S06.E09: Battle Of The Bastards

[Gertrude]

2 hours ago, kittykat said:

I don't remember Blackwater getting this much flack for Tywins big rescue but I'm assuming that's because it was book source material.  I hadnt read the books yet and I remember going "OH COME ON!" when Tywin saved the day.  But again, straight from the books.

It was good at Blackwater. It's less fun when we see Stannis with the last minute save for the Watch, and Dany's very timely save for Mereen. Of all these situations, Blackwater was the least telegraphed and was a surprise. In that situation there was no clear side to root for, and it really could have gone either way, which I think helps the situation. By the time we see the Vale army come to save the day for the doomed good-guys, and we know without a doubt that they are going to come in with the last minute save, I'm less impressed.

[Maximum Taco]

Watched it a second time, I'm actually fine with most of the narrative flaws with Sansa's actions now.

1) Sansa going from "We have to get Rickon back" to "Rickon's already dead" - She says this after the parlay with Ramsay, when he says "There's no need for a battle, get off your horse and kneel. I'm a man of mercy" to Jon, the focus is on Sansa and she's pretty much thinking "NOPE, I remember this guy now." he very obviously would've slaughtered Jon horribly if he had surrendered his army and knelt to him. I can buy that as the moment she gave up on Rickon. "No one can protect me. No one can protect anyone"

2) Sansa withholding information about Littlefinger and the Vale knights - Leaving aside the fact that she had no proof they were coming aside from her own feelings, and that fact wouldn't have stopped Jon from attacking. She needed a Plan B in case Jon did exactly what she thought he'd do (and what he ended up doing.) If Jon had added the Vale Knights to his army he still would've only just matched Ramsay's strength and he might have gotten everyone slaughtered by falling into the trap he ended up falling into. The way she did things, Sansa is set either way. If Jon sticks to his plan Ramsay's knights charge him and the Vale Knights act as the hammer to his anvil taking them in the rear. If Jon falls into Ramsay's trap, like he did, the Vale Knights out flank the Bolton army after they think they have flanked Jon's. She says she's not a warrior, but this is pretty simple logic. She just wanted a plan of her own in case Jon didn't listen to her, which he didn't.

3) Sansa knowing that Ramsay's hounds had been starved for a week - I think this one's just a mistake. I suppose someone could've told her, but it doesn't make any sense to. Unless she saw the hounds after they took Winterfell and asked how long since they'd been fed, and then someone offered the info that Ramsay said it had been a week.

Edited June 21, 2016 by Maximum Taco

[Kelda Feegle]

I felt that Yara was pushing the whole "we women have to stick together,  look oat our similarities,  etc" agenda too hard. 

Grey Worm has serious slicing skillz.

Littlefinger can shove off now.

Davos what will you do? I adore this character and was almost hoping he would never find out what had happened. 

[WearyTraveler]

2 hours ago, lawless said:

Sansa did not want to ask for Littlefinger's help unless there was absolutely no chance they could prevail without it.

Not true.  Sansa wrote to LF two episodes ago.

[Nanrad]

On June 19, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Skeeter22 said:

I guess we're supposed to think Sansa didn't share her information with Jon because he wasn't listening to her, or respecting her opinions. Like when he told her she didn't need to be at their parlay with Ramsay. He was more interested in saving her feelings than letting her be useful. He certainly took the Rickon bait, despite Sansa warning him. 

On June 20, 2016 at 2:23 AM, OhOkayWhat said:

To the people saying: "Sansa did not have any reason to do not tell Jon about the Vale". The thing is this: I think Sansa heavy trust issues made it hard to tell anyone. Even if she trust Jon good heart and even if she knows that he wants to protect her, she does not trust he will act the way she thinks he should act. Notice that i said "the way she thinks..." because i am not saying either she is right and Jon is wrong.

On June 20, 2016 at 3:31 AM, patchwork said:

Both sides of the Telling Jon About the Vale Knights have good points but ultimately I think it came down to Sansa's trust issues.

There was a lot of Ifs attached to Little finger and the knights, if he gets the raven, if he gets there in time, if he will fight on her side and so on.

We should get an explanation next week but who knows if we actually will.

On June 20, 2016 at 10:07 AM, stillshimpy said:

I swear sometimes it feels like the writers are trolling fandom a bit with this stuff.   There were a couple of reasons to withhold that information, chief among them that Sansa doesn't trust Littlefinger and wasn't actually sure he would show up.  The other would be having to answer Jon's questions about what having Littlefinger show up entails for Sansa:  Either she's in for her third freaking marriage to Robyn or to Littlefinger himself.   

My reply is a combined response to all of the quotes: Perhaps, it's the PTSD, the trust issues, or both, but Sansa being upset that Jon didn't consult with her is moot if her trust issues are that severe. Because either she trusts him to listen to her or not; what would she have done if he did listen to her? But, actually, we sort of have answer. He flat out asked her what should they do and she said she didn't know, but just to expect the unexpected basically. What does that mean exactly and how does one plan for that against someone they don't know? Not only did Ramsey kill Rickon, he also intentionally killed his own troops in the process. There is no way to adequately plan for that. 

So either we are to assume 1. she really didn't know that LF was coming 2. she did know, but didn't trust LF or 3. She did know and didn't trust Jon. 

Basically, the question is: what was her point in hounding Jon about not having enough troops if there was uncertainty or untrustworthiness regarding if they'd actually show up? She could've just warned him about Ramsey's unpredictable and sadistic nature, which she could've easily given examples of and probably already has. OR, if she really did want to be included in that discussion, she could've said, "Jon, I've been in touch with LF, I don't really trust him and I don't know if his men will actually be here in time or make a difference for that matter, but there's a chance we may have more men." I understand she has trust issues, but her issues are counterproductive to her goal as well as the people she wants to fight her/their battle. But, her admitting she's been in touch with LF opens up a conversation and conversations she doesn't want to have, especially when she has kept her communication with LF a secret since her and Jon reunited. 

Jon did make some mistakes, BUT Sansa certainly helped by withholding that information. Her trust issues doesn't negate this, it simply makes her predicament tragic and sympathetic. 

Now regarding her warning about Rickon. She's been pushing for Jon to save Rickon since they reunited, despite Jon's protests, so she cannot casually dismiss Rickon's life and expect Jon to be all on board. Jon is not Blackfish and I don't think many people would sit and watch their sibling's life be threatened, again, minus Blackfish, without doing anything. 

