For more than three decades, John Humphrys delighted and infuriated listeners in equal measure as he confronted the nation’s politicians in his trademark, pointed style on the Today programme.

Now a listener himself, the former presenter of the BBC’s flagship radio news show is just as pointed in his assessment of the current incarnation of the programme. His verdict? It’s irritating.

“Having been the one on the radio informing (and possibly sometimes annoying) the listeners for 33 years, I’m now the man shouting at his radio about how irritating the programme has become,” Humphrys writes in the Guardian.

The focus of his ire is not the tone of interviews, which were often the focus of complaints during his presenting reign. Instead, his critique cites congratulatory exchanges between presenters, gushing welcomes for interviewees and persistent rhetorical tics.

“It’s not so much the really important stuff that gets the harrumphing going,” Humphrys writes. “It’s the stuff that challenges the meaning of IQ. In my new listener mode, IQ stands for ‘irritation quotient’, and it’s largely to do with the way the presenters communicate.

“You will most certainly have spotted the gratuitous gratitude expressed by host and guest to each other. Increasingly rare is the guest who doesn’t feel the need to curry favour with his interviewer. ‘Thank you SO much for inviting me on!’ has become standard. To which the correct response should be: ‘On the contrary. Without someone to interview there’d be no programme.’

“Instead there’s a gushing contest between host and guest. Again, some presenters are more guilty than others.

“And what are we meant to make of the presenters occasionally having a little chat with each other about the significance (or otherwise) of an interview one of them has just completed? As the discerning listener may have noticed, even some of the presenters appear to find this deeply uncomfortable.”

He also expresses annoyance when a contributor “or, God forbid, even the occasional presenter or correspondent will find it a real challenge to get through an interview without ‘y’ know … ’ probably followed by ‘I mean … ’.”

Humphrys singles out presenter Amol Rajan, who has announced he is leaving the show to pursue his own business in the creator economy.

“A prime example would be Amol Rajan’s insistence on emphasising, without fail, the definite and indefinite articles in any given sentence,” Humphrys writes. “In his world, ‘A’ bomb has exploded in ‘THE’ Palace of Westminster. My apologies to you, dear reader, if you’ve never spotted it, but if you hadn’t, I bet you will now.”

Despite Humphrys’ criticism, there is genuine dismay inside the show at Rajan’s departure, with senior figures seeing his engaging style as a crucial part of keeping it relevant.

And despite the upheaval wrought by the digital revolution in the media industry, Today still commands well more than 5 million listeners a week.

Humphrys admits BBC executives may have a view on the feedback he is offering about the show. “I suppose if I were Today’s editor, the phrase ‘pain in the arse’ might come to mind,” he writes.

He also says he may stop listening should budget cuts to the programme go further, while acknowledging it has been more protected than others. Previous rounds of cuts saw the show lose its dedicated correspondents.

“Otiose? Almost always,” Humphrys writes of the show. “Irritating? Profoundly. But would I really die on this hill? Possibly not. Then again … y’know?

“And if the big bosses persist in cutting its budget so it sometimes has to use last night’s TV news report and becomes less ‘Today’ and more ‘Yesterday’ – then Radio 3, here I come!”