Safe Standing Areas

[The Large One]

Just because the authorities may not want a return to terraces, and just because we still seem to be a long way from making that return in no way makes me want to be so defeatist as to want to 'give it up'. I find that attitude appalling.

I'm in.

 

[SUSD]

yeah those seat things would work alright and I agree, no reason why they cant have them, if they increase capacity ever so slightly then football clubs would surely consider it.

Which leads me to ask this, why not us at Falmer? could we not of pushed for that design in the North Stand? would it work properly? do the rules state we cant have that type of seating/standing combo?

Well to my knowledge there is no leglisation that stops you putting in these Kombi Seats at Brighton, and with the new ground its a brillant opportunity. But it seems no club is willing to lead and do it first. Morecambe looks like it will be having terracing in its new stadium which is a first for a while. Don't take my word for it but I'm sure i've heard it is £50 to install one of these seats, so for a club to install say 500 it would be £25k

 

[attila]

Obviously I would like to see terraces come back, as would a huge number of fans. Why should we be the odd ones out in Europe? There has certainly been some fairly low key parliamentary debate on the subject, and, as far as I am aware, a large number of MPs - certainly the majority of those who love football - are on our side. I have it from a very good (Liverpudlian) source that the stumbling block is the continued opposition of the committee representing the relatives of those killed at Hillsborough. Although other people who were involved in the tragedy recognise that it was bad crowd control, not terraces, which killed those people, as long as there is a substantial number opposed to safe standing, it has far less chance of happening, because the political parties are scared to address the issue. As I say, this is what I have heard, and it's from a Liverpool fan who was there and supports safe standing.

 

[Hungry Joe]

Which leads me to ask this, why not us at Falmer? could we not of pushed for that design in the North Stand? would it work properly? do the rules state we cant have that type of seating/standing combo?

Do you reckon the North Stand at Falmer will be the closest thing to the old Goldstone North Stand in terms of atmosphere? It'd be good to know in advance as it will influence where I get my seat.

 

[Storer68]

So the Germans went from standing stadia, to all seater, back to part standing/part seated.... but we cant do it? Ok.

If you don't think it's possible just keep shut.

It's only been possible in Germany where they have built completely NEW stadiums and incorporated the system into the design. The safe seating that transforms itself into terraces, takes up 40% more space than their seating requires, and makes a stadium footprint that much bigger. Makes it almost impossible to convert an existing ground to use it so can only be realistaclly used in brand spanking new grounbds, like Falmer. If we had incorporated this into Falmer, we would never have got the stadium to fit into the space that we now have.

Oh and it's ll take a little bit more than a Facebook site for the politicos to change the law. You will need a new Football Spaectators Act to overwrite the existing one.

Not impossible but a really long hard slog.

 

[Brighton till i die]

north stand @ falmer built as terraces would be FLAIR!

 

[teaboy]

Hillsborough? Heysel?

But more than this its the image it creates. Being on terracing moving around as the crowd surges and moves around is great fun, but the image it portrays is not the family friendly one that football wants.

Neither Hillsborough or Hysel were caused by people satnding on terracing to watch a football match.

Hillsbourough was caused by having TOO MANY people in a CAGED terracing area that they couldn't get out of. Hysel was caused by hooliganism and a stadium not fit for purpose.

There is NO reason that traditional terracing cannot be safe, especially in the world of all-ticket matches. Imagine forcing 150,000 into Old Trafford's seating - not going to be pretty, and people would probably die. It isn't sitting or standing that causes problems, it's sheer numbers of people admitted into a confined space.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

I don't believe the clubs are motivated by safety concerns for one second. They can charge considerably more for a seat than they could for a terrace spot, and therefore they have no financial incentive whatsoever to change back to standing spaces. And they have a convenient excuse of the Taylor Report to hide behind.

Let's face it, the Hillsborough disaster marked a watershed in football history, when stadiums went from being run down, crappy old sheds to the gleaming, plastic temples they are today, at around the same time that Sky jumped on board, and the sport became gentrified. Attendances now are significantly higher than they were at the end of the 1980s, and the men in charge of the money equate that fact with the improvement in facilities. They don't give a toss about atmosphere in games, only how much cash they can rake in from more upwardly mobile supporters and corporate box-holders.

