Originally Posted by Cantabrigian
JapanAlex said the bare ankle look was incongruent with a suit (by which he meant a formalish outfit since this isn't a suit).
But that's not a formal outfit.
I've got no interest in wearing floodpants myself since I think it looks dumb but for a guy who could likely wear anything to work and (in part) sells shoes for a living, it's not as if it's crazy to wear what he did.
As Tirailleur pointed out, if you'd going to #, that's not a bad way to do it. And context doesn't dictate otherwise - which was the objection which I found so misplaced.
Yes, of course, I meant a formal outfit. And, yes, it is formal. If he was wearing chinos and a polo shirt or jeans and a casual shirt, even, he could rock something along those lines (even if I wouldn't do it myself). With wool trousers (or so they look like), it looks so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so wrong.
I think it's made worse by the horrid, forced Elvis Costello toe-to-toe pose.