CancelReport This Post

Please fill out the form below with your name, e-mail address and the reason(s) you wish to report this post.

 

Crossword Help Forum
Forum Rules

les40

4th March 2017, 07:19
Well done mattrom, cheers Paul.
51 of 66  -   Report This Post

chrise

4th March 2017, 07:23
Congrats mattrom and thanks paul

btw theambler had 2 votes as well.
52 of 66  -   Report This Post

jws

4th March 2017, 08:09
Well done mattrom and thanks to Paul.
53 of 66  -   Report This Post

paul

4th March 2017, 09:25
Apologies also to The Ambler - you were on my spreadsheet with your two votes - have to put the omission on the posting down to sheer exhaustion I'm afraid!
54 of 66  -   Report This Post

rossim

4th March 2017, 09:48
Looks like you've done it again Mattrom, well done!
Thanks for hosting Paul.
55 of 66  -   Report This Post

skyewalker

4th March 2017, 10:01
Well done, Mattrom, and thanks for the vote. Much appreciated. Cheers, Paul.
56 of 66  -   Report This Post

stevea6000

4th March 2017, 10:17
Congrats, mattrom. Thanks for the fun, Paul, I enjoyed clueing your word.

Thanks for the vote, Les, and the mentions, rossim/chrise/Skye - all very much appreciated.
57 of 66  -   Report This Post

seamus, ayrshire

4th March 2017, 12:11
Congratulations mattrom and thanks to paul for hosting.
58 of 66  -   Report This Post

theambler

4th March 2017, 15:12
Thanks Paul for an interesting word , hardly any definitions or synonyms. I completely forgive you for forgetting me!!!!! Thanks to chrise and seamus for some votes – the first since 2015!!!
Mottram got away with the swag under cover of darkness—A simple innocuous double definition and a surface read that added nothing extra. Come on chaps, this is a cryptic clue comp. The crypt must be somewhere.

BTW I see that the Devil is in the Detail in todays prize Times Crossie
Cheers THEA(O)
59 of 66  -   Report This Post

aristophanes

4th March 2017, 17:20
thea: The clue is indeed cryptic: "one can call it" "off"- an anagram, not just a double definition, though double definitions can still be cryptic, can they not? Or did I misunderstand the objection?
60 of 66  -   Report This Post