I found it surprisingly funny. I'm not sure if the other crits had read the version that I saw (you said that you updated it).
The characters did have some depth, in that I got a sense of who they were, and could anticipate their responses, and that's quite difficult to convey in a 15 minute pilot.
My only advice is DON'T listen to criticisms from women about anything related to comedy. It was mainly females that criticised you for putting "swear words" in your script. I thought that the swear words were necessary, not that they added to the comedy, but they made Sid's character more realistic. There is no way a man like that would say "bloody" or "flipping" instead of "f**king". What you have to ask yourself is: how many funny, actually funny, women are there in the comedy world.? The answer is of course zero. Have you ever found a female stand-up in any way funny? neither have I. I am not Sid, I love women, but whenever I see their lame jokes on TV (2 packets of lager, written by a woman. Miranda, written by...a woman (sort of) = I rest my case). Contemporary women are not creative, and have too many boundaries to be actually funny. They can do "silly" but not intelligent or self depricating humour. That is why their critiques will tend to advise you to clean up your language, or give your character a sympathetic side like Grace from Will and f'ing Grace. Again I use the proviso "contemporary" women, there have been creative women in the past, ones that weren't all about make up and heat mag, and didn't just tell jokes about men's fear of "commitment" and "periods".
Apologies, I digress. So to wrap this baby up:
1) I liked the fact that Sid was a solid character;
2) I liked the way that you used the setting, especially for the humiliation of Lidl boy (i got the impression that Sid came of as a bit of a hero there, saving his friend from a possessive ex, who looks like a reflection in a spoon)
and 3) I liked the creative jokes (the lock and key).
The only things that I didn't like (i'm a man of extremes, so I'm gonna say "hated") were the monologues. They work only when used as a narrators voice, but you didn't do that. In your script, the monologues were completely out of place, and the thought of Sid directly addressing the audience was just cringe worthy. This isn't f**king Shakespeare, and Shakespeare used such scenes only to let you know what was on the characters mind, and not as some sort of pantomime (i.e. Buttons (TURNS TO AUDIENCE) "Oh yes he did") or to pointlessly llabour a joke (Sid is direct, he doesn't need to go off screen). Peepshow's Mark is the opposite, and so the internal monologue tels you what he is really thinking (but niether he nor Jez "turn to audience" ooooh).
But in conclusion, better than my entry, which was about how men can't commit to relationships and are afraid of pre menstraul tension. You bastard. Good luck.