Biggest North Stand crowd surge

[Storer 68]

Whats the point in adding that photo you dick head.

We all know what happened ffs.

because that is what happened.

 

[southern_sid]

because that is what happened.

we know what happened.

no need to post that picture is there.

 

[n1 gull]

because that is what happened.

Using that logic everytime there is a thread about war, murders, rape or whatever we should show
the personal pictures of the victims.

FFS using this thread for that picture is just plain wrong

 

[The_Real_SussexSeagull123]

Quality Vids!

 

[del strangefish]

This is good on 30 seconds.I was in amongst it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNSwFM2d6IQ

Shocking defending by Alan Hansen!

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

With safe standing areas, a repeat of Hillsborough would never happen again anyway, as shown by the horrific photo already posted; people didn't die just because they were standing; they died because of the massive metal fences which penned people in that had been erected to stop hooliganism.
I am sure that if there was standing areas allowed on a greater scale in today's modern age then the deaths seen previously would not been repeated, due to the fact that hooliganism is a thing of the past - so no need to have huge fences. Furthermore standing areas which have tickets not available to PATG will avoid overcrowding.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

err Peterbrough was in 1986 about three years BEFORE Hillsborough.

Yes you're quite correct. It was just after Heysel in 1985.

 

[HenryC]

Hey, was anyone in the NS the day that Paul Clarke scored with an absolute bullet following a corner. Celebrations were fairly loud after that one too.

 

[Simster]

Anyone remember that ridiculous game at Peterborough in the cup when there was a couple of inches of snow on their pitch? There were about six thousand Brighton there, crammed in dangerously tight. It was not long after Hillsborough I think and I remember thinking all it needs is for someone to trip over......

Definitely. We had over 6,000 there that day, so we must have had well over 5,500 in that stand which is now only allowed to hold 3,900 or something. I was 14 and when we equalised the second time I remember never having felt so scared on a football terrace as I struggled for room to breath...

 

[BRIGHT ON Q]

Yep,i would go along with Peterborough in 86.That was so packed i was sideways for the whole game.Hardly had room to go mad when we scored!

 

[Captain Sensible]

Because people have DIED in standing areas since the year dot. And after hillsborough, that was not acceptable to continue. Something had to change and the quickets and easist solution was to make the whole arena, seated. And you tend not to get scenes like this in seated areas.....
You could do what they have done in Germany with safe standing areas, but only if you can double the area that the stadium occupies as, so to install the systems requires a complete rebuilding of an existing stadium if you want to keep the capacity at the same numbers. For instance if we put in safe seating into the Amex - its capacity would drop by about 35-40% simply to accommodate the safe seating system.

oh, and you'd have to change the law. Could take a decade or more.

Sorry mate but that's simply not true. First thing is the standing area takes up the same area as a seat. Instead of a row of seats it's a barrier that has a fold down seat attached. The talk of capacity dropping is nonsense. The row of seats are just replaced. Think it would take the same amount of time as it would to fill the corners in at the Amex.

Also to compare it to Hillsborough completely wrong because it is impossible.... IMPOSSIBLE, (Got it) to have a crush. It just can't happen. Your assessment comparing it to Hillsborough is the same argument the anti standing MP's make in the House Of Commons, because they no nothing about it and just say what they think the clueless in the country want to hear.
I do respect your point of view but you are wrong. Go to Germany, see for yourself, then slag it off.
Try to find anyone that ever died in a crush in a safe standing area, you can't. In fact you won't ever be able to find an example of a crush because there weren't any.

I dont want a return to the bad old days ( which we all think were good now but if you brought it back we'd hate it), but your thinking is backwards. Safe Standing is the future. We should have the right to choose if we sit or stand, standing in seated areas is more dangerous than the safe standing areas.

 

[Vegas Seagull]

Credit where credit is due Rev! I always wanted to go in the old (pre-eighties) north but my dad was strict

I remember that Millwall game. Was it the one where they were put in front of the West stand and climbed in?A bloke in front if me poured a flask of tea over them from above, they climbed into the west, a brick went flying by from somewhere and I am pretty sure there was a stabbing near the ground by Old Shoreham Road after the game.

I remember the 1st one up put both hands on the top of the wall and pushed his head over the top only to be met with a massive right hook to the head from the guy in the front row which sent him flying, reverse stage dive like, back into the mob below

 

[DT Withdean]

This was against Spurs when they 'took' the North Stand. I ended up on the pitch and the game was held up and the players taken off. I remember being terrified but also mortified that my dad insisted we went home and I missed the match! We won 3-1 and there was some justice I suppose. I was 15 at the time and the game was late 70s I believe.

I was there as a 13 year old.
We all seemed to go back after the 2 stoppages. Were the 100 odd Spurs fans ejected or marched to their pen?
They had a crap McAllister sent off too.

Youtube has the away game at WHL earlier that season. A draw. We were killing time near the end, and a bad loser Perryman kept trying to hack Ward & Co.

 

[Storer 68]

Sorry mate but that's simply not true. First thing is the standing area takes up the same area as a seat. Instead of a row of seats it's a barrier that has a fold down seat attached. The talk of capacity dropping is nonsense. The row of seats are just replaced. Think it would take the same amount of time as it would to fill the corners in at the Amex.

