i suspect that the ‘headteacher’ comment may be a parody of all setter criticism rather than a sincere view. either way it made me laugh out loud.

I enjoyed all of the puzzle except for the four utterly unfair clues I did not get. (2, 4, and 22 d, 7 a)

Main comment: this was a horridly uncrossed puzzle, with only 7 first letters checked. Ironically, when I finally tackled the empty SE corner, I filled in fairly fast, except for that utter cheat TIC-TAC. Whatever that means.

Glad you enjoyed it, anyway.

Welcome to the site, Wirricow. You’re quite right that we’re a ‘broad church’ but generally speaking, we manage to tolerate each other’s preferences without too much rancour. It just happens that these two setters seem to arouse more discussion than most – but, as Bill Taylor says, it’s quite possible to admire both!

I hope we’ll hear from you again.

In the clue’s defence, I suppose, from the Wikipedia entry it does seem to depend on which old Jerusalem you are talking about since the place expanded in ‘olden’ times ~ whereupon it would have become ‘inside’ !

Perhaps ‘Station at old Jerusalem’ would cover it.

Just a thought, you know …

However, like many others, I thoroughly enjoyed this Rufusmonday.

Well, try harder.

One of the joys of the Guardian crossword is the range of different setters, each with their own style. Personally, I find Rufus refreshingly straightforward, and I can generally breeze through his puzzles without difficulty. That doesn’t mean I find them unenjoyable. They’re perfect to start the week. Araucaria, on the other hand, I often find exasperatingly complex and obscure, and a bit of a chore. There are lots of setters inbetween, for example Paul and Brendan, whose wit and cleverness is very impressive.

However, it very much depends on what floats your boat. I accept that there are lots of Araucaria fans out there, who prefer his tricksy, more devious clueing. A range of setters means the crossword is more likely to cater for a broader mix of solvers, and this seems to be the case. Certainly, novice solvers would be much more likely to get started with a Rufus than an Araucaria, for example. Not everyone has been doing these crosswords for 20 years, and can get inside the mind of some of the harder setters.

Anyway, long may diversity and difference of opinions thrive.

Truth to tell, it was my ex-father-in-law ex-bookie who used to say it. I personally would never set foot in a bookie’s / buy a lottery ticket / go to the dogs, so I know little of their [subculture vernacular, whatever]. Maybe fifteensquared at large has more people with mis-spent youths than the average.

We all know our particular veranacular, and some of us know some other people’s too, but obviously nobody knows everything that anyone might say – “lexicographer of last resort” is a nonsensical phrase.

RUFUS – if you ever see this – thank you VERY much for an excellent puzzle, and damn all those who find fault!