Paul Barber's programme article about standing

[Guy Fawkes]

I entirely sympathise with people who cannot stand easily, but the 'solution' to this 'problem' has been idiotic catch-all legislation which makes absolutely no difference to the safety inside grounds (apart from, possibly, endangering it by having people stand in seated areas when they could be standing safely in an area designated for it) and is merely a knee-jerk reaction to something which didn't solely cause the problems ascribed to it in the first place.



In my case, it's about choice - I prefer to stand. I don't do so at home games but would if there were a safe standing area, which can be achieved, as Dortmund so ably demonstrate. We're paying customers, to use Barber's own term, but we've been denied the choice of how watch the game by idiotic, ignorant law-makers who'd rather simply deprive us of that choice than address what we want safely.

You could improve the atmosphere, get more people in the ground, stop the constant conflict with clubs and stewards and open up that choice to people* simply by having a safe standing area behind the goal, especially in new stadia. But the authorities won't have it, and this programme piece is symptomatic of what you get instead.

*And, in the process, prevent people who can't or don't want to stand having their view of the game ruined by others who do.

You still have a choice when it comes to watching football in all seater stadiums, you either go and sit when told or don't go. No-one is forcing you to go in the first place and there are other levels of football in this country where you can go and stand to watch the game.

What you and those like you are not getting is that the club don't really have a choice either, so instead of trying to do something about the situation that could deliver results (by trying to bring about a change in the law through a campaign) they instead choose to abuse the stewards who can't change the law and those who abuse them and fail to follow their instructions still think its the stewards or the club to blame.

The club could eventually be forced to find funds to pay for the Police to enforce the law on seating rather than using stewards who are far cheaper or risk having their capacity cut at a time when the club can sell every seat in the ground - meaning lost revenue?

A lot of the problem is a lack of respect towards the stewards, would those refusing to sit when being asked by a steward still refuse if it had been a Police officer asking them instead? The problem lies with those individuals who think that they are above the law and that the rules shouldn't apply to them. my favourite is that i have paid my ticket so i should be able to do what i want! -If that was applied to say motoring, does paying for your fuel, MOT and road tax allow you to speed? or does it allow you able to drive faster along a stretch of road where the speed limit has been cut for safety reasons?

Had you been brought up in an era of all seater stadiums and that is all you have known, then there wouldn't be an issue either because it is what people are used to. The claim that an atmosphere can only be generated by standing is another complete myth too, you eith er go and want to make some noise or you don't and seated or standing makes no difference - its all pyschological to some.

Why don't people sit when told for now but campaign to get this law changed, surely there is enough support up and down the country to put some pressure on for a reform?

 

[Brovion]

No, no there isn't.

That is probably the biggest myth that is continually perpetuated about standing at football.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport: "At no point has it been argued that the individual spectator commits a criminal offence by standing in a seated area"

It is only law the clubs (in the top 2 divisions) must supply a seat for all spectators. The law does not state that fans have to sit on them.

Spot on. Otherwise everybody who stood up to celebrate a goal would be committing an offence. If it is to do with 'safety' then perhaps I can seamlessly (and mischieviously) link this into NSC's other recurring divisive topic: early leavers. If it's 'unsafe' to stand up to watch football then it's doubly 'unsafe' to have people wandering around trying to leave, blocking the exits, forcing the elderly and infirm to be up and down more times that a tart's knickers etc. Just stay quietly in your seat until the game finishes and then leave in the proper manner. How hard is that? No one wants another Hillsborough.

 

[Superphil]

[MENTION=268]Superphil[/MENTION] Fair enough, but sometimes when there is a lull in the atmos, the North keeps it ticking along until the rest of the ground starts singing. When the west is in full voice it blasts everything away, including noisey away fans.

Anyway for an end to this argument, see Trigaar's post. If Barber were to adopt this it would solve all the problems.

Thing is.....were they sitting or standing?

You make good points, however, as has been said on this thread, the North Stand stood for the whole game on Sunday, and still were not as loud as the Palace fans. As I said, I'm not slagging off anyone, but the North Stand could do with a bit better coordination, get the whole stand singing the same song, at the same time, and then hopefully they'll be as loud as a decent away following. Half the time "Go Left Go Right" sounds as if it's being sung by about 40 people.

