I didn't pick up on the intro because other people did already - this is A Good Thing, it means that people don't need me ranting at Noel's ranting to pick up on the obvious bias! I also went on to extend that to imply that Sarah had no intention of going that far into the game but may have been 'inspired' to do so by the influence of Noel...

Here's how I'd have introduced this one:

The intro could have been March 2007 again if we'd just been able to hear the sound and not see the set.

I nearly turned off this game after Noel's introduction. Was there any need for it? The Banker could have easily been bluffing. David didn't deserve that..

Interesting approach. I probably would've done something along these lines:

"Welcome back to the Dream Factory. Yesterday was David's game, and we got to see a truly unique game play out, one that I doubt we'll see again for a very long time. If you've been watching this week, you know about the Trick or Treat feature we've given our players when they get to 5-box. David selected the urn with the Trick, and the Banker got to look inside his box as a result. You can imagine the Banker's shock, then, when he saw that David's box contained the quarter-million! He had to resort to desperate measures, and a £40,000 offer was enough to get David out of the game. But something even more curious happened at the end, when we were down to two boxes. David was offered a swap - and he took it, even though the quarter-million was still on the board and that £40,000 offer looked like a clear indication that the Banker saw it. Was he really going to swap at the end or did he just do it to avoid the regret of Dealing away the largest prize the show has to offer? We'll never know. But it appears that the Trick or Treat is having a profound effect on the way these games are playing out. Here come the names."

I felt the same in Nigel's game after Noel's rant about Steven in March '07.