Safe standing: a response from Paul Barber

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

Why would there ever be a surge with electronic ticket inspection, allocated standing areas, and a 2 foot concrete barrier separating the stand and the pitch? The safety aspect just seems absurd, unfortunately that (rather than any other reason) is what appears to be the bottleneck to safe standing because without legislation there can be no trial, and without people realising that it's actually safe there can be no legislation by popular consent.

Catch 22.

I'm talking about a goal surge, did you never stand in the North at The Goldstone?

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Personally I think that the justification for wanting a safe standing area has yet to be made. It all smacks of wanting a 'kids free, women free, OAP free ' zone, and I don't think that's acceptable.

Get out of it. When was the old North Stand ever like that ?

Do you also think the East Stand Upper also smacks of an OAP free zone ?

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

What Paul Barber's statement boils down to is:

" Tony Bloom isn't prepared to foot the bill of ripping out all the existing padded north stand seats, and fitting a load of poky, narrow, uncomfortable ones and a load of metal barriers, having already spent much time, effort, and money on ensuring that you all have a nice comfy seat on which to place your derriere.

If you are really serious about wanting to do this, come and have a chat with me and I'll explain just how much money it'll cost, because, if that's what you really want, you'll be the person paying for it (through your ticket prices). "

So there you go, I don't think that's an unreasonable answer to give out.

 

[Charlies Shinpad]

To save me trawling through a this but has anyone asked that why can't the North Stand stay at the same capacity but allow people who have seats there to stand ?
No problem there with Fire Exits etc ??
Sorry in advance if someone has already asked this

 

[8ace]

I don't think a team who have just built a brand spanking new stadium were ever going to be trail blazers for safe standing in England.
Let another team who are struggling for crowds and have a stand in need of renovation go first.

As for mentioning St Pauli

 

[Seagull27]

What Paul Barber's statement boils down to is:

" Tony Bloom isn't prepared to foot the bill of ripping out all the existing padded north stand seats, and fitting a load of poky, narrow, uncomfortable ones and a load of metal barriers, having already spent much time, effort, and money on ensuring that you all have a nice comfy seat on which to place your derriere.

If you are really serious about wanting to do this, come and have a chat with me and I'll explain just how much money it'll cost, because, if that's what you really want, you'll be the person paying for it (through your ticket prices). "

So there you go, I don't think that's an unreasonable answer to give out.

Agreed, I think most people are missing that the main point Barber is trying to make is that we're focusing on the new FFP rules over the next few years and that takes precedence, particularly as changing the structure of the stand will cost a fair bit and may not make the money back, as the stand cannot have an increased attendance.

There is every possibility that despite our best efforts, we may still not be turning over the hugest of profits and the club are being cautious with regard to the new rules and the next few years in that respect. Fair play to them I say.

 

[teaboy]

I havnt been in the North, but imagine the rise of each step is the same as the other stands, quite deep, and if standing was allowed then if there was a surge ala the old North Stand at the Goldstone, then the chance of injury would be quite significant. So on a safety issue it will never happen. The safety certificate has been issued for seating only.
I would like standing, but I can see the pitfalls, but appreciate Paul Barbers response.

Have you not understood the difference between 'traditional' (like the Goldstone) open terracing and 'safe standing' areas? There can't be any sort to surge as EVERY row would have a rail. The only way you could go is sideways.

 

[SeagullSongs]

I am fully prepared to accept their reasoning against Safe Standing on the grounds that major structural work would need to be done on the North Stand.
But they also seem to be insinuating that the only people who want the option to stand are:

1. Male
2. Between the ages of 18 and 65.
3. Taller than 5'8"

But this is simply not the case.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Agreed, I think most people are missing that the main point Barber is trying to make is that we're focusing on the new FFP rules over the next few years and that takes precedence, particularly as changing the structure of the stand will cost a fair bit and may not make the money back, as the stand cannot have an increased attendance.

There is every possibility that despite our best efforts, we may still not be turning over the hugest of profits and the club are being cautious with regard to the new rules and the next few years in that respect. Fair play to them I say.

You've made an important point which bears repeating. I have signed the Safe Standing petition and agree with it in principle. However it doesn't apply to me personally as due to ill health, I cannot stand for the whole time now. I do sing and join in the north stand singing so using atmosphere is not necessarily a good argument. The north stand is also the cheapest area to buy tickets which could have an impact on some fans who would have to move if safe standing came in. Having said that, I do think that fans should have a choice.

 

[drew]

Not only that the safe standing/seats should still have row and seat numbers attached. so no different to all seater's.

But people use the seat allocated to them. In safe standing, people will be able to stand where they like.

