Comments on: The Hereward Pub

By: Digby

Digby — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:27:27 +0000

@Vikki:

Unless you’re a lawyer, you should refrain from fatuous remarks about the Human Rights Act 1998.

What about the elderly lady’s human rights to be treated with dignity.

By: Vikki

Vikki — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:34:06 +0000

Having just went in the pub this evening i am very impressed with the staff and venue itself. It is a fantastic place to visit. The staff are friendly and very keen on having a basic chat. The drinks were wonderful, and as for a busy Wednesday evening they did brilliantly. In regards to the comments above. Maybe things have changed in the last few years but as someone that has worked in the pub trade, although an elderly women may not be seen as a threat to the company or venue it is still against human rights to discriminate against any segment of the population and therefore a policy held within the venue or the company as a whole should be implemented in all situations.

By: Alan Tench

Alan Tench — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 20:19:36 +0000

Andy, get real! Any pub that needs a so called “door supervisor” is a pub to to be avoided like the plague.

So it makes your job easier does it – this no hats policy? Well that’s OK then. If it makes your job easier it doesn’t matter how bloody stupid the rule is – is that the attitude? Has the place not gone out of business yet? I sincerely hope it has.

By: Andy

Andy — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:15:54 +0000

Hello,
In reply to the comments made above, I work as a door supervisor in the hereward. The reason why like so many venues I have worked at we have a no hat policy is that we have so many problems with trouble makers. People have said to me in the past ‘how come they can wear there hat and I cant’? So it makes our job alot easier saying no hats at all. I work there often and have had very minor trouble. we also have pubwatch in place to identify known trouble makers, we always try to make your visit a safe and enjoyable one.

By: Cyclops_dan

Cyclops_dan — Sat, 11 Mar 2006 14:10:37 +0000

The Hat Rule is an attempt to prevent people bringing ecstacy tablets onto the premises, hidden in the sweat band and seams. Tony Love wouldn’t want to have drugs associated with his business so he wouldn’t mention it in the interview. I find it hard to believe that an 82 year old retired school mistress would get much business at lunchtime in a family pub even if she was a well known drug dealer. The ‘rave’ clientel would probably still be in bed recovering from the previous nights exploits! Mr. Love needs to exercise some common sense.

By: Trevor

Trevor — Sat, 11 Mar 2006 11:04:29 +0000

Barracuda were bought out by Charterhouse Capital Partners last year.

You can email Charterhouse at http://www.charterhouse.co.uk

I told them the problems with the pub and asked them for a new manager.

By: George Taylor

George Taylor — Sat, 11 Mar 2006 04:22:01 +0000

The Hereward pub is now a laughing stock here in Australia. I ask Tony Love what his staff will do if a elderley Muslim lady walks in wearing a Burkah.

By: John

John — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 20:02:26 +0000

Fire Tony Love. We don’t need people like him in our town.

I suggest we all email Barracuda.

By: Pete

Pete — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 19:28:12 +0000

Oh my God, it was true – this country has finally gone to the dogs!!! So pleased that many licenced premises are going out of business, what do you expect if you treated like this!

By: Pete

Pete — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 19:17:08 +0000

Please tell me you really didn’t tell the elderly lady to take her hat off and that this story is one of those crazy journalistic lies!!

By: Valerie

Valerie — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:00:56 +0000

This is completely ridiculous! The pub needs to be given a wide berth.

By: John Glover

John Glover — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 12:49:16 +0000

“Possibly the publican could ask the 82 yr old school marm for suggestions on controlling the problems in the pub.”

Whilst not wanting to get involved in the Hat Row I’d just like to make this point (speaking as a local). I’ve been in the pub at 11:00am for coffee with my wife, Sunday afternoons to watch football and on an extremely busy Friday evening for a few beers with some mates. The staff are friendly and I’ve never seen or heard of any trouble in the pub. Misguided or not the Hat Rule & the previously mentioned Under 18 rule are there to prevent trouble.
I shall, as always, be wearing my deerstalker when I’m next in there.

By: Bob

Bob — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 09:05:37 +0000

Words cannot describe what an absolute cock landlord tony love must be.