I understand that Sansa has trust issues and may have been unsure about LF actually coming through, but for someone who was very passionate about having more troops to take back Winterfell, NOT telling Jon that there is a slight chance that more troops were on the way was incredibly stupid and may have even lost unnecessary lives and almost lost them the battle. The Rickon thing did change the original game plan, but Jon might have actually listened to her if she told him about LF, which she was complaining about his disregarding her input, and changed his strategy. 

Edited June 21, 2016 by Nanrad
spelling

[forum4idiots]

something worth noting......davos.

i haven't read the books, but i know that even in the show, they regarded stannis as a great tactician.....i'm beginning to wonder about the legitimacy of that claim.  he raised davos to what he is today?  why?  could it be perhaps he showed a keen mind in battle.

note that he is the predominant mind in the planning of the attack on winterfell.  citing weaknesses and knowledge of people, regardless of how northerners are as sansa pointed out.  but what interested me most.....in this episode, he is the one responsible for SAVING JON'S LIFE.  upon branh's death, jon went apre shit and went on the attack mindlessly.  and once he did, ramsey ordered cavalry towards jon......but davos, with his quick thinking ordered their own cavalry the minute he saw jon went blind in rage.  so by the time ramsey's cavalry was about to blitz jon, his own men was there to save his ass.

i suppose he was also responsible for jon being back alive of sorts.

other notable with of davos......howhe convinced the young lady to keep in league with the starks and gave her few dozen soldiers.  also, he was the ones who convinced those people who loan money to kings to support stannis and rebuild his army.

i think it's worth noting that davos is the great tactician in this story, not stannis.  and i'm sure it's no accident that he is there to be jon's right hand general of sorts.

ramsey's strategy was brilliant.  he had the men, but his strategy (i think) was even sacrificing them to create a wall of bodies to break the other side's line of sight.....so that he can use his shield offense once all of jon's men are in one spot and coral them.  there is no shame to losing since there is no way he can anticipate sansa's influence and allegiance with little finger.  but ramsey's strategy was very, very good.  it just proves that jon is meant for better things to be able to overcome his stupid mad rage, death, and an overwhelming army that was strategized and led well by ramsey. hell, his rikon game was even brilliant to get jon to lose focus and make a huge mistake.  by all sentiments, jon should have died so many times in this battle.

[forum4idiots]

one last thing.....

i luv the scene comaprison of the "the prince that was promised"....the stannis part of him facing ramsey's cavalry to kill him and jon's moment.......both faced it with courage but absolutely different results. beautiful compare and contrast scene.  brilliant.

[OakGoblinFly]

Didn't need to see Dany and her "burn them all" routine (again) for the first ten minutes of the show and the scene with Theon and Yara meeting Dany could have waited - let's just hope she gets on the ships and moves her arse to Westeros because right now her storyline bores me to tears.  Thank goodness the rest of the episode was excellent.

 

My heart broke for Davos finding the stag - and the look he gave Mel at the end - oh boy.

 

Not gonna lie, I gave a little cheer when the Stark banner was hung at Winterfell.

 

That battle scene was brutal to watch - and the scene with Jon climbing through the piles of dead bodies - WOW!  I really liked that extended one-shot of Jon during the battle - while the subject matter was brutal and difficult to watch, the cinematography and direction were compelling.  I didn't want to watch, but I couldn't look away.

 

I don't know why Sansa didn't tell Jon about the Knights of the Vale; I suppose if they showed up to the battle Ramsey would have stayed in Winterfell and there wouldn't have been a battle - still, she could have told Jon about the Knights and held them in reserve until Ramsey played his hand. 

 

I am glad that Ramsey finally got his comeuppance in the end; though I was tired that he (once again) was the smartest person in the room, erm battlefield, and played Jon like a violin.  Just once, I want to see the good guys (or less bad guys) win a battle of wits (and no, Tyrion doesn't count). 

 

Sophie Turner (once again) gave a brilliant performance.  I don't how it is that Clarke received two nominations when Turner hasn't been recognized for her excellent work these past few seasons (same for Alfie Allen) - I guess that speaking a made up language and riding fake dragons gets all the attention while playing a victim of psychological torture gets over looked.  

 

Kit Harrington will never be confused with a great actor (though he has greatly improved) - what he does well is action scenes (boy really knows how to swing a sword and look good doing it) and the quite moments. 

[OakGoblinFly]

On 6/19/2016 at 10:20 PM, ybrik said:

Sad about Rickon but kid you got to zig and zag.

Jon being trapped under the bodies was too claustrophobic for me. Jon did make a lot of mistakes however, I liked the end with him charging after Ramsey blocking each of the arrows.

Yara was definitely hitting on Dany who didn't seem to mind. Theon is just going to get crapped on by anyone he knew.

Now it becomes interesting to see how Winterfell gets ruled by Sansa and/or Jon. Sansa has LF and the Vale while Jon has the Wildling and Northerners.

Yes, that was a great scene; you could see with every step Jon took Ramsey's bravado falter - again, it was beautifully shot and both actors did really well conveying so much with just their faces. 

[Arnella]

Quote

 

When I grow up, I want to be Lady Mormont!

[Morrigan2575]

6 hours ago, Raachel2008 said:

Because Ramsay would still have Rickon and use him as a bait? I'm sorry, there is a hundred scenarios this could have played out. I gave an example, two hours, make it five minutes or five days. My point remains the same: knowing the Vale forces *could* be coming, their strategy would have been another thus making the whole battle shorter - less lives lost.

Yes but, you're reasoning completely ignores the fact that most of the excessive deaths happened because Jon fucked up. Vale or no Vale Jon totally fucked up his own plan and fell for Ramsey's game. 

This just seems like a stretch, trying to put blame on Sansa to alleviate Jon's screw up.  But, I'll drop it now, doesn't seem like we're gokng to agreeon this.

[paigow]

5 minutes ago, OakGoblinFly said:

Yes, that was a great scene; you could see with every step Jon took Ramsey's bravado falter - again, it was beautifully shot and both actors did really well conveying so much with just their faces. 

After each arrow hit the shield, Ramsey went from "wtf" to "Wtf" to "WTF"

[Misplaced]

10 hours ago, Raachel2008 said:

Because Ramsay would still have Rickon and use him as a bait? I'm sorry, there is a hundred scenarios this could have played out. I gave an example, two hours, make it five minutes or five days. My point remains the same: knowing the Vale forces *could* be coming, their strategy would have been another thus making the whole battle shorter - less lives lost.

I'm not sure Jon really had the choice to delay.  I'm not sure medieval battles work that way --  Jon couldn't just not show up when there's a huge freaking army amassing on the other side of the battlefield.  And once Jon is there, Rickon comes out and the show starts.

