On my first theatre outing post-holiday (to the Newbury Watermill’s hilarious Sherlock’s Last Case — reviewed elsewhere on The Oxford Times website) I picked up the surprising news of Libby Purves’s dismissal, effective from October 11, as chief theatre critic on The Times.

Evidently her work in this field is not admired by incoming editor John Witherow.

Libby, who is also a respected Times columnist and BBC radio broadcaster, said: “It is not my wish at all to stop. I’ve enjoyed this very much for three years. I love it and I find the whole industry very fascinating.”

Needless to say, news of her departure has been followed by the usual bilious outpourings in the social media. A typical one on the website of The Stage read: “Have to say, that she wasn’t actually very good at it.”

Begging to differ, I found Libby an exceptionally fine critic, her reviews notable for sound judgment, wit and an astonishing knack of saying much to the point in few words.

Very often, reading her notice of a production that I too had reviewed, I marvelled at how much better she’d done the job (not very difficult, some will say).

Quentin Letts, a rare apostle of fairness at the Daily Mail, is of a similar opinion. He told The Stage: “Libby has a distinctive voice and her reviews frequently make me reconsider my own, bolshy view of productions. She avoids cliché, does not overload her pieces with theatrical history, is generous to youth and was good at filing fast, clean copy. I am sorry that John Witherow has done this but new editors often put the black spot on their predecessors’ appointees, no matter how talented.”