Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Went about three weeks ago after a long absence and had a great time. The fish was good, the chips too and the mushy peas were spot-on. The service was prompt and friendly, the wine was cool and totally acceptable, and the child portion was good value and enjoyed by the eight year old. It wasn't too busy and therefore not noisy. I'd go again.

Without denying the truth of anyone who had bad service/food At SC, I'm going to weigh in with a more positive take


To my undying shame I don't eat seafood so would normally give this place a miss, but the house and guests and pretty much everyone else does like seafood so I end up in here a bit, usually take out but ocassionally sit in and in all those times, not once has the food been off or the service mardy. The chips have been hit and miss over the years, with the misses not actually being bad but just a bit wooly compared to some others


By all means flag up the bad instances but there is a danger of painting a one-dimensional picture of a broken business here and it ain't


(as a non seafoodie I use the chipper next to ED Station with occassional visits to all the others mentioned)

people do bleat more often than praise though- I woud have been unlikely to have started a thread in support of the SC without prompting. maybe the woodrotettes have been unlucky getting hit with a couple of rotters in a few months. this aside, we gave it 10 years of use.

oh for sure woody - thought your OP and follow ups were sound, and then others gave theirs.


But usually there are a few counterbalances and this time there weren't, and then people started ripping Fay Maschler in the toasted thread for bigging up Sea Cow and it was started to look like an alternative reality. Good to see some more balance on there now


(you STILL confined to the Lounge btw?)

woodrot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> people do bleat more often than praise though- I

> woud have been unlikely to have started a thread

> in support of the SC without prompting. maybe the

> woodrotettes have been unlucky getting hit with a

> couple of rotters in a few months. this aside, we

> gave it 10 years of use.



I think the test should be how they would react if you did complain about the take away - it would be nice to think they would compensate you in some way and show you that they value your custom.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> I think the test should be how they would react if

> you did complain about the take away - it would be

> nice to think they would compensate you in some

> way and show you that they value your custom.


xxxxxx



I can't understand how a fish shop would not notice that they were cooking bad fish?

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mick Mac Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > I think the test should be how they would react

> if

> > you did complain about the take away - it would

> be

> > nice to think they would compensate you in some

> > way and show you that they value your custom.

>

> xxxxxx

>

>

> I can't understand how a fish shop would not

> notice that they were cooking bad fish?


well they didn't have to eat it so maybe none the wiser. perhaps when they cooked it the rotten smell escaped them over the waft of oil/ammonia/vinegar etc


(On that ToastED thread, small wonder that locals who don't hold Sea Cow high in their estimation based on recent experience, took Fay Maschler's review of new place with a pinch of salt. Not that that would stop me from going to try it as I don't really go by what food critics say and I'd rather judge for myself. However, agree it was rather unfortunate that she'd somewhat tainted an otherwise good review by including praise for somewhere local that has, in many people's eyes, gone downhill)

to be fair, fish can turn very quickly, but you can feel the difference in raw fish as you handle it- hard to explain, but you can tell when its on the edge


This isnt a slagfest, I cant be arsed with that, more of a heads up for the owner to get on top of it - it doest seem to have affected anyone else, so maybe we woz just unlucky


pinhead refernce deleted


/ends

numbers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> it was rather unfortunate that she'd somewhat tainted an

> otherwise good review by including praise for

> somewhere local that has, in many people's eyes,

> gone downhill)


Seems an unfair criticism - can't really expect her to continually re-visit a restaurant to check that it hasn't slipped.

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Seems an unfair criticism - can't really expect

> her to continually re-visit a restaurant to check

> that it hasn't slipped.


yeah fair point jeremy but really I'd not be keen to add it to any review unless I was pretty damn sure.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
    • I guess its the thing these days to demonstrate an attitude, in this instance seemingly of the negative kind, instead of taking pride in your work and have standards then 🤷‍♀️
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...