Also to compare it to Hillsborough completely wrong because it is impossible.... IMPOSSIBLE, (Got it) to have a crush. It just can't happen. Your assessment comparing it to Hillsborough is the same argument the anti standing MP's make in the House Of Commons, because they no nothing about it and just say what they think the clueless in the country want to hear.
I do respect your point of view but you are wrong. Go to Germany, see for yourself, then slag it off.
Try to find anyone that ever died in a crush in a safe standing area, you can't. In fact you won't ever be able to find an example of a crush because there weren't any.

I dont want a return to the bad old days ( which we all think were good now but if you brought it back we'd hate it), but your thinking is backwards. Safe Standing is the future. We should have the right to choose if we sit or stand, standing in seated areas is more dangerous than the safe standing areas.

Standing at matches in the top two divisions was banned following the Hillsborough disaster in 1989, and HFSG chairman Margaret Aspinall said: 'The Hillsborough Family Support Group are totally against any form of standing whatsoever. We are absolutely against it and always will be.

'Our football clubs should remain all-seater stadiums. People always say they have standing areas in Germany but we don't play any part over what happens in that country - we just believe there's no such thing as safe standing in this country.

'We will not be encouraging the Government to change the law.'

Sports minister Hugh Robertson, at a meeting with the FSF, football authorities, police and the Football Licensing Authority on Monday night, said he would examine the evidence for safe standing

From the Football Licensing Authority....
All-Seated Stadia

The FLA attended a round table discussion hosted by Don Foster MP on 21 March 2011 at which the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Football Authorities, Football Safety Officers Association, Football Supporters Federation, Association of Chief Police Officers and other interested parties were invited to share their thoughts on the reintroduction of standing at all seated grounds.

While the FLA accepts that there are some supporters who would prefer to stand, we believe that there are benefits of seating in terms of safety, comfort and crowd management. Seating can provide a more defensible space for those who need it or want it, including children, elderly people and people with disabilities, thereby helping to create a more inclusive and diverse environment. Seating can also make it easier to steward spectators, to identify and provide assistance to them if needed.
It has been suggested that persistent standing at some matches is clear evidence that supporters favour a return to standing areas. However, not everyone who stands in a seated area does so because they want to. Some people are forced to stand because others are, and so it is the only way to see the game.

Standing in seated areas presents a mixture of crowd safety, crowd management and customer care issues. Some experts have suggested that standing in seated areas can present a significant risk to spectator safety and under certain circumstances could result in a progressive crowd collapse. The FLA firmly believes it is important to approach persistent standing in a collaborative way. Ground management is responsible for the safety of spectators, but fans, football clubs, local authorities and police can all play a role in tackling the issue of persistent standing. Ultimately, that is a matter of enforcement rather than a reason to change the regulations.

so if the FLA are against it, it stand NO CHANCE of a change.

 

[Storer 68]

Sorry mate but that's simply not true. First thing is the standing area takes up the same area as a seat. Instead of a row of seats it's a barrier that has a fold down seat attached. The talk of capacity dropping is nonsense. The row of seats are just replaced. Think it would take the same amount of time as it would to fill the corners in at the Amex.

.

Dirk Mansun, secretary of the Hamburger SV Supporters Club, explains that, working alongside both the club and its' fans, the architects developed a system whereby the terrace steps rotate through 180 degrees to be replaced by steps with seats.

"The process takes about three hours and, after roughly a year of operation, is working very well. Installation added 150DM (approximately £50) per seat with the stand's capacity reduced from 9,000 for standing to 5,000 for seats.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Sheff Wed - last home match of season 1976. A 3-2 win clinched promotion. Arguably it was the side to side swaying, that lives with me as much as the surge when the third goal went in.

 

[Captain Sensible]

Dirk Mansun, secretary of the Hamburger SV Supporters Club, explains that, working alongside both the club and its' fans, the architects developed a system whereby the terrace steps rotate through 180 degrees to be replaced by steps with seats.
"The process takes about three hours and, after roughly a year of operation, is working very well. Installation added 150DM (approximately £50) per seat with the stand's capacity reduced from 9,000 for standing to 5,000 for seats.

:
Sorry mate, you just don't get it.
Your post above is about converting old standing to seats. So what's the point of that? That just states that old standing had a larger capacity than seats and we all know that! The new safe standing areas occupy the same space as a seat and therefore the capacity stay the same, just copying and pasting any old piece of crap isn't going to wash and that goes for your previous post as well.
I don't mean to be rude but, I've totally had enough of ill informed people slagging off safe standing when they know nothing about it. That seems to go for you too.
Again going on about Hillsborough, Hillsborough was tragic but has entirely nothing to do with it!
It doesn't matter what was said in the Hillsborough aftermarth, that was 22 years ago. Times change, technology changes, moves forward. Everytime, there is a call for safe standing some ill informed numpty starts banging on about Hillsborough.
A bit like ill informed numpties going on about Falmer being an AONB!
Safe standing is called safe standing......coz it's safe.