I would love to see a club stick its head above the parapet and do something different with regard to standing, but the only ones who have the incentive to do so are the more mediocre PL clubs whose support is starting to dwindle- eg Bolton, Wigan- and they are far too scared of upsetting the PL to be the ones to take the first steps.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

Neither Hillsborough or Hysel were caused by people satnding on terracing to watch a football match.

Hillsbourough was caused by having TOO MANY people in a CAGED terracing area that they couldn't get out of. Hysel was caused by hooliganism and a stadium not fit for purpose.

There is NO reason that traditional terracing cannot be safe, especially in the world of all-ticket matches. Imagine forcing 150,000 into Old Trafford's seating - not going to be pretty, and people would probably die. It isn't sitting or standing that causes problems, it's sheer numbers of people admitted into a confined space.

It might not be pretty but can't see how you could get the same sort of crushing when there are rows of seats in the way.

Anyway, I agree with you that terracing could be safe.

My point though is more about the image that terracing creates and how that image isn't really the image that football authorities want to put across. They want a family friendly image that appeals to sponsors and investors, not something that appeals to males between 16 and 45.

 

[attila]

Neither Hillsborough or Hysel were caused by people satnding on terracing to watch a football match.

Hillsbourough was caused by having TOO MANY people in a CAGED terracing area that they couldn't get out of. Hysel was caused by hooliganism and a stadium not fit for purpose.


Absolutely correct.
A few months before the Heysel disaster, myself and a few mates went to Belgium v Albania in a WC qualifier. (Why? Because we could.) We staggered into the 'away' end after an awful lot of Belgian beer (we were, for obvious reasons, nearly the only ones there) and were shocked at the state of the terrace - FAR WORSE than the condemned bits at the Goldstone in the last few awful years. Stray lumps of concrete, weeds sprouting through, unbelievable. Then I leaned heavily on a crash barrier and it simply gave way, leaving me in a crumpled heap on the ground. When I saw the disaster unfold I thought back to that day and a shiver ran down my spine.
But to say that it ws due to terracing is like saying that Bradford was due to seats. It was due to the authorities not putting basic safety measures in place. In both cases.
And the two disasters played into the hands of a government with a massive anti-football agenda. I's sure some of you remember Colin Moynihan. And I'm equally sure that the memory makes you feel ill. As it does me.

 

[teaboy]

What image to Reading have? They have a lovely ground and there aren't people there disturbing the peace. How are they seen in football?

What sort of image do Millwall have? They have a similar stadium, not vastly differing crowds. How are they seen outside football?

Personally I think there's room for everyone in football. Have terraced areas behind goals, seating on the sides or top tiers on the ends. Atmosphere returns, those wanting to avoid it have plenty of space. A lower ticket price will be available, but potential attendances increase. Everyone's a winner!

How are the 'safe-standing' seats? What's the view like behind the metal railing when seated?

 

[Acker79]

Why terracing behind the goals? I mean, if we're thinking of making a compromise, isn't it better for the terrace to the side of the pitch, half way up, even?

I mean, if one of the supposed safety issues is the crowd being excited by a goal, and wanting to join in the celebrations, do we want to put the terrace at the place where the players are closest to after scoring?

 

[Brovion]

I don't believe the clubs are motivated by safety concerns for one second. They can charge considerably more for a seat than they could for a terrace spot, and therefore they have no financial incentive whatsoever to change back to standing spaces. And they have a convenient excuse of the Taylor Report to hide behind.

Let's face it, the Hillsborough disaster marked a watershed in football history, when stadiums went from being run down, crappy old sheds to the gleaming, plastic temples they are today, at around the same time that Sky jumped on board, and the sport became gentrified. Attendances now are significantly higher than they were at the end of the 1980s, and the men in charge of the money equate that fact with the improvement in facilities. They don't give a toss about atmosphere in games, only how much cash they can rake in from more upwardly mobile supporters and corporate box-holders.