So while I believe you have an abstract point (if the battle could have been delayed, maybe fewer people would have died because the Vale could have swept in), I'm not convinced delaying was at all possible. 

Edited June 21, 2016 by Misplaced

[Chris24601]

11 minutes ago, Morrigan2575 said:

Yes but, you're reasoning completely ignores the fact that most of the excessive deaths happened because Jon fucked up. Vale or no Vale Jon totally fucked up his own plan and fell for Ramsey's game. 

This just seems like a stretch, trying to put blame on Sansa to alleviate Jon's screw up.  But, I'll drop it now, doesn't seem like we're gokng to agreeon this.

Actually, Jon didn't mess up the plan.

He went out there alone, prepared to die on the sliver of hope he could save his brother. He did NOT order the rest of the men to follow him. Davos and the rest could have still exercised the original plan to deliver Winterfell to Sansa without him.

Instead the order was given by Davos to go defend Jon and THAT is where it fell apart.

The only blame Jon deserves in that scenario is for not more strongly ordering his men to hold the lines before he rode out to Rickon... but he didn't know he'd be riding out until it was too late to give such orders. His actions risked no one but himself in that engagement.

[Haleth]

12 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

If you have HBO GO, go watch the "extra": Game of Thrones: Anatomy of a Scene: The Battle of Winterfell.  It's cool.  My favorite bit was learning that the scene where Jon faces the incoming cavalry charge -- that moment after his horse has been killed and he's all alone in the middle of the battle ground -- that was NOT shot using a green screen.  Kit Harrington was really there, staring into the face of 80 galloping horses.  Now I'm pretty sure they used a depth perception camera trick to make the horses seem a lot closer to Kit than they were but still . . . damn.

That extra is fascinating.  It surprised me how much of what we saw was real, not CGI.

[benteen]

Quote

One last point on the PTSD... I don't know whether its because she suffered a complete psychotic break somewhere in season four and I've just gotten used to her being completely insane or if its just been bad writing for her, but it sorta annoys me that Arya has not been showing similar signs of PTSD after what she's been through (Bran too, but he hasn't been onscreen enough to make it as noticeable).

I'd hardly say that Arya is undamaged.  Her over-the-top killing of Meryn Trant last season is proof of that.  I don't feel sorry for Trant but I wasn't exactly cheering when Arya was reveling in her sadistic killing of him.  To me, that showed how damaged and mentally unheathly Arya has become.  It just manifested for her in a different way.

Edited June 21, 2016 by benteen

[Tikichick]

10 hours ago, Pogojoco said:

She was at the little pre-battle meeting. She was not that into Ramsey.

Yes, I was responding to a comment about not seeing more of her/wanting to see more of her and what she did in the battle.  The parlay was the only "tidy" bit of shooting regarding the Winterfell battle locale in the episode.

[paigow]

11 hours ago, Macbeth said:

The Iron born need a new motto.  I don't think "We do sow" will work.

" We're up for anything"

[Chris24601]

42 minutes ago, benteen said:

I'd hardly say that Arya is undamaged.  Her over-the-top killing of Meryn Trant last season is proof of that.  I don't feel sorry for Trant but I wasn't exactly cheering when Arya was reveling in her sadistic killing of him.  To me, that showed how damaged and mentally unheathly Arya has become.  It just manifested for her in a different way.

So "psychotic break I'd gotten used to" it is then. I can accept that.

Jon and Sansa need an extended stay at a tropical paradise with no responsibilities or threats bearing down on them. I'm not even sure HOW you go about fixing Arya.

[Hana Chan]

17 hours ago, Helena Dax said:

Can`t read everything so forgive me if i'm repeating things. Imo, Sansa didn't tell Jon because she didn't know if LF would arrive in time and because she realized that if Jon knew about them, he would be obvious about it. Ramsay needed to believe that there wasn't any surprise coming. And wow, I LOVED what she did to Ramsay. The way she smiled at the end... Like a boss, Sansa! That was the most cathartic death I've seen in this show.

If Sansa's ass was on that battlefield alongside Jon, I might be able to buy that. Might. But she wasn't. She wasn't in any kind of physical danger until the battle was decided (and then only if Ramsey won). Jon and all of the men who had faith in him and followed him were at risk. Many died as a result. As the commander on the field, Jon needed to know as many variables as possible so that he could try to plan accordingly. Not knowing that Sansa had been in contact with LF and requested aid from the Vale hampered his ability to make battle plans because he needed to play defense in order to keep from his men being totally overwhelmed by Ramsey's numbers. Giving Sansa her "boss" moment came at a huge cost in lives that might not have had to be sacrificed if Jon had known that there was the chance of more men to bolster his numbers.

And count me as one who isn't considering Ramsey some kind of military genius. It's easy to make up a convincing battle plan when you outnumber your opponent two to one and can just overwhelm them with numbers. Especially if you're as ruthless as Ramsey, where you will knowingly fire on your own men and use them as canon fodder. As others have pointed out, Ramsey squandered nearly his entire force and left Winterfell all but undefended. By the time he pulled back to the keep, he didn't have enough men to prevent Jon and his Wildlings from entering. 

[Constantinople]

7 hours ago, Maximum Taco said:

1) Sansa going from "We have to get Rickon back" to "Rickon's already dead" - She says this after the parlay with Ramsay, when he says "There's no need for a battle, get off your horse and kneel. I'm a man of mercy" to Jon, the focus is on Sansa and she's pretty much thinking "NOPE, I remember this guy now." he very obviously would've slaughtered Jon horribly if he had surrendered his army and knelt to him. I can buy that as the moment she gave up on Rickon. "No one can protect me. No one can protect anyone"

That's a good point.

That said, I don't think you'll convince posters who have taken up this line of argument.   Sansa said they had to get Rickon back in Episode 4.  Sansa gave up on that in this episode (Episode 9).  Contending that Sansa's behavior was inconsistent, and thus the writing and the show sucks, without accounting for what happened, or didn't happen, in the intervening episodes and in the parley before the battle doesn't, in my opinion, come across as reasoned, open-minded criticism.  It comes across as disingenuous bitching for its own sake by those who've decided they hate the show.