 

[Bozza]

The club could eventually be forced to find funds to pay for the Police to enforce the law on seating rather than using stewards who are far cheaper or risk having their capacity cut at a time when the club can sell every seat in the ground - meaning lost revenue?

The police would tell the club to get stuffed as there is no law and, as such, it has nothing to do with the police at all. It's a civil matter between the fan and the club relating to the contract between the club and the fan that is formed when a ticket is purchased. Adherence to the Ground Regulations, which are devised and written by the club, are a term of that contract.

 

[Herne Hill Seagull]

Did you even read my post, Guy? I understand all too well that the club don't have a choice, which is why I was criticising the regulations and not the club. I do make the choice - rather than miss out on seeing my club, I obey the rules, as I said. And I am part of the campaign to get this changed - see the post I made just after that.

 

[LamieRobertson]

So when actually purchased there season ticket in the north ..but not in the back four rows ..what did they actually think would happen if they continually stood? (Just asking)

 

[les dynam]

There's some seriously ignorant people on this thread.

EVERY large ground in the UK has a big section where standing is allowed... even encouraged at some grounds. Plus the away end is almost always a standing area. That's just the way it is. Nobody gets a fine, or a reduced allocation. And certainly nobody gets hurt. The reason? To encourage a good atmosphere, and for reasons of sensible stewarding.

 

[Box of Frogs]

The police would tell the club to get stuffed as there is no law and, as such, it has nothing to do with the police at all. It's a civil matter between the fan and the club relating to the contract between the club and the fan that is formed when a ticket is purchased. Adherence to the Ground Regulations, which are devised and written by the club, are a term of that contract.

Therefore if a fan stands all game he is in breach of contract and the club have the right to eject him, yes? By purchasing the ticket he has after all agreed to adhere to the ground regulations at the Amex which state, no standing.

 

[LamieRobertson]

There's some seriously ignorant people on this thread.

EVERY large ground in the UK has a big section where standing is allowed... even encouraged at some grounds. Plus the away end is almost always a standing area. That's just the way it is. Nobody gets a fine, or a reduced allocation. And certainly nobody gets hurt. The reason? To encourage a good atmosphere, and for reasons of sensible stewarding.

Do you not think its all to do with getting that final safety cert for the 30500?

 

[Bozza]

Therefore if a fan stands all game he is in breach of contract and the club have the right to eject him, yes? By purchasing the ticket he has after all agreed to adhere to the ground regulations at the Amex which state, no standing.

Only if the club choose to go down that route, is my understanding. We've all been to countless grounds where the host club seem to display a far more flexible and pragmatic approach to this.

 

[Triggaaar]

We've all been to countless grounds where the host club seem to display a far more flexible and pragmatic approach to this.

I think it's becoming clear that's not the case

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

But correlation does not imply causation. The reason is far more likely to be that those who are more likely to stand are also more likely to sing. One does not beget the other.

Some good probing by you on this thread. It is strange how inarticulate the responses you have received about why people prefer to stand or why they think they're incapable of sitting and singing at the same time.

 

[Gazwag]

Seriously, the North Stand is possibly not as loud as you think it is. Please take this as constructive when I write this, I sit a little closer to the north than the south, in the WSM (1901 tier) so in a good position to make these observations.

This is not a slag off to the North Stand, I promise, it isn't, but I really don't think that the North Stand all sitting down and not singing would ruin the atmosphere at the Amex, I think you would be quite suprised at how much noice comes from the rest of the ground.

Much as it pains me, most away fans with a decent following, have been louder than the North Stand. Palace were comprehensively louder than the North Stand were at any time on Sunday when they were on song. Chelsea, pre-season, in the WSU, were by far the loudest anyone has been at the Amex*. Parts of the North are superb, but by no means is it the whole stand. Get the rest of the stand to join in, because at the moment you're just not all singing at the same time. When the WSU joins in, and the East, then of course it is a superb atmosphere, and hardly any of the West, or East are standing up.

* please note, these are my observations, from where I sit, WSM (1901 tier), towards the north, halfway between the centre line and the penalty D. As so many of you are fond of saying, we sit in silence with our prawn sandwiches, so I can judge the volume coming from the various stands quite easily.

(BTW, we are not that quiet, I still have a raw voice from Sunday).

Away fans nearly always sing louder and longer than home fans due to two reasons 1 - because of (mainly) the type of fan who goes to away matches and 2 - they normally sit where they like so singers sit with singers.