I have just read his comment in the metro about 82 year old pensioner Betty Wilbraham wearing her hat in his pub while popping in to enjoy a sandwich one lunchtime. she was asked to remove her hat by a member of over zealous staff as it was ‘a hatless pub’ so as to make it easier to identify troublemakers on the CCTV system. Instead of recognising his staff had no or little common sense he backed them up by saying ‘Mrs Wilbraham does not understand the world is changing.’ Obviously changing for the worst in the Hereward, Ely, into a world where fools prevail.

What an absolute twat, I only hope for his sake that this isn’t printed in the local paper where no doubt he will be a figure of public ridicule. one wonders what he thought the 82 year old might get up to? Throw her sandwich at the moronic bar staff would have been advisable.

By: Royston, Hertfordshire

Royston, Hertfordshire — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:37:20 +0000

I don’t expect Tony Love is a real person at all. Surely he must be one of those robots engineered in back rooms by corporate companies and described as managers, out of whom all vestige of humour, intelligence or common sense has been scrupulously removed. The 82-year-old WI lady comes out of this sorry affair looking like a shining beacon of sanity and Mr Love attains the status of a maggot (or is that being unkind to maggots?).

I am rarely in Ely but in case I ever am, thanks for the warnings about this place. It sounds like the kind of hellhole to avoid like the plague!

By: Mr. Krieger

Mr. Krieger — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 05:01:31 +0000

Possibly the publican could ask the 82 yr old school marm for suggestions on controlling the problems in the pub. After 40 to 50 years of teaching the unwashed, unwilling and unruly, the lady may stay and shape up the bouncers into an effective group able to prevent problems rather than pick up after them.

Any good retired teacher should be able to strike fear into the hearts of a few boisterous malcontents.

Having real problems? Hire one or two retired Mother Superiors from the ranks of the teaching nuns.

By: Mark Griffiths

Mark Griffiths — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 02:56:51 +0000

‘Have you any suggestions on what the pub should have been called?’

In recognition of the attitude that prevails in that pub, and bearing in mind that Mrs Wilbraham’s generation saw off Hitler in the 1940s I would suggest ‘THE LITTLE HITLER’. I’m sure Mrs Wilbraham can recognise a smaller (and dumbed down version) when she sees it.

By: Mike Bossingham

Mike Bossingham — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 23:39:49 +0000

What a stupid policy! Anyone with a degree of common sense can see that an elderly lady in a hat is not a hoodie and likely to cause trouble.

How daft can you get.

Boycott the pub until they change this daft policy

By: Dave Richards

Dave Richards — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 22:59:40 +0000

Tony Love, the licensee, said,”Mrs Wilbraham does not understand that the world is changing”.

What a complete twat.

By: Fred Dean

Fred Dean — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 22:19:10 +0000

The “security” arrangements here are both intrusive and offensive. The licensee of this establishment, a Mr. Tony Love, clearly has no idea that the world is changing. For the better. That’s why all the good local people with healthy disposeable incomes will be avoiding this place and finding a public house that’s a little less paranoid and a little more interested in serving the public.

By: Alan Tench

Alan Tench — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 21:49:33 +0000

The comments from the landlord about how the world is changing and how they don’t want to discriminate between young and old demonstrates singular stupidity on his part. Yes, boycott the pub, and the chain of which it is a part. I hope the whole lot go out of business – soon. CCTV, or spy cameras as they are more properly called, are an evil in our midst.

By: Edward

Edward — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 21:34:56 +0000

The Hereward may be a hatless pub, maybe it’s aiming to be a customerless pub.

By: Welsh Windbag

Welsh Windbag — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 19:21:27 +0000

I’ve just been listening to the pensioner who was asked to take off her hat in the pub. What scares me is that this pub clearly has no interest in preventing real troublemakers getting in – just looking at CCTV pictures of the locking of a door to an empty stable.

By: John Latchford

John Latchford — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 19:03:44 +0000

Amazing that a Landlord can be so dim as to require an 80+ year old woman to remove her hat as a security risk – the world is notchanging, bar staff are just insensitive and money grubbing, if they didn’t serve drubks there would be very little problems in pubs, the problems that require 13 CCTV cameras are entirely of their own making

By: Dr Pete Kaiser

Dr Pete Kaiser — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 18:16:53 +0000

I just read on the BBC website about the hat ban and an 82 year old woman being asked to remove her hat, which didn’t obscure her face in ANY way. Apparently Pub licensee Tony Love said it was pub policy to always ask people to remove their hats.