7 hours ago, Maximum Taco said:

2) Sansa withholding information about Littlefinger and the Vale knights - Leaving aside the fact that she had no proof they were coming aside from her own feelings, and that fact wouldn't have stopped Jon from attacking. She needed a Plan B in case Jon did exactly what she thought he'd do (and what he ended up doing.) If Jon had added the Vale Knights to his army he still would've only just matched Ramsay's strength and he might have gotten everyone slaughtered by falling into the trap he ended up falling into. The way she did things, Sansa is set either way. If Jon sticks to his plan Ramsay's knights charge him and the Vale Knights act as the hammer to his anvil taking them in the rear. If Jon falls into Ramsay's trap, like he did, the Vale Knights out flank the Bolton army after they think they have flanked Jon's. She says she's not a warrior, but this is pretty simple logic. She just wanted a plan of her own in case Jon didn't listen to her, which he didn't.

I agree.

7 hours ago, Maximum Taco said:

3) Sansa knowing that Ramsay's hounds had been starved for a week - I think this one's just a mistake. I suppose someone could've told her, but it doesn't make any sense to. Unless she saw the hounds after they took Winterfell and asked how long since they'd been fed, and then someone offered the info that Ramsay said it had been a week.

I don't think it's a mistake, and I think it makes sense.  Ramsay didn't randomly show-up bound in the kennel.  His method of execution was proposed beforehand.  Given that, I don't think it's odd that someone would have told Sansa that he hadn't fed his dogs in a week,

[benteen]

On the subject of dumbing down Jon, this seems to be a theme of the show since Season 2.  Mormont was admonishing him constantly and the last thing he tells Jon is that he was a shit steward.  The one real conversation we see between Jon and Qhorin is Qhorin telling him he's wrong at every turn.  Ygritte mocked him constantly (though I always laughed at her "I'm Jon Snow" voice).  The writers seem to view Jon as a dumb jock, honorable like Ned but just as smart (ie, he isn't).

[Tikichick]

The way Sansa said the words "where is he?" conveyed that she could not rest until she knew he was well and truly dead, because she knew that a live Ramsay was always a threat.  Given they cut away immediately after she bit out the question to her standing at the gates to the kennel leaves plenty of room for the discussion to be had that he could not be left alive under any circumstances with the response being she was told precisely where he was and exactly why he wouldn't be leaving there alive.

[Misplaced]

2 hours ago, Chris24601 said:

Actually, Jon didn't mess up the plan.

He went out there alone, prepared to die on the sliver of hope he could save his brother. He did NOT order the rest of the men to follow him. Davos and the rest could have still exercised the original plan to deliver Winterfell to Sansa without him.

Instead the order was given by Davos to go defend Jon and THAT is where it fell apart.

Realistically, I don't think Jon's army, largely made up of Wildings -- who are following "Snow" -- even with Lady Mormont's 62 good men, would have lasted very long if their lord commander had been cut down on the field in the first three seconds of the battle in full view of both sides.  I think Jon's army would have been toast at that point (who would stay??).  Once Jon reacts to Rickon's death and charges down the field towards Ramsay, Davos didn't have much choice but to follow and try to save him / join battle right then and there.  So no, I still think Jon blew up the plan by playing into Ramsay's hands.  

[WatchrTina]

Quote

The way Sansa said the words "where is he?" conveyed that she could not rest until she knew he was well and truly dead, because she knew that a live Ramsay was always a threat.  Given they cut away immediately after she bit out the question to her standing at the gates to the kennel leaves plenty of room for the discussion to be had that he could not be left alive under any circumstances with the response being she was told precisely where he was and exactly why he wouldn't be leaving there alive.

Agreed.  It also left plenty of room for a discussion between Sansa and Jon as to HOW this MoFo was to be executed.  I can well imagine Sansa sharing with Jon the information that Ramsey liked to hunt women down with his dogs and let them tear them to shreds.  I can well imagine the words, "He told us that those dogs haven't been fed for a week" entering into the conversation along with "Then let the punishment fit the crime" or "Then let him die as he chose to live."

Edited June 21, 2016 by WatchrTina

[Tikichick]

1 minute ago, WatchrTina said:

Agreed.  It also leaved plenty of room for a discussion between Sansa and Jon as to HOW this MoFo was to be executed.  I can well imagine Sansa sharing with Jon the information that Ramsey liked to hunt women down with his dogs and let them tear them to shreds.  I can well imagine the words, "He told us that those dogs haven't been fed for a week" entering into the conversation along with "Then let the punishment fit the crime" or "Then let him die as he chose to live."

Not to mention it was much more dramatically effective to leave any exposition between Jon and Sansa out at that point.  We've waited this long, why spoil it further for the audience?

[nksarmi]

In the "after the throne" piece if you watch On Demand - one of the show runners said that when Jon was beating the life out of Ramsey and looked up and saw Sansa, he stopped because he knew Ramsey wasn't his to finish. That says to me that the entire final scene was about allowing Sansa to finish him off. She might have even been the one to choose his method of execution. Jon is more the type to go for beheading, but he would give this to her if she explained why she wanted it.

[Tikichick]

50 minutes ago, benteen said:

On the subject of dumbing down Jon, this seems to be a theme of the show since Season 2.  Mormont was admonishing him constantly and the last thing he tells Jon is that he was a shit steward.  The one real conversation we see between Jon and Qhorin is Qhorin telling him he's wrong at every turn.  Ygritte mocked him constantly (though I always laughed at her "I'm Jon Snow" voice).  The writers seem to view Jon as a dumb jock, honorable like Ned but just as smart (ie, he isn't).

Given Davos' comments to Jon this week and the images of Jon trapped in the scrum of battle we may be meant to see him reborn and wiser from his experiences very soon.

[Ambrosefolly]

43 minutes ago, benteen said:

On the subject of dumbing down Jon, this seems to be a theme of the show since Season 2.  Mormont was admonishing him constantly and the last thing he tells Jon is that he was a shit steward.  The one real conversation we see between Jon and Qhorin is Qhorin telling him he's wrong at every turn.  Ygritte mocked him constantly (though I always laughed at her "I'm Jon Snow" voice).  The writers seem to view Jon as a dumb jock, honorable like Ned but just as smart (ie, he isn't).

Since Jon doesn't appear to have some sort of brain damage, my beef is that unlike everyone else, he doesn't seem to learn.The only time we see Jon use any real strategy, was after he returned from the Wildings, gave the Night's Watch advice about how to fortify their defenses, and even agreed with Alister about the Wildings strategy about trying to lure the NW out to pick the men off a few at a time, even though innocent villages were being slaughtered.

And to be fair, the only reason Mormont called him a shit steward was because he wanted him to help Qhorin, because Mormont wanted groom Jon for command.