No more than seating was a factor in the awful tragedy at Bradford. It was outdated stadia and dreadful security which caused the problems in both cases.

Sorry but you can't even compare the two tragedies. How many of those that died at Bradford were crushed getting away from their seats? As far as I'm aware, the only victims that died of crushing were those that were trying to get out under the turnstiles!

I'm not against safe standing and agree it will improve the atmosphere but I get fed up with those supporters of it who just dismiss the counter arguments with the sort of comment given above. If you are going to be successful in getting Government to change their stance then you should try having a more imaginative campaign, such as the one that actually got us Falmer in the first place. The road show is a start but people bleating on about their 'right' to stand doesn't really help. And, bearing in mind how much press and support the Hillsborough group get from government, it doesn't bode well if you dismiss their position against safe standing!

 

[Pantani]

Let's not forget that lower league teams have been allowed to build new stadiums including terraces. Morecambe's Globe Arena has terraces on three sides, yet must be safe as it was allowed to be built only two/three years ago. The whole terraces debate is shrouded in hypocrisy, unfortunately and a reasonable debate seems impossible, whilst people constantly hark back to Hillsborough and Heysel.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Let's not forget that lower league teams have been allowed to build new stadiums including terraces. Morecambe's Globe Arena has terraces on three sides, yet must be safe as it was allowed to be built only two/three years ago. The whole terraces debate is shrouded in hypocrisy, unfortunately and a reasonable debate seems impossible, whilst people constantly hark back to Hillsborough and Heysel.

Very much this. Terraces are either safe or not. It's nonsense that a L1 club's terrace is safe but the minute they get promoted it isn't.

 

[Easy 10]

Let's not forget that lower league teams have been allowed to build new stadiums including terraces. Morecambe's Globe Arena has terraces on three sides, yet must be safe as it was allowed to be built only two/three years ago. The whole terraces debate is shrouded in hypocrisy, unfortunately and a reasonable debate seems impossible, whilst people constantly hark back to Hillsborough and Heysel.

Spot on.

It really is a complete nonsense that terraces are apparently safe in L1 and below, but are apparently unacceptable at any level above that. Makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Good response from PB and the club....do you not think that the people who want to stand would have the consideration of the people who can't stand....one fan said his children stood on their seats to see....I have been to many games where fans have stood in front of me....I see their point that the guy in front is standing....answer....divide the stand in two,top half stand,lower half sit....so if you want to stand....get your seat in the back. By the way,I was a Northstander for years at the Goldstone and when we scored I got crushed against the barrier,but then I was young and fit. Now the years have taken their toll....(remember this will happen to you all)...I have to have comfort,hence the 1901 club,got a terrific seat where no one can block my view. One of the great things that makes a match is to hear the Northstand in full voice....apart from that outdated...'Stand up if you hate Palace'....it's as bad as hearing the opposition singing.....'Does your boyfriend know you're here?'... We are all different but this difference is what makes us human....the word is.....tolerance.....D9o you want the club to progress....maybe not this season....or the next....but when it comes it will come on a sound footing. God this Vodka is good!!

 

[c0lz]

But people use the seat allocated to them. In safe standing, people will be able to stand where they like.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry but you can't even compare the two tragedies. How many of those that died at Bradford were crushed getting away from their seats? As far as I'm aware, the only victims that died of crushing were those that were trying to get out under the turnstiles!

I'm not against safe standing and agree it will improve the atmosphere but I get fed up with those supporters of it who just dismiss the counter arguments with the sort of comment given above. If you are going to be successful in getting Government to change their stance then you should try having a more imaginative campaign, such as the one that actually got us Falmer in the first place. The road show is a start but people bleating on about their 'right' to stand doesn't really help. And, bearing in mind how much press and support the Hillsborough group get from government, it doesn't bode well if you dismiss their position against safe standing!

So are you saying that the same rules can not apply to safe standing/seats with row and seat numbers matching season ticket number's can not apply here, we are not talking about open Terracing.

 

[attila]

Drew, the point I was making is that the main factor in both the awful tragedies at Hillsborough and Bradford was bad safety procedure and ground condition NOT seats or terrace. Let's not start getting into grotesque detail. And after the Hillsborough verdict the main lynchpin of the anti safe standing argument (manufactured at the time through police and media lies to suit a political agenda which was utterly anti football) has gone.
Anyway, just had a message from Paul Camillin asking me to go and discuss the issue with Paul Barber and Martin Perry. Have suggested that Mark, who started the ball rolling on this, come along as well. I shall reflect the majority view expressed on here (and to me personally, time and time again, not just at the Albion but by the football fans I meet up and down the country) that safe standing should be CONSIDERED as a viable option in the future, if/when that option becomes legally available. That's all.