I would love to see a club stick its head above the parapet and do something different with regard to standing, but the only ones who have the incentive to do so are the more mediocre PL clubs whose support is starting to dwindle- eg Bolton, Wigan- and they are far too scared of upsetting the PL to be the ones to take the first steps.

That is pretty much my view. The old crammed terraces have gone for good; when it comes to fixing capacities a 'safe standing' area will not have nearly the same density of occupation per square foot as an old-fashioned terrace. Indeed I'm guessing that in terms of capacity it won't be that much greater than the equivalent sized all-seater area.

Therein lies the rub. Fans will expect to pay a lot less to stand than to sit, and I reckon that a fair few (such as myself) who currently have to sit will happily switch to a standing area. Consequently the clubs can see that terraces = reduced revenue with the added 'problem' that some will see it as a return to the bad old days. As Edna says it's far easier just to hide behind the Taylor report - if the clubs thought they could increase revenue by supporting a return to terraces they'd be agitating for it at every opportunity. As it is can you really imagine Man U supporting a safe standing campaign when they can sell every seat?

There is an interesting thread on here asking if we'd be prepared to pay MORE to stand. That's an extrememely interesting concept and one I hadn't considered before - would I be prepared to pay a bit more for a better (IMO) match day experience? Do you know I think I might; just to get the ball rolling.

 

[Brovion]

Absolutely correct.
A few months before the Heysel disaster, myself and a few mates went to Belgium v Albania in a WC qualifier. (Why? Because we could.) We staggered into the 'away' end after an awful lot of Belgian beer (we were, for obvious reasons, nearly the only ones there) and were shocked at the state of the terrace - FAR WORSE than the condemned bits at the Goldstone in the last few awful years. Stray lumps of concrete, weeds sprouting through, unbelievable. Then I leaned heavily on a crash barrier and it simply gave way, leaving me in a crumpled heap on the ground.

Remember it well! Long live the Glorious Peoples' Republic!

 

[Storer68]

'Safety' and 'comfort' seem to be the over-riding values at football matches these days. I think they trump 'choice' in this respect.

Now, there is a case to be made that safety and comfort doesn't necessarily mean you have to have all-seater stadium, that the Taylor Report response to Hillsborough was an over-reaction.

However, the SUSD website does nothing to dismantle the assumptions that have prevailed since 1989. It seems to be doing nothing to speak into the concerns of the people at the top it needs to get on board.

To say that the Taylor report was an "over reaction" to hillsborough beggars belief.

96 people did not come home from a game at a ground which had a designated safety certficiate, which had been insepcted and passed as safe for the amount of people and which had hosted this type of event successfully without an incident.

The reaction at the time was one of "something HAS to change and change NOW". Spectators had been complaiining about stadia that were no longer fit for purpose (and being caged in a pen just to watch a game) for years (everyone has a tale of standing ankle deep in urine at Wembley during a Cup Final!).

People had died at heysel,

had died at bradford

and now died at Hillsbrough

. Something had to change to improve ground diesign before something like this happened again (as it would)

 

[Sergei's Celebration]

I don't believe the clubs are motivated by safety concerns for one second...far too scared of upsetting the PL to be the ones to take the first steps.

Totally agree with this. But it is no coincidence that during the years of english football being banned from europe, the english game looked inside and went on a long term course to be a power house in world football, with money, glamor and success. There is the school of thought that had this not happened we would be in a similar position financially and football(y?) as Germany. A strong footballing nation but at the club level leaking talent to other leagues.

I also agree that the top level club decisions are based on finance and finance alone. They are a business and if that business model shows the margins are greater for added 'luxury' of seats then the terraces are a thing of the past. The quality of the stadiums because of the all seater rule has changed beyond recognition and i think for the better.

What makes the difference to a stadium and thus the match is the stewarding policy. If this is flawed it hampers the enjoyment. If it works well then the game is a delight. Sort this out then no one will care if they stand or sit as it will become immaterial.

 

[bristolseagull]

Just because the authorities may not want a return to terraces, and just because we still seem to be a long way from making that return in no way makes me want to be so defeatist as to want to 'give it up'. I find that attitude appalling.

I'm in.

you're 'in'?? what, have you joined the facebook group or something??


defeatist?? REALIST mate.