[Raachel2008]

3 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

Yes but, you're reasoning completely ignores the fact that most of the excessive deaths happened because Jon fucked up. Vale or no Vale Jon totally fucked up his own plan and fell for Ramsey's game. 

This just seems like a stretch, trying to put blame on Sansa to alleviate Jon's screw up.  But, I'll drop it now, doesn't seem like we're gokng to agreeon this.

No, I'm not ignoring it. I'm just not being able to explain it (sorry, this is not my language) what I'm trying to say, which is frustrating, but let me try. The Vale forces arriving ten minutes earlier = less deaths. The Valle forces arriving one hour earlier = less death. It coudl have happened if the battle had started some time later for whatever reason, you know what I mean? If Jon waits for the Vale to go to battle, less deaths (though we don`t get the epic battle). If he waits for some time but still goes to battle, it is a shorter battle, with less deaths. 

I'm not trying to alleviate Jon's screw up. He fucked up like everybody (we, Sansa, Davos, Tormund) knew he would. The moment Rickon died and he ran forwards he fucked up the entire thing. That's on him - being reckless played by Ramsay, which he should have been able to at least forsee. People started dying sooner because of him. Davos deciding to follow Jon and not staying where he was (you bet Stannis would have stayed put) and following their plan is on Davos. Ramsay killing his own men is on Ramsay. Sansa witholding important information about a larger army, thus letting the folks who are fighting for her home walk into battle when they could have waited, that is on her. That's my reasoning, which I wish I could explain better. I truly believe Sansa should have shared the info she had and that she was wrong in not doing so. Telling Jon and Davos about the Vale could have changed things. This is very simple for me.

We agree to disagree on that.

ETA: What's it the problem with Sansa knowing that the hounds hand't eaten in a week? If Jon didn't tell her about the starving dogs, someone else there probably did. There are common folks still working/living at Winterfell, right? Any of them would know about those beasts not being fed.

Edited June 21, 2016 by Raachel2008

[Tikichick]

6 hours ago, lovebug1975 said:

something worth noting......davos.

i haven't read the books, but i know that even in the show, they regarded stannis as a great tactician.....i'm beginning to wonder about the legitimacy of that claim.  he raised davos to what he is today?  why?  could it be perhaps he showed a keen mind in battle.

note that he is the predominant mind in the planning of the attack on winterfell.  citing weaknesses and knowledge of people, regardless of how northerners are as sansa pointed out.  but what interested me most.....in this episode, he is the one responsible for SAVING JON'S LIFE.  upon branh's death, jon went apre shit and went on the attack mindlessly.  and once he did, ramsey ordered cavalry towards jon......but davos, with his quick thinking ordered their own cavalry the minute he saw jon went blind in rage.  so by the time ramsey's cavalry was about to blitz jon, his own men was there to save his ass.

i suppose he was also responsible for jon being back alive of sorts.

other notable with of davos......howhe convinced the young lady to keep in league with the starks and gave her few dozen soldiers.  also, he was the ones who convinced those people who loan money to kings to support stannis and rebuild his army.

i think it's worth noting that davos is the great tactician in this story, not stannis.  and i'm sure it's no accident that he is there to be jon's right hand general of sorts.

ramsey's strategy was brilliant.  he had the men, but his strategy (i think) was even sacrificing them to create a wall of bodies to break the other side's line of sight.....so that he can use his shield offense once all of jon's men are in one spot and coral them.  there is no shame to losing since there is no way he can anticipate sansa's influence and allegiance with little finger.  but ramsey's strategy was very, very good.  it just proves that jon is meant for better things to be able to overcome his stupid mad rage, death, and an overwhelming army that was strategized and led well by ramsey. hell, his rikon game was even brilliant to get jon to lose focus and make a huge mistake.  by all sentiments, jon should have died so many times in this battle.

Davos absolutely proved his mettle in battle, at sea, and providing key assistance to Stannis' while under embargo, hence his being named the Onion Knight.

[Unknown poster]

The only thing that I can think of to excuse Davos ordering a hopeless charge is the fact that quite often in battles of this type, the death of the commander/king/general has a huge demoralizing effect on his men. If Jon gets cut down before the battle is even joined, his force might just melt away. Maybe Davos decided that it was a choice between two awful choices.

[mac123x]

10 hours ago, kittykat said:

I don't remember Blackwater getting this much flack for Tywins big rescue but I'm assuming that's because it was book source material.  I hadnt read the books yet and I remember going "OH COME ON!" when Tywin saved the day.  But again, straight from the books.

My complaint isn't Book material vs Show material.  My complaint is repetitiveness. 

1. Off-screen Battle of the Camps: Robb broke the first siege of Riverrun.

2. Blackwater:  11th hour cavalry by Tywin / Loras. 

3. Battle of the Wall:  13th hour cavalry by Stannis

4. Meereen:  Dany, Dragons and Dothraki to the rescue.  (I think this one was better executed, since the besieged at Meereen weren't on the verge of collapse)

[paigow]

1 hour ago, Tikichick said:

The way Sansa said the words "where is he?" conveyed that she could not rest until she knew he was well and truly dead, 

It also conveys that the stupid gene did not skip Sansa. Did she go for a bath and manicure? Why doesn't she know where Ramsey is? Who else would have the idea to make him dog food? Why didn't she supervise the preparations?

[vibeology]

19 minutes ago, Raachel2008 said:

No, I'm not ignoring it. I'm just not being able to explain it (sorry, this is not my language) what I'm trying to say, which is frustrating, but let me try. The Vale forces arriving ten minutes earlier = less deaths. The Valle forces arriving one hour earlier = less death. It coudl have happened if the battle had started some time later for whatever reason, you know what I mean? If Jon waits for the Vale to go to battle, less deaths (though we don`t get the epic battle). If he waits for some time but still goes to battle, it is a shorter battle, with less deaths. 

I'm not trying to alleviate Jon's screw up. He fucked up like everybody (we, Sansa, Davos, Tormund) knew he would. The moment Rickon died and he ran forwards he fucked up the entire thing. That's on him - being reckless played by Ramsay, which he should have been able to at least forsee. People started dying sooner because of him. Davos deciding to follow Jon and not staying where he was (you bet Stannis would have stayed put) and following their plan is on Davos. Ramsay killing his own men is on Ramsay. Sansa witholding important information about a larger army, thus letting the folks who are fighting for her home walk into battle when they could have waited, that is on her. That's my reasoning, which I wish I could explain better. I truly believe Sansa should have shared the info she had and that she was wrong in not doing so. Telling Jon and Davos about the Vale could have changed things. This is very simple for me.