 

[Springal]

Drew, the point I was making is that the main factor in both the awful tragedies at Hillsborough and Bradford was bad safety procedure and ground condition NOT seats or terrace. Let's not start getting into grotesque detail. And after the Hillsborough verdict the main lynchpin of the anti safe standing argument (manufactured at the time through police and media lies to suit a political agenda which was utterly anti football) has gone.
Anyway, just had a message from Paul Camillin asking me to go and discuss the issue with Paul Barber and Martin Perry. Have suggested that Mark, who started the ball rolling on this, come along as well. I shall reflect the majority view expressed on here (and to me personally, time and time again, not just at the Albion but by the football fans I meet up and down the country) that safe standing should be CONSIDERED as a viable option in the future, if/when that option becomes legally available. That's all.

I find it staggering that people expect, if this is passed, in a <5 year old stadium, we carry out major re-engineering of one of the stands to allow this. As insinuated, who would pay for this? Tony Bloom clearly won't, so it will be the fans, and we already have the moaner brigade out at £28 upwards for an FA Cup game, so god knows what will happen if, say, £20m of re-engineering work is needed, as well as growing a Championship team.

 

[drew]

Drew, the point I was making is that the main factor in both the awful tragedies at Hillsborough and Bradford was bad safety procedure and ground condition NOT seats or terrace. Let's not start getting into grotesque detail. And after the Hillsborough verdict the main lynchpin of the anti safe standing argument (manufactured at the time through police and media lies to suit a political agenda which was utterly anti football) has gone.
Anyway, just had a message from Paul Camillin asking me to go and discuss the issue with Paul Barber and Martin Perry. Have suggested that Mark, who started the ball rolling on this, come along as well. I shall reflect the majority view expressed on here (and to me personally, time and time again, not just at the Albion but by the football fans I meet up and down the country) that safe standing should be CONSIDERED as a viable option in the future, if/when that option becomes legally available. That's all.

And I don't disagree that terracing was the main factor or cause, I've never said otherwise but it was almost certainly a factor in the outcomes. But those proponents of safe standing need to accept that but demonstrate, which I assume the roadshow does, that the new systems are not the same as old terracing. I haven't stated that I think the modern safe standing terrace is a major safety issue but it is an aspect that will be taken into account.

I find it staggering that people expect, if this is passed, in a <5 year old stadium, we carry out major re-engineering of one of the stands to allow this. As insinuated, who would pay for this? Tony Bloom clearly won't, so it will be the fans, and we already have the moaner brigade out at £28 upwards for an FA Cup game, so god knows what will happen if, say, £20m of re-engineering work is needed, as well as growing a Championship team.

Have to agree that I think this will be the major stumbling block.

 

[drew]

And I don't disagree that terracing was the main factor or cause, I've never said otherwise but it was almost certainly a factor in the outcomes. But those proponents of safe standing need to accept that but demonstrate, which I assume the roadshow does, that the new systems are not the same as old terracing. I haven't stated that I think the modern safe standing terrace is a major safety issue but it is an aspect that will be taken into account.



Have to agree that I think this will be the major stumbling block.

Sorry, that should have read that terracing wasn't the main factor.

 

[Acker79]

I'm largely indifferent to standing. I think people who want to stand seem to have a sense of entitlement with attitudes such as "if you want to sit, go somewhere else", ignoring that those people may want to sit in the north stand for a reason (preferred view, cost, tradition etc). But conversely, the people who want to sit equally have that sense of entitlement, "I want to sit *here*, so you can't stand and ruin my day".

I don't know what the answer to that is.


But I thought I would highlight something that I think is being overlooked re the hillsborough. My reading is that a lot of the problems that resulted in the disaster were born out of a cultural problem. Fans were not treated as human beings, so they stopped acting like them. The report cites bad facilities, leading to people urinating on walls when they wouldn't think of doing it outside of football, degrading stands not being seen as an issue because of the people who stood there. Part of the 'benefit' of seats is that people are given their own space, it is dignified and 'proper' so everyone remembers they human beings and treat them so/act as them.

I think many of the negatives of standing are related to this attitude of dehumanising people because they are a group of standers rather than individuals with seats and their own allocated space.

I suppose that is one of the benefits of safe standing. Space is allocated, people are treated as individuals, and the seats would need maintenance the same as seats all around the stadium.


I tend to agree with those that say it isn't financially sensible for us at the moment, but generally speaking I'm indifferent. As a kid I started as a sitting fan in the south end of the goldstone, then started to stand in the west and north, and am now back to sitting. I don't have anything against standing, but also feel fans are just as passionate and devout whether they sit or stand, so don't understand/agree with those that feel you have to stand to support the team, to sing, to create atmosphere.