NS when full has a small capacity when compared to the WS and ES so is it any wonder that on the odd occasion the WS and ES all get going they are going to be very loud compared to the NS. On Sunday didn't the NS only represent about 10% of the crowd.

I hope the club has demanded a refund from the acoustic engineer who's claims were massively wrong

 

[Kumquat]

I've started calling Barber "The Barber of Seville". This is based loosely on the fact that we have a lot of spanish players and the fact that the opera is known as "The Futile Precaution" which seems to somehow match his efforts to try and stop people standing. I've not given it much more thought than that despite having quite a lot of time on my hands.

 

[Sweeney Todd]

Unless my eyes were deceiving me, 2,500 Palace fans were standing in the south stand on Sunday.

The same goes for Arsenal, Newcastle, Leeds, Millwall, etc.

Does the rule not apply to away fans as well?

 

[les dynam]

Do you not think its all to do with getting that final safety cert for the 30500?

Dunno? Do you know something about this... do tell. If the club have to make certain noises and do certain things in order to get the certificate, whilst accepting that as soon as the certificate is granted they can relax a bit and stop trying to enforce sitting in the North, well then that sounds promising.

 

[father_and_son]

I read that article and thought he was absolutely spot on in the tone and content of what he was saying. He wasn't expressing his opinions on standing, they're irrelevant. All opinions on standing at football grounds are completely irrelevant because there is a law in place which states you can not stand at an all seater stadium. It is as clear as that.

Personally, I deffinitely think both the North and the South stands should be safe standing. The safe standing campaign should ultimately be successful and I would love the Amex to be one of the first to re-introduce standing at a league ground. There is clearly a demand for it, and the time has come for it to be reintroduced. I don't want to stand at football matches, I like sitting down and I like having a view alongside the pitch so I'm not affected at all by this campaign and this movement. But I deffinitely support it and believe it is time for fans to have the option to stand legally and without the need for confrontation with stewards.

I agree in so much as I'm pro-safe standing and believe that it is inevitable that safe standing comes to championship football.

However, it won't appear at the Amex for a number of years to come. The club has paid for some very ice, comfy (and presumably expensive) seats and there isno waywe can afford to waste that money tripping them out and installing ss-seats. When the ground becomes old and tatty and due a refit the we might get it.

Also, the argument of more people per sq foot and therefore more money for the club (or lower prices) is completely invalid. The capacity of the ground is driven by structural features other than the number of seats (toilets, exits, etc) without which the club could increase capacity by shaving the gap between seats slightly and squeezing an extra seat or two onto every row. But the club doesn't because we can't afford the other things!!

I find the lack of comprehension of these two basic facts hard to fathom. Yes, we are a football club and are supporters not customers, but BHA is also a business and must operate as a successful Business or else we have no club to support. You may not like it but it is the cold hard reality that PB is faced with and whining over something that he cannot change is pathetic and not at all productive.

Throw your weight behind a national campaign to get changes at a national level, but know that the price of a nice new shinny stadium is it will stay as it is until it's an old tatty stadium!!

 

[jgmcdee]

This is why if there was an area in the North where standing was tolerated and in the rest of the stadium it was enforced, it would end situations like the one you describe.

No it wouldn't. It would be a limited section, and those who were not in it, through choice or capacity, would still stand if they wanted to and they could justify it as "they're standing so why can't we?".

The reality is that the AmEx is a new stadium and so there is going to be closer scrutiny of their adherence to the rules than in other stadia which have been around for many years. Perhaps not fair, but the continued "they do it over there so why can't we do it over here?" argument (not yours, I know) is just purile.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Maybe other grounds get away with being more lenient as the local safety officials elsewhere are more relaxed about it.

Perhaps we have a particularly officious one at the council/safety body who deals with us

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

You make good points, however, as has been said on this thread, the North Stand stood for the whole game on Sunday, and still were not as loud as the Palace fans. As I said, I'm not slagging off anyone, but the North Stand could do with a bit better coordination, get the whole stand singing the same song, at the same time, and then hopefully they'll be as loud as a decent away following. Half the time "Go Left Go Right" sounds as if it's being sung by about 40 people.

That depends on where you sit. From where I was, the North seemed louder than the Palace fans, but to be fair they had little to cheer I suppose.