We agree to disagree on that.

ETA: What's it the problem with Sansa knowing that the hounds hand't eaten in a week? If Jon didn't tell her about the starving dogs, someone else there probably did. There are common folks still working/living at Winterfell, right? Any of them would know about those beasts not being fed.

The problem with "just wait" is wait until when? Ravens can only travel from castle to castle. Littlefinger is on the move and Sansa is at some random camp. They cannot communicate. How are they supposed to coordinate the attack without Ramsay finding out about the additional troops? The Vale could have arrived a half hour earlier or three days later. Marching soldiers takes time, especially in the cold North which is supposed to have snow. If Sansa had told Jon that the Vale might be coming, he doesn't know if they will for sure, when, where they are, how to get a message to them, etc. Once Ramsay took the field for battle Jon and his forces have to fight; the risk of not taking the field is that the riders will come through camp and cut everyone down where they stand.

I think Sansa should have told Jon, too. I think if you're going to have someone fight for your cause, you owe them honesty. But I think you're vastly overestimating Sansa's blame. She couldn't know if or when the Vale forces would arrive and they couldn't plan around them with so much uncertain. They were always going to lose most of their men. They were vastly outnumbered and had the weaker position on the field. If they had held their position, it wouldn't have been quite as bad because they would have remained out of arrow range, but their loses were always going to be big.

11 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

Davos absolutely proved his mettle in battle, at sea, and providing key assistance to Stannis' while under embargo, hence his being named the Onion Knight.

Davos wasn't made a Knight because of battle; he was knighted because he got food into Storm's End while it was under siege. Sneaking a boat into a castle has everything to do with smuggling but very little to do with battle. I do think Davos was one of the smarter people in the Blackwater but he was lowborn so Stannis put other people in charge. Still, Davos has very little on land battle experience.

[Alapaki]

On one level, this episode was some god-damned entertaining television.  So I feel sort of dickish to criticize.

But, having had a few days to think about it, the biggest problem that I have is that the narrative was driven in sometimes inexplicable ways for the sole apparent reason of creating such entertaining visuals.  And, I think, some more simply poor writing.

For example, if you take out the scene between Littlefinger and Sansa at Mole Town, but leave in Littlefinger's scene with Royce and Sansa sending the raven, then I think the arrival of the Vale army becomes much more dramatic.  The only purpose the Mole Town scene served was to bolster the Sansa-as-bad-ass theme, but there were plenty of ways to do that.  Instead, we're left with a bunch of "why didn't she . . . " questions that may or may not be satisfactorily answered next week.

Same deal with Mereen.  In what world does Daenaeys ride home on a fire-breathing dragon that she can obviously control, see her city under a naval assault, and instead of wiping out the attacking fleet then and there she decides instead to park the dragon and pout to Tyrion?  

What we saw this week was driven purely by the writers desire to have yet another "no Mr. Bond, I expect you to die" line from Dany.  Meanwhile, the much more interesting information regarding the what, where, when and how of the Iron Fleet docking at Mereen and Yara/Theon getting to Dany is left unaddressed.  

[mac123x]

18 minutes ago, Alapaki said:

In what world does Daenaeys ride home on a fire-breathing dragon that she can obviously control, see her city under a naval assault, and instead of wiping out the attacking fleet then and there she decides instead to park the dragon and pout to Tyrion?  

I actually bought that.  Dany knew that Daario and the Dothraki were on their way and had a reasonable estimate of when they would arrive.  She parked Drogon for a few hours waiting for her land forces to get there.  Also, the way they executed the plan allowed her to capture a bulk of the Masters' fleet rather than destroying it.

[GrailKing]

23 hours ago, Dev F said:

That was the raven announcing the beginning of autumn, not the beginning of winter.

I actually appreciated that it was a little more nuanced than that. Jon expected Ramsay to be bloodthirsty and careless, but he was in fact pretty calculating. He knew, like Jon said, that he can't rule the North by fear if his troops are unable to leave his holdfast, but instead of blundering into Jon's trap, he contrived a way to lure Jon into a trap without putting his own forces at excessive risk.

Though it is hard to imagine that a giant army marching north didn't attract his attention as a possible complication. I'm still assuming that Littlefinger was pretending that the Knights of the Vale were there to reinforce Ramsay's forces rather than battle them, or it makes no sense that they could traverse Bolton territory unseen and unmolested for hundreds of miles.

Me being a bit nitpicky. :>)

Actually it was the Citadel saying that the Maesters has declared the end of the longest summer in memory, how does one tell a White Autumn Raven from a White Winter Raven?

Edited June 21, 2016 by GrailKing

[GrailKing]

23 hours ago, VCRTracking said:

Another reason I think Sansa didn't tell Jon about the Vale's army might be coming is that she didn't want to give him false hope. She's had so much false hope through the years where there would be a bright spot for her and it was cruelly taken away that it was like a death of a thousand cuts.

There arestill  people who haven't forgiven Sansa for lying in favor of Joffrey way back in the second episode of season 1 and will always dislike her to this day and believe she will sell out her own family and think the worst of her. "Oh she didn't care about Rickon" . I say she initially wanted to save Rickon when she found out he was held prisoner but had to realize the hard truth that Ramsay would never leave him alive.

The truth is though:

Sansa NEVERED lied for Joffery, she played the middle and got burned! and Ned pointed out later that Sansa as his future wife had to take his side no matter what( Sansa backed Arya's version to Ned in private ), that's when Arya hit dad between the eyes with "why would you marry her to a person like that!".

I believe they went that route because GRRM himself said he didn't understand the Sansa hate.

It also showed between Arya and Joffery they put her between a rock and a hard place.

11 year old Sansa isn't the Sansa now in WOW or the tv show, that Sansa is now deeply buried .

Edited June 21, 2016 by GrailKing

[GrailKing]

23 hours ago, Ottis said:

Yes, and here's the thing about Sansa telling Jon or not: Unless LF had replied and said I am coming (did he? if so, I missed it), what difference would it have made to tell Jon? Jon wouldn't have known whether LF was coming, or when, so ... just wait indefinitely, then? Jon would have attacked, anyway.

The bigger issue is Jon's total lack of strategy or acumen. That's what doomed them, not the fact Jon went ahead w/o knowledge of LF.

He had a plan, Sansa told him, good you have a plan, but Ramsey is gonna mind fuck you and take it away, Davos said Ramsey has the men we need the patience(?) Ramsey releases Rickon, Jon (doing an honorable Stark thing) goes for Rickon ALONE, Ramsey wins,Sansa's correct,Davos's correct.

so yeah all this.

