Crossword Help Forum
Forum Rules

10 across doesn’t have to be a Norse name.

well I could see how he might pick up two sons - but then that would lead to the same answer ... (has anyone ever succeeded in making the italics instruction on the side of the message box work??)

I think the ref to legs in 2 is clutching at straws; ja seems to be on the right track and aspria says it. Take another direction at 10 then Bob’s your uncle. I do, however, agree that the completion leaves a lingering doubt due to a few rather liberal clues and lack of Chambers’ confirmation for some answers.

yes, looks like "another one" in 10 refers to another earl rather than another son. Then I suppose the cricket term for direction at 2 down.
A bit wishy-washy isn't it. Much better to left with only one possible solution as in 12 to eliminate doubt.

I must be being very stupid ... are you suggesting that we make earl plural (and then deduct the s, leaving either of two obscure words), or that we add an e (which amounts to the same thing). We obviously can't end up with two lots of earl ... and I can't think of an actual earl who will help ...

If the earl goes, we have only one answer, ending in s.
The addition is an s; if this goes, we have a problem. The word wizard gives 9 possibilities for earl + s and 7 words for earl. If we eliminate the son, we can choose one with -a-e; the problem is that there are two alternatives, rale and lare. Maybe we should toss a coin and plump for one or the other.

clearly not so stupid because I had already explored all those possibilities. To be asked to add an s and then take it away seems to me very inelegant. And neither lare nor rale seem to me to rank as high as lars (which in itself is not an attractive solution but at least involves removing a different letter - or maybe two). Seems to me none of us have cracked this yet - needs work.

Your last comment, prospero, prodded me to look again at 2 and 10; it would be very slapdash of the Guardian to allow alternatives. I’ve given it more thought and I have to admit that my previous suggestion was incorrect (and apologies for that). Lars remains the answer to 10 as you say, with no other alternatives.
2 down is, actually, easy if you know about bowls, not cricket; I know little of either. One of the definitions of mark is ‘the jack at bowls’. This is the small white ball aimed at in bowls. The answer has a definition of ‘(in the game of bowls) a bulge or greater weight on one side of a bowl making it turn to one side’. This fits in the -i-s slot.
This is about 95% of the answer, the 5% I’ll leave to you.

well, I'd considered that option before aspria mentioned it at comment 6. It just seems to me too literal, with none of the subtext or double meaning that such a clue seems to demand ... that's why I feel the "legs" alternative - although perhaps far-fetched - gives the clue subtlety that matches the question-mark, while I don't feel your suggestion does ... to be honest I'm not confident about either.

I am entering the forum late, and am having trouble with entries that must be simple because on-one else has mentioned them.
17a bird or tool? Stumbling on "crooner".
Not sure about 28a, 27a, 11a and 18d.
Hints please!