Exactly what I thought although I didn't like to say so. Also perhaps there was a technical fault / accidental erasure and yes indeed it was a Mark who was beaten on the day in question.

The other discontinuity was on Wednesday's show. Nick mentioned that Penny's previous talk was about how clumsy she was (in the missing show). But in fact her previous talk was about the strange words which she uses (in Monday's show).

Hope that's clear!

As I said before, although I got shot down in flames for doing so, I watched Tuesday's show on 'On Demand' on Virgin cable at about 5 p.m., and it was a normal show between two new contestants, which was won by Steve on the crucial conundrum.
I can't remember the name of the male contestant, but he went ahead on the last numbers game, but lost on the last round.

It was perfectly normal, and I have no idea why it subsequently disappeared.

No you didn't get shot down for saying so, you were criticised for revealing the ending, slightly different. (As it happens, as the show was never broadcast it didn't matter in the end!) I did check on 4oD on Wednesday and it wasn't on there either.

I was not shooting anyone down, I merely said that when I checked it wasn't there. Which reinforces my theory that maybe the contestant had some sort of conviction. I read somewhere that an episode was pulled after it came out that one contestant had a conviction for child molesting.

Comparatives / Superlatives

Today Suzie allowed WORNEST (and by extension would have allowed WORNER) on the basis of a Countdown rule that single syllable adjectives can take -ER or -EST even if not specified in the dictionary. Considering the number of perfectly reasonable words that have been disallowed over the years for not being listed I think this is a stupid rule and some common sense and judgement should be applied.

Anyone see the target in the third numbers round today? 300!

Suzie looking particularly nice today with plenty of cleavage.
Where has the channel 4 Countdown comments page gone?

One of the most boring weeks in Countdown that I can remember. Weak to average contestants, Nick wittering on more than usual, and someone sat with Susie whose main (only?) subject of conversation was being on Strictly Come Dancing.

Where did it all go so horribly wrong?!

Jon Culshaw next week, then Dan Walker who presents Football Focus, then Gloria Hunniford. Then Nicki Chapman, followed by triple jump legend Jonathon Edwards, and then into September we have Connie Fisher.

Not letting Jeff reverse his resignation.

Yes that was a bad move. I prefer Nick to Des O'Connor but Jeff was the best host they've had.

Don't know if this has come up before put why does Rachel stare at the celing during the numbers round?

I'd imagine there's a monitor up there. It'd be easier to see the numbers than sideways on on the real board. But then I also thought a helper wrote out the numbers for her.

I am afraid that my wife and I have given up now. We were on holiday last week and had started catching up on the episodes that we had missed but they were just too dire, with dreadful contestants and a dreadful guest (Brendan Cole) in dictionary corner.

Like a lot of people on here, I quite like Nick Hewer on The Apprentice but he is awful on this. I have become adept at skipping past his waffle but now so few of the guests have anything interesting to say. The last straw for me though was when I realised how frustrated I was becoming with the appalling standard of the contestants. You can almost feel how exasperated Rachel is becoming with how abysmal some of them are at the numbers.

I am afraid that after nearly 30 years of watching, we have now had enough.

I have to agree. The numbers rounds today were quite easy, so I was surprised that both contestants missed them several times, especially the eventual winner (Rory). He must have had an off day as he has usually been on the ball.

I do like Jon Culshaw as a guest, he looks interested and he plays an active role in the game.

With the relatively low standard of recent contestants, it makes me wonder if they aren't getting very many applicants lately, and have had to lower the pass rate (or whatever they use).

Agreed about Jon Culshaw, he has an obvious enthusiasm for the programme and seems to have a good rapport with Susie.

I'm debating seriously whether to apply or not. At home I regularly score 80+ but think the fact I have confidence issues could scupper me when in studio.

How do you do the scoring?

The rare times I bother keeping score, I have to do it separately against each of the contestants. That means that if, for example, you get a six, and they get a seven, your score will be zero that round.

Yeah if I play along i'll be competing in 2 separate games. It does give a slight advantage in the conundrum though because you can beat both but only one of them can beat you

He appears to be one of the few DC guests who seems to actually watch the show.

My wife asked today where Jeff Stelling was. Shows how long it's been since she watched it.

Curiously, she also randomly remarked that Rachel was 'quite fit'.

Go for it!

I'm sure a lot of people on here will be supporting you.

Just an idea about the confidence issue, how about applying to be in the audience first to see how the programme is put together and familiarise yourself with the studio?

I play against both people, so more often than not I match one of them or better them both. I've downloaded the form and filled it in, just need a pic to attach with form and email it off by the weekend. I've decided to go for it, if I don't get anywhere at least I tried.

Although I wouldn't watch any of my episodes, I'd be analysing everything, like missed words, etc.

Now I'm honestly not one of these feminist types, but today I felt that Nick Hewer was rather patronising towards the female contestant who was a bus driver, by asking her (in a rhetorical kind of way) if it was a single decker bus she drove, insinuating (I felt) that it would have to be a single decker because surely a woman could not drive a double decker.