[stagmania]

16 hours ago, Umbelina said:

I agree with those who've said they sacrificed Jon's character for Sansa, in much the same way they've sacrificed Jamie's character to build up Cersei's.  I think it's for very different reasons though.  In Cersei's case, they are obviously in love with the actress.  In Sansa's?  Three possible reasons, probably a bit of each.  They wanted the last minute rescue, and they wanted her to feed Ramsay to the dogs, they also wanted to justify her rapes.

Worth it all?  I guess, for people who like epic battle scenes over character complexity, or especially for those who love the Starks and really wanted Sansa to have her revenge.

There's been a definite move this season toward female empowerment, most likely in response to the backlash around treatment of female characters last year, but some of it has felt empty to me. They're playing at rah rah girl power, but they're not being particularly thoughtful about the way these specific female characters would develop and flex their power. With Sansa and Jon, it irritates me that they felt the need to make him an imbecile to prop her up. I think a Sansa who let him in on her plan to bring in allies would be just as powerful and even more rootable. 

12 hours ago, lmsweb said:

I'm going to go with the assumption that we will find out next week that we will at least find out some of the "why didn't Sansa tell Jon" reasons.

I really hope this is true, because as things stand I don't think we know enough to understand why she did anything. The writers kept us completely in the dark in order to preserve the least surprising surprise of all time, so we have no idea how much information she had at any given point in time, how much contact she had with Littlefinger, how much confidence she had in his willingness to show up, or what her motivations for keeping it to herself may have been. Maybe she had heard nothing from Littlefinger until he miraculously showed up just as the battle was beginning. Maybe she knew exactly where he was and was able to call him in as soon as she realized Jon wasn't going to handle it on his own. Maybe she didn't want to give Jon false hope in case they didn't show. Maybe she was afraid to tell Jon because she didn't trust him to use the additional men well. Maybe this was all a power play to make herself the hero and strengthen her claim as Queen of the North. We simply don't know, so trying to judge her decision-making is a bit fruitless.

2 hours ago, benteen said:

On the subject of dumbing down Jon, this seems to be a theme of the show since Season 2.  Mormont was admonishing him constantly and the last thing he tells Jon is that he was a shit steward.  The one real conversation we see between Jon and Qhorin is Qhorin telling him he's wrong at every turn.  Ygritte mocked him constantly (though I always laughed at her "I'm Jon Snow" voice).  The writers seem to view Jon as a dumb jock, honorable like Ned but just as smart (ie, he isn't).

I don't understand Jon's character arc at all anymore. I thought the entire point of the earlier season efforts to underline how much he didn't know was for him to learn, so that by the time we got to the big show he would have grown into the hero and leader he is clearly meant to be in the narrative. Yet here we are, and he doesn't seem to have learned much of anything. Is there another big narrative subversion coming here, and Jon isn't actually as important as we all thought? Or has the show just failed to develop him properly?

[Tikichick]

3 minutes ago, stagmania said:

There's been a definite move this season toward female empowerment, most likely in response to the backlash around treatment of female characters last year, but some of it has felt empty to me. They're playing at rah rah girl power, but they're not being particularly thoughtful about the way these specific female characters would develop and flex their power. With Sansa and Jon, it irritates me that they felt the need to make him an imbecile to prop her up. I think a Sansa who let him in on her plan to bring in allies would be just as powerful and even more rootable. 

I really hope this is true, because as things stand I don't think we know enough to understand why she did anything. The writers kept us completely in the dark in order to preserve the least surprising surprise of all time, so we have no idea how much information she had at any given point in time, how much contact she had with Littlefinger, how much confidence she had in his willingness to show up, or what her motivations for keeping it to herself may have been. Maybe she had heard nothing from Littlefinger until he miraculously showed up just as the battle was beginning. Maybe she knew exactly where he was and was able to call him in as soon as she realized Jon wasn't going to handle it on his own. Maybe she didn't want to give Jon false hope in case they didn't show. Maybe she was afraid to tell Jon because she didn't trust him to use the additional men well. Maybe this was all a power play to make herself the hero and strengthen her claim as Queen of the North. We simply don't know, so trying to judge her decision-making is a bit fruitless.

I don't understand Jon's character arc at all anymore. I thought the entire point of the earlier season efforts to underline how much he didn't know was for him to learn, so that by the time we got to the big show he would have grown into the hero and leader he is clearly meant to be in the narrative. Yet here we are, and he doesn't seem to have learned much of anything. Is there another big narrative subversion coming here, and Jon isn't actually as important as we all thought? Or has the show just failed to develop him properly?

I think you've hit it squarely on the head, much of this season has felt empty and hollow, precisely when we should be feeling some payoff.  Perhaps the vacuum explains the hysteria over Tormund and Brienne and other small details.

[WebosFritos]

I will agree that the people behind the scenes and the actors did an amazing job for this episode. There were lots of breathtaking shots and amazing sequences. Unfortunately, I think the writing let them down.

One thing I noticed, please correct me if I’m wrong, was that the wildlings, who were on foot, only joined the battle right before they were being trapped behind the shields. We know most of Jon’s army was made up of wildlings so the majority of those dead men and horses were Bolton forces before they started finishing off the rest of the Stark forces. If that was really part of Ramsay’s battle plan, then who the hell agreed to let most of their men die to build a wall of corpses?

Lots of Stannis’s men rightfully deserted him when he burned Shireen. In this episode, the masters’ soldiers ran away when given the opportunity. But apparently none of the Boltons, Kartstarks or Umbers’ soldiers left when they saw Ramsay start to decimate his own cavalry.

I liked Jon beating the crap out of Ramsay, I watched that scene a few times because this show has made me bloodthirsty. But even though he deserved it I couldn’t watch the bastard getting fed to his hounds because I know the dogs will have to be put down because Ramsay turned them into killing machines.

18 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

Did you notice that Wun Wun is actually the first person who seems to realize the danger when the "cauldron" is being formed.  He's inarticulate, but he ain't dumb.

Well he did have a good vantage point, what with him being at least 15 feet tall. RIP Wun Wun, you deserved better than to be finished off by Ramsay of all people. I wish they had given him something to fight with, a tree or a very large sword.

[Nanrad]

5 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

Yes but, you're reasoning completely ignores the fact that most of the excessive deaths happened because Jon fucked up. Vale or no Vale Jon totally fucked up his own plan and fell for Ramsey's game. 