“It’s all to do with the CCTV. We have 13 cameras inside the people and we cannot be seen to be discriminating between the youths and the elderly people.”

Once again, political correctness gone mad!!! 82-year-old female members of the WI do not cause trouble in pubs. Young people do. Differentiating between the two age groups on the grounds that one is more likely to cause crime than the other is not discrimination, it is simple common sense!!!

If you live in Ely, do the rest of the country a favour – boycott the pub until they change their policy!

By: Dee Walker

Dee Walker — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 12:24:48 +0000

This establishment’s CCTV set-up is just ridiculous. A pub that treats every single customer as a criminal suspect doesn’t deserve to have customers.

By: Michelle

Michelle — Mon, 19 Dec 2005 18:59:53 +0000

I have visited this pub on many occasions and enjoyed a meal and drinks in a nice enviroment! I was soooooo disappointed when myself and friends went to have a meal on sunday 11th december, we ordered our meal, which took at least 45mins to appear, as I took a bite out of my steak I noticed it smelt funny! It didnt even taste like steak and it smelt of ‘fish’! I told the waitress about this and she came back from the kitchen and said that it was deff steak (I was unsure if it was or not) needless to say i didnt eat any of my meal, when the waiter came to clear the table he asked if everything was ok, I told him the problem and he wasnt interested either!! At no stage was I offered my money back or a replacement meal!!!! I was going to take it home for my dogs but thought again!!! I hope no body else experiences the same poor quality of food and service that we did on this occasion!!

By: Tracy Pearce

Tracy Pearce — Wed, 01 Jun 2005 13:54:10 +0000

I have just visited this pub for food and was disappionted in the result. Yes the menu is great, but that’s if it’s available and if you can afford to wait over an hour to get it!

I witnessed the same gentleman try to order 3 different meals with no luck. My friends and I then placed our orders, all the food was available but we were not informed of the 45-60 minute wait and as the average lunchhour is only 50-60 minutes long that’s just not good enough.

The staff were very apologetic, and explained that it was very busy, I wish this had been the case! Not only was it quiet for a lunchtime, but there were 3 chefs in the kitchen! As I have worked in this sector for many years I know “waffle” when I hear it. I’m afraid that as a pub it is lovely but waiting over an hour for a salad is just not good enough! If they wish to keep and encourage customers through the door for food they will need to address this problem immediately!

By: Mary McGuire

Mary McGuire — Wed, 18 May 2005 16:02:02 +0000

Maybe they should have just painted a horoscopic squiggly thing on the front and called it “the pub formerly known as Cutlacks”.

By: Jo

Jo — Sun, 15 May 2005 17:33:57 +0000

The hoodies ban is just so extreme – I mean hoodies are pretty much obligatory in windy Ely. What’s the problem?

By: John Glover

John Glover — Fri, 13 May 2005 08:11:55 +0000

When I first began to post on the net, I naively thought it WAS OK TO WRITE LIKE THIS. And then a fellow poster sent me an email saying, ‘Lose the caps’. Maybe ‘No Caps’ is a proud claim that they will serve ‘burger and chips’ not ‘BURGER AND CHIPS’.

There was a debate about Hoodies on Question Time that had Boris Johnson shaking his head in dismay. Maybe they should have a ‘No Fringes’ rule? Never trust a man with a fringe.

By: Karl Bedingfield

Karl Bedingfield — Thu, 12 May 2005 21:26:09 +0000

Ah the ‘No Caps’ rule – it’s all to do with Big Brother CCTV I think (harder to identify the drug pushers). No mention of ‘hoodies’ though and it certainly rules out any American guys getting in the pub

Please don’t get me started on the vilification of the ‘hoodie’ and the people who wear them.

By: Martin

Martin — Thu, 12 May 2005 20:59:27 +0000

‘No caps’ it proudly states on the front of the pub. What does this mean? Did Hereward’s brave men put all cap wearers to the sword? Were the Norman’s cap-crazed? We need to know!