On top of being the host ofSurvivor,Jeff Probsthas also become one of the stars of the show's official podcast. During the recent season ofOn Fire with Jeff Probst: The Official Survivor Podcast, Survivor'sboss has been co-hosting with a former winner of the reality show, Jeremy Collins. While Collins has stated severalbrutally honest takeson the podcast, it was when he argued that Parvati Shallow prevailing duringAustralian Survivor v The Worlddoesn't make her a two-time winner that he really angered fans.
"In mySurvivorworld, I say she has one and a half wins. It's a good win.Australian Survivor'sa good win, but it's not the same asSurvivorU.S. It's not the same."
After his comments angered many observers, Shallow, and other former players alike,Collins defended his take on the situation. On the other hand, Probst has recently commented on the scandal by publicly distancing himself from Collins' remarks.
Jeff Probst doesn't want to be blamed for Jeremy Collins' remarks about Parvati Shallow
Among the fans who expressed outrage at Parvati Shallow'sAustralian Survivor v The Worldwin being downplayed were the hosts of the the "Las Culturistas" podcast, Matt Rogers andSaturday Night Live'sBowen Yang. During the Nov. 12 episode of that podcast, Rogers unleashed a rantcalling out Probstfor downplaying Shallow's secondSurvivorwin.
“Jeff Probst, you're not going to get away with calling Parvati Shallow a one-and-a-half time winner ofSurvivor. She won two times. She won Micronesia, and you know that. And she just won AustralianSurvivor, which is, I'm going to say it not only more difficult version ofSurvivorbut a better-produced version ofSurvivor. AmericanSurvivor, you better get it together because they are lapping you. hey are outclassing you around the world. Do not play with me about Parv… So for you to pick on one of the great iconic winners of the show, I think just because she went and did Traitors and that pisses you off. Don't show Don't show that you're insecure, Jeff.”
While Rogers went on that passionate rant, Yang repeatedly made it clear he agreed with his podcast co-host. For example, when Rogers brought up calling Shallow "a one-and-a-half time winner," Yang agreed that is wrong by saying a single word. 'Incorrect." Later, when Rogers warned against calling out Shallow, Yang spoke up in defense of theSurvivorHall of Famer. "Don’t f—k with Parv."
Well, during the Nov. episode ofOn Fire,Probst brought up the controversyabout the comments that had been made about Shallow almost immediately. Probst then pointed out that he wasn't the one who called Shallow a one-and-a-half-timeSurvivorwinner. Probst also stated that he didn't feel qualified to weigh in on if Shallow is a two-time winner since he has never actually playedSurvivor. Finally, Probst specifically responded to being called out by Yang and Rogers.
“I'd like to address something that is still stirring that started on our podcast a few weeks ago when I innocently asked Jeremy, regarding Parvati winningSurvivor Australia, does that make her a two-time winner? And Jeremy, you as a player, you had an opinion…
"Okay, so somehow Jeremy's answer, his own opinion as a player, got attributed to me. And now I'm the one who said that Parvati's win doesn't count. I didn't say it. I don't even have an opinion, and if you think that was a leading question, and I was hoping Jeremy would answer that way, you don't know me.
"I have opinions. I state them all the time. I often regret them later, but I don't have an opinion on this. I've never played. The thing is, I like that podcast, and Bowen was great to me when I was on SNL. He welcomed me and kind of relieved some pressure that you kind of feel when you're there, and I like both those guys. So Matt, I hear you, and it was funny. You got the wrong guy. Retape that with Jeremy, and Jeremy, you can take all the grief.”
To Probst's point, he has never called Shallow a one-and-a-half-time winner. TheSurvivorhost's only involvement in the conversation that led to that statement was asking Collins if he felt Shallow should be considered a two-time winner now.
Still, I have to say that Probst saying he can't weigh in on the conversation because he has never playedSurvivorfeels like a massive cop out.
Probst has spent the last 25 years making unequivocal statements about howSurvivorshould be played despite never competing on the show. Perhaps the best example of that is the fact that Probst has constantly stated that players need to take big risks and play to win.
Now, suddenly, a cat has Probst's tongue when it comes to discussing one of the biggest scandals to hit theSurvivorcommunity in a while. That seems very convenient to me.
Add us as a preferred source onGoogleLoading recommendations... Please wait while we load personalized content recommendations