Yes.

  6. I, like most others David avoid this site when I have recorded a show that you may put the result up.

    Not very hard for others to avoid either. If you have recorded a show, it is your own fault if you are on the internet looking at a TV website.

  7. I also agree with others regarding spoilers. I also record my tv shows on my PVR to watch later…that way we can skip all those ads.

  8. Do the people here complaing about “Spoilers” live under a rock except for when they come to this website?

    I watched the episode at 10:30pm last night after being out for dinner with friends, within the 5 minutes it took for me to quickly check my Twitter & Facebook I knew both the result and the “big surprise” of the episode with Joey & Richard shaving their heads from my friends.

    I still watched the episode and quite enjoyed it despite knowing the answer.

    Then already this outside of this website I have seen the result on Sunrise this morning, then on the Herald Sun website.

    Do these people avoid Facebook, Twitter, Sunrise & The Hearld Sun until they catch up? Or just blame David Knox for what he does best, which is report Television news.

    Particularly when this thread gets archived, do we really want a dozen “Amazing Race Australia: Spoiler Alert” threads, having to go through each one to find the one I want, no you want the one that reflects the episode.

  9. I think by now all regular readers of this blog know what the news/spoiler policy is. Please don’t complain. If you have taped the show steer clear of blogs and tv sites until you have watched it. I wish the Big W ladies had not given up so easily. I don’t think they were ever going to win but it was fun watching them.

  10. adelaide john

    so Liz, by your reasoning
    If I read your newspaper and it articulates who was eliminated prior to me watching the show i.e I have recorded it, then your newspaper should also have some form of Spoiler Alert !
    Your argument that a general news site is very different from a television-centric news site doesn’t wash given we are bombarded today with news on all platforms etc be it centric or not
    And at the end of the day – its only a TV show, its not real !

  11. I loved how when the ladies were reading the fortune cookies and it read ‘a promotion is coming soon for you’ they just laughed.

    I don’t think this will help ratings at all!

  12. David, I have been a long time reader, but I have to agree with others here. Spoilers in headlines really need to be re-assessed. Many people, including myself, watch shows on a PVR or even on a catch up website. Even consolidated ratings figures take people into account who record tv programs. Site’s like Den of Geek have spoiler warnings, yet can still report news. I’d hate to have to stop reading your blog for the next few months!

  13. Liz, what paper are you a journalist at? Most newspapers routinely publish reality show results the day after if they’re considered newsworthy (Masterchef eliminations etc). Asking this site to adopt a different standard is a bit much. It’s arguably easier to avoid spoilers at a website like this, which visitors should be well aware will contain news of recently aired programs, than at a general news source, where you never know what story is on the next page.

  14. The Big W ladies went home when they should have – they seemed like lovely people but the incessant giggling at everything and their predictable uselessness at each challenge was starting to get repetitive. But why would they have given up? Poor casting by the producers I reckon – clearly they decided they were too tired and didn’t have a hope in hell of winning so just packed it in. That is truly lame, especially seeing as they had 4 hours to regroup.

    As for the “spoiler” accusations about this story….anyone who hasn’t watched the show shouldn’t be going to TV new blogs the next day – that is just moronic! And if you are that precious about not having your episode spoiled, you could always watch it when it’s on, or get up early the next day (or stay up late the same night) to watch it.

  15. if the show’s airdate doesn’t suffice as the cut-off point for reporting outcomes then how long should site owners have to wait? A day? A week? Forever? I mean, come on. The airdate (at least EST but I can appreciate some consideration might pay off for WST but whatever) should be an acceptable ‘line in the sand’. And for the record, I taped last night’s TAR:A and probably won’t get to see it for some days. Yes I now know the outcome but that’s the reality of it. I can’t expect this site or others (e.g. Twitter!!) to withhold information forever and a day waiting for me to watch the show on tape when I get around to it.

  16. The reality is most people are no longer slaves to the networks and record these shows to watch at their convenience. Some of us even watch the encore or use the catch up services. I don’t think it’s selfish for people to request a spoiler warning. Spoilers have become a problem for me on this site recently so I guess I will forego my daily dose of TV Tonight because there’s absolutely no way I will sit through 20 minutes of advertising to watch it as it goes to air.

  17. Here’s what I don’t get about the “it’s already aired so it’s not a spoiler, it’s news” argument:

    A film news website wouldn’t post: “The Sixth Sense, turns out Bruce Willis is a ghost” – the day after the film debuted, or a week after the film debuted, or a year after the film debuted.

    If this was for the finale of The Amazing Race that would be different, but it’s for the third episode and there was no report about who was eliminated last week so people might have come to the site expecting not to have it spoiled again.

  18. Well said Get Real.

    When you make the decision not to watch something live you take the risk that you will probably be spoiled, it’s your own responsibility to go into a technology blackout until you watch it, much less head straight to a tv website. The world doesn’t revolve around you.

    Anyway as for big W ladies. They were a fav in the first 2 eps but last night I wasn’t too upset to see them go, the way they gave up was disappointing and really ruined the ‘regular Aussie battla’ image they had.

  19. It may come out in an interview later, but I was wondering how long the BigW ladies spent on the task? And I guess you couldn’t run over to someone elses finished zodiac sign to copy theirs.

  20. How selfish can some of you be? Once a show has aired it becomes news and this site along with any other tv related site should publish immediately. If you don’t want to know an outcome avoid all media. The selfishness of some of you is just astounding

  21. I have been a long-time reader of your television blog and usually visit it as one of the first sites I check in the mornings before working on the paper but sadly, the number of spoilers I am accidentally seeing are meaning that I won’t be able to visit your site any more.

    As a journalist I understand the need for headlines to convey news. But, and this is a big one, a general news site is very different from a television-centric news site. You have an audience that is more sensitive to spoiler culture and a genuine love for television. The other TV blogs that I read are all sensitive to spoiler culture by having headlines that say “Favourites eliminated from Amazing Race: Spoiler Alert” and giving readers the chance to decide for themselves what they want to see.

    In this case, it’s more about showing respect for your viewers. In this busy world it’s not always possible to view TV shows live, hence recorders. Recognising that doesn’t mean not writing spoilers but it should see you avoid writing them in headlines and possibly opening blurbs where your readers can avoid them if they choose to. Having them in your face is only going to annoy them or, worse, discourage them from visiting your site. And correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t readers the point of writing?

    Sadly, neither I nor any of my colleagues at the paper can continue to visit this site if you continue to have the policy of “once it’s on TV I havent spoiled it.” Which is a real shame because your site really is one of my very favourites.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.