[Albion] Garbled dress code "clarification"

[Dick Swiveller]

Just had this email which is, quite frankly, abysmally unclear.


Ahead of this weekend's Premier League match against Southampton, we wanted to remind all supporters about our dress code in 1901 Club lounge and hospitality areas.

The dress code for the hospitality areas is smart business attire for all guests, male and female. Acceptable attire includes smart jeans and shoes. Hospitality guests dining in a restaurant or executive box will still be required to wear shoes; trainers will not be permitted in dining areas.

Please note ripped jeans, shorts, trainers, canvas shoes and flip flops are not permitted.

Men must wear a collared shirt or polo shirt. Football shirts, polo-neck and turtleneck sweaters are not acceptable. Only guests aged under 14 may wear Brighton & Hove Albion replica shirts. Away team colours or shirts are not permitted in any circumstances.

Please ensure your guests are aware of and adhere to the dress code as entry will not be permitted if they are not dressed accordingly.

Unfortunately, we will be unable to reseat hospitality guests in general admission areas of the stadium if admission is refused.

So can I wear trainers in the lounge or not? Can I wear a polo neck or not?

*I don't care as I will wear the same style of clothes and shoes that I have for the last 8 years but if they think this has cleared up the confusion from last week, they have communication issues. To go from a sentence saying that trainers are not permitted in dining areas straight to an unclarified statement that trainers are not permitted. Saying polo shirts are permitted and then, presumably saying polo neck sweaters are not whilst lumping them in with shirts in the very next sentence?

And yes, I know - prawn sandwiches/first world problems/snowflake/blah blah. But a 100m+ turnover company sending out such a contradictory email is poor to say the least.

 

[Originunknown]

Smart trainers in lounge OK.

Trainers not permitted in dining areas.

Polo shirt or collared shirt essential.

Polo neck never OK, regardless of being in the 1901 or not.

Perfectly clear, anyone that has been before should know the score by now.

 

[Wozza]

It is messy, yes. Should be a list of bulletpoints.

 

[blockhseagull]

Aren’t polo neck and turtleneck sweaters the same thing ?

 

[Justice]

No turtle necks

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Maybe I'm thick....but at no point reading that did I think trainers were permitted.

Yes, you can wear a polo shirt

I have posted a link of how to get to the stadium
https://www.google.com/maps/place/A...65c543da10d7abc!8m2!3d50.8615651!4d-0.0837163

 

[Originunknown]

Aren’t polo neck and turtleneck sweaters the same thing ?

Yes, neither are OK.

 

[Dick Swiveller]

Smart trainers in lounge OK.

Trainers not permitted in dining areas.

Well you say that but the email they sent before West Ham suggested otherwise as Timmy decided to rear his head to point out. Presumably that caused confusion as it suggested a change so they have sent this which is equally contradictory. As Wozza says - a simple one line for lounge and one for dining would make so much more sense. This is just a mess.

A very small thing and of course long term members will know what is what but they have confused the issue for no reason as far as I can see. And of course, guests of the lounge sponsor are allowed to wear away colours and gob off - they forgot to include that bit.

 

[SAC]

Aren’t polo neck and turtleneck sweaters the same thing ?

No. A turtleneck was used for covering up love-bites when you were a teenager.

 

[Wozza]

No. A turtleneck was used for covering up love-bites when you were a teenager.

Of course, the kids now use them to cover neck tattoos.

 

[Originunknown]

Well you say that but the email they sent before West Ham suggested otherwise as Timmy decided to rear his head to point out. Presumably that caused confusion as it suggested a change so they have sent this which is equally contradictory. As Wozza says - a simple one line for lounge and one for dining would make so much more sense. This is just a mess.

A very small thing and of course long term members will know what is what but they have confused the issue for no reason as far as I can see. And of course, guests of the lounge sponsor are allowed to wear away colours and gob off - they forgot to include that bit.

So the only ambiguous point is the trainer issue then. Ask the suits in the reception on Saturday who are the ones enforcing it, that will clarify. I'd wear shoes though!

 

[Dick Swiveller]

So the only ambiguous point is the trainer issue then. Ask the suits in the reception on Saturday who are the ones enforcing it, that will clarify. I'd wear shoes though!

As I say - not an issue for me as I always wear shoes and a very minor point overall but they have allowed trainers for a couple of years and have now muddied the waters twice for no apparent reason. All seems a waste of time anyway as the dress code is like a pub - most people in jeans and polo shirt. Hardly Milan fashion week so I am not sure what the objective is. If they were expecting Opera dress code then they will be sorely disappointed.

Probably just a "me" thing but poor communication like this from a big company really grinds my gears. Especially on a subject that should be very easy to clarify in one line.

 

[Bozza]

Rather than being negative about this, shouldn't we applaud the club for giving work to someone who doesn't have English as a first language? Possibly even as a second language.

 

[Knocky's Nose]

A pair of Reebok Classics look far more chav than a roll-neck or turtle-neck sweater...

Glad I'm not part of the 1901 Aristocracy.

 

[matt]

Yes, neither are OK.

Ever.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Rather than being negative about this, shouldn't we applaud the club for giving work to someone who doesn't have English as a first language? Possibly even as a second language.

It really is rather grim.

Still, it remains more coherent and better punctuated than PPf's posts on NSC.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

A pair of Reebok Classics look far more chav than a roll-neck or turtle-neck sweater...

Glad I'm not part of the 1901 Aristocracy.

Back in the day, I occasionally sat in the West Stand at the Goldstone. Marvellous attire on show.

 

[Saunders]

It really is rather grim.

Still, it remains more coherent and better punctuated than PPf's posts on NSC.

Is that the standard for the club to reach for? Its better than NSC where most of the posts are done through phones.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

As I say - not an issue for me as I always wear shoes and a very minor point overall but they have allowed trainers for a couple of years and have now muddied the waters twice for no apparent reason. All seems a waste of time anyway as the dress code is like a pub - most people in jeans and polo shirt. Hardly Milan fashion week so I am not sure what the objective is. If they were expecting Opera dress code then they will be sorely disappointed.

Probably just a "me" thing but poor communication like this from a big company really grinds my gears. Especially on a subject that should be very easy to clarify in one line.

Frankly I have no idea how you get in dressed like that

 

[Dick Swiveller]

Frankly I have no idea how you get in dressed like that

View attachment 114627

I blind them with my Davy lamp.