This just seems like a stretch, trying to put blame on Sansa to alleviate Jon's screw up.  But, I'll drop it now, doesn't seem like we're gokng to agreeon this.

They both deserve blame, but I'm not going to act as if Jon reacting to Rickon's life being treated like a game and trying to save him isn't not only understanding, but realistic for a person like Jon. Jon has fought battles, but he isn't as seasoned as Stannis or Blackfish who know better than to indulge in those games (family member lives on the line). He's never encountered anything like that before and Sansa hyped him to go there for exactly that reason.

Jon was prepared to die alone when Davos sent the troops out.

The fact that Sansa didn't tell the commander that there may be a chance for additional troops is a fuck up. People in Jon's position plan for every possible outcome even if it may not happen--Sansa robbed him of proper planning and Davos may have planned accordingly to Jon's fuck up if he'd known about the additional troops.

Also, I think Jon wouldn't had tried to get Rickon if Ramey had flat out killed him. Ramsey started to panic once the third arrow didn't hit. So, honestly, Ramsey DID make mistakes and was lucky that he did have greater numbers on his side as well as someone not as battle tested as Jon who fell for his trap. Rase also should've stayed in the Castle. 

10 hours ago, Maximum Taco said:

Watched it a second time, I'm actually fine with most of the narrative flaws with Sansa's actions now.

1) Sansa going from "We have to get Rickon back" to "Rickon's already dead" - She says this after the parlay with Ramsay, when he says "There's no need for a battle, get off your horse and kneel. I'm a man of mercy" to Jon, the focus is on Sansa and she's pretty much thinking "NOPE, I remember this guy now." he very obviously would've slaughtered Jon horribly if he had surrendered his army and knelt to him. I can buy that as the moment she gave up on Rickon. "No one can protect me. No one can protect anyone"

2) Sansa withholding information about Littlefinger and the Vale knights - Leaving aside the fact that she had no proof they were coming aside from her own feelings, and that fact wouldn't have stopped Jon from attacking. She needed a Plan B in case Jon did exactly what she thought he'd do (and what he ended up doing.) If Jon had added the Vale Knights to his army he still would've only just matched Ramsay's strength and he might have gotten everyone slaughtered by falling into the trap he ended up falling into. The way she did things, Sansa is set either way. If Jon sticks to his plan Ramsay's knights charge him and the Vale Knights act as the hammer to his anvil taking them in the rear. If Jon falls into Ramsay's trap, like he did, the Vale Knights out flank the Bolton army after they think they have flanked Jon's. She says she's not a warrior, but this is pretty simple logic. She just wanted a plan of her own in case Jon didn't listen to her, which he didn't.

1. I can totally buy this line of thought, but she couldn't have expected for Jon to follow and agree with it--that's the problem. WE know why she feels that way, Jon doesn't--not really. Even then, it still does feel kinda quick and dismissive as if Rickon wasn't her brother as well. I guess since so much was on the line, she didn't have time to really think about her feelings for Ned's last true born son.

2. Her plan A wasn't much of a plan though. Other than saying "we need more troops" and "you don't know Ramsey", that's not a plan just stating facts. Jon DID listen to her, but her plan A was crap because it provided NO solution. I mentioned in a post after yours that she could have easily told Jon about LF all while explaining that she wasn't certain that he would come and that she didn't trust him. That way, Jon could have planned for the Vale, BUT if they didn't show up, go with the original plan. Rickon's death may have screwed up the plan regardless, but still.

Edited June 21, 2016 by Nanrad
didn't initially respond to first quote

[BigBeagle]

On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 9:01 PM, dizzyd said:

Gods, let us be done with Essos after next week.

How many times over how many shows have how many people said the same thing? Get thee to Westeros, Dany!

 

Quote

The Iron born need a new motto. I don't think "We do sow" will work.

How about, "We don't want to sow, but our boss has dragons?"

[OakGoblinFly]

9 hours ago, WearyTraveler said:

Not true.  Sansa wrote to LF two episodes ago.

Wasn't that after the great tour of the north yielded minimal results?

[RedheadZombie]

At first when Ramsay's mounted troops ran by leaving Jon untouched, I assumed Ramsay had warned them, "leave him for me". But then Ramsay shot the arrow into Wun Wun's eye when he was already in his death throws, and could have killed Jon in that moment - Jon was distracted by the giant's death.  So now I'm not sure if I'm supposed to assume he's AA or one of the other prophecies.  

Loved that Dany and Drogon have perfected their partnership.  From the way he came, landed right beside her without setting the bad guys on fire. Then he unfurled his wing which she climbed like a flight of stairs.  To the ultimate control Dany had over him as she carefully hit only certain targets.  She was also calm and less blood thirsty, and didn't have what some describe, as that mad gleam in her eyes as she ordered Dracarys.  The siblings proved they want in on the action and are only needing riders of their own.

 I can't help but feel that the speculation that Dany will ultimately be a villain and mad like her father are wrong.  I saw a woman who listened to her advisor, had faith in the three she left behind to do what was needed, and reined in the scorched earth policy that has always worked in the past.  And not coincidentally, Drogon seems to have gained self-control of his own.  

[benteen]

Quote

Lots of Stannis’s men rightfully deserted him when he burned Shireen. In this episode, the masters’ soldiers ran away when given the opportunity. But apparently none of the Boltons, Kartstarks or Umbers’ soldiers left when they saw Ramsay start to decimate his own cavalry.

Yeah, even in an episode where Ramsay got a fitting ending the writers still felt the need to prop up SUPER RAMSAY at every turn.

[redcat88]

4 hours ago, paigow said:

" We're up for anything"

Brilliant!  Officially the most fabulous motto in the realm.  "The Ironborn:  We're up for anything!"

[GrailKing]

21 hours ago, Hanahope said:

I can't recall if the show depicted Robb making Jon his heir, but it is in the books.  Even if is in the show, did anyone survive who witnessed it?  Does making him the 'heir' give him full right to Winterfell and the Stark name?  Obviously, everyone assumes he's Ned's son, and given that he just defeated Ramsay, I would expect the Lords will be just fine if Jon took the Stark name and 'legitimized' himself (even if that's not exactly his correct parentage - no one we've seen knows this).  Bonus points if Sansa supports him.

It's with Mage Mormont or / and Howland Reed at Greaywater watch, IIRK.

When Sansa sends the letter and we saw the deciphered version on the NET, in the end lines were : I will see you properly rewarded ( close paraphrase) I say that's a double  entendre, if I was to guess from all I know in book and show WRT Sansa and family, she support Jon for KITN or Lord of Winterfell, to block LF.