I searched Halfpenny Green Airport, and found the runway information. Although they provide a category for runway PCN, it is not stated - an oversight? Though as there is mention of that airport being former RAF, you'd think it could handle a more heavy aircraft.
In my brief research about the Venom, it is a lighter gross weight than that for which formal consideration is required in terms of weight/pressure effects on the runway surface, but it's close. I did note with interest, a description of the tires being more narrow, because of thin wings, and thus being of higher pressure. Higher than what, I'm not sure, but a higher weight, and higher tire pressures should be a consideration point for a pilot in runway choices.
I read that the lowest classification of flexible paved runway bearing (Z class) specifies a maximum of 72 PSI tire pressure for the aircraft. When I used to fly the C 310, I did ask if I could take it into my flying club runway. They were content to say yes. When I used to fly the Piper Cheyenne, there were runways we would not take it into. I note that the Cheyenne has a tire pressure greater than the maximum of 72 PSI for a Z class runway.
The concentrated jet blast effect on the pavement is a different situation. I agree that a poor runway condition, possibly contributed to by high loads on the runway surface, would contribute to runway vulnerability.