[Albion] Safe Standing Survey Results

[Dick Swiveller]

Can we get our terminology straight for going forward? What are we calling those that don't accept the vote was valid? Restanders? Standmoaners? And those that are happy with the outcome? Seat Means Seaters? Standexiteers?

Personally, I am happy with people standing at other grounds as long as they don't come near my ground. Sit means sit.

 

[A1X]

Can we get our terminology straight for going forward? What are we calling those that don't accept the vote was valid? Restanders? Standmoaners? And those that are happy with the outcome? Seat Means Seaters? Standexiteers?

Personally, I am happy with people standing at other grounds as long as they don't come near my ground. Sit means sit.

Now the results are in we should only consider a "Hard Sitting" option. Which probably involves superglue.

 

[Dick Swiveller]

Now the results are in we should only consider a "Hard Sitting" option. Which probably involves superglue.

Plenty of Non League grounds these people pass that they could stand up at. The Amex sells out - there is no more room.

 

[dazzer6666]

I don’t agree this should be funded directly by the fans. There must be a pot for stadium upkeep and enhancements etc…take out of that. Eg when all the lounges were upgraded our ticket prices did not got up specifically to pay for this. Same with the blue, now white, plans for the roof being redone. Obviously the cost is in there somewhere but then so are many things relating to the infrastructure.

That said, Installing safe standing can’t cost that much….spread over 30 odd thousand for a few seasons it shouldn’t be much of an uplift.

Me neither…….I was suggesting another question, and my point re cost was that anyone not wanting to stand and moving out the NS would almost certainly have to move into a higher cost ST block

 

[Thunder Bolt]

From the outset it felt like the club had already decided that this wasn't going to happen, and the survey was just a token gesture to the Fans Forum.

As more and more clubs have it installed (for safety!) it is going to happen eventually, but until then the club are happy to kick that can down the road as it's an overhead that's not going to generate any additional revenue.

Only 5000 odd people bothered to fill in the survey. That is the problem.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Me neither…….I was suggesting another question, and my point re cost was that anyone not wanting to stand and moving out the NS would almost certainly have to move into a higher cost ST block

Fair point regarding it being more expensive elsewhere.

 

[PeterT]

Now the results are in we should only consider a "Hard Sitting" option. Which probably involves superglue.

Airline style seat belts would work better, and this could be better policed with instructions given on the scoreboards. Maybe get an airline to sponsor the announcements to bring in a bit of extra revenue.

 

[Beanstalk]

I think it's a shame, but I'm not surprised.

I thought there would be more of a universal clamour for safe standing but in a few of the WhatsApp groups I saw real distaste for the idea, especially from older fans. Ultimately, tickets are pricier and fans are getting older and older. The priority for them is comfort.

 

[dazzer6666]

I think it's a shame, but I'm not surprised.

I thought there would be more of a universal clamour for safe standing but in a few of the WhatsApp groups I saw real distaste for the idea, especially from older fans. Ultimately, tickets are pricier and fans are getting older and older. The priority for them is comfort.

I don’t really get the distaste tbh - it wouldn’t be compulsory, it would be a relatively small section in the NS (probably where most are already standing anyway) filled with only those who wanted it. It could have been presented differently - for example proposing say ‘the top half of 3 NS blocks to be considered ie xxx seats), anyone in those not wanting it can move to anywhere else available, those wanting to move into the safe standing area subject to ballot if numbers exceed availability…..etc’.

An elderly fan sitting in ESU who has no wish to move doesn’t need to worry, and shouldn’t really care that much…….

 

[Beanstalk]

I don’t really get the distaste tbh - it wouldn’t be compulsory, it would be a relatively small section in the NS (probably where most are already standing anyway) filled with only those who wanted it. It could have been presented differently - for example proposing say ‘the top half of 3 NS blocks to be considered ie xxx seats), anyone in those not wanting it can move to anywhere else available, those wanting to move into the safe standing area subject to ballot if numbers exceed availability…..etc’.

An elderly fan sitting in ESU who has no wish to move doesn’t need to worry, and shouldn’t really care that much…….

Yes, I completely agree. It was quite a surprise to see how many disliked it and the reasons why. All felt very silly when you think about the reality, but I guess people, especially those of an older persuasion, don't like to be threatened with change, especially when that doesn't suit their current or future lifestyle.

Particularly annoying as I'm sure they weren't yelling in their twenties about how there needed to be a stricter enforcement of people sitting down at the football.

 

[BN9 BHA]

As an aside, I noticed (from photos) that fans were SITTING in the safe standing area at Wembley for the women's finalissima last week...

Two of my sons went to Spurs away on Saturday, they got told to sit down in the safe standing area by a steward. Some of our fans further back in the same area couldn’t see because they wanted to sit down.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

Me neither…….I was suggesting another question, and my point re cost was that anyone not wanting to stand and moving out the NS would almost certainly have to move into a higher cost ST block

Had wondered who the beneficiaries of the rumoured south stand (pending POTENTIAL relocation of away to south west) would be, maybe the north stand “seaters” on the same zone A price point?

Assuming there was room from the south west season ticket holders.

Saying that, for atmosphere would it be better for the south to be unofficial standing based on proximity to the away fans, on the assumption that the standers would be louder?

Made sense when I started typing this, not so sure now!

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Yes, I completely agree. It was quite a surprise to see how many disliked it and the reasons why. All felt very silly when you think about the reality, but I guess people, especially those of an older persuasion, don't like to be threatened with change, especially when that doesn't suit their current or future lifestyle.

Particularly annoying as I'm sure they weren't yelling in their twenties about how there needed to be a stricter enforcement of people sitting down at the football.

As an older person, who doesn't object to change, I do think 'lifestyle' is very much a strange reason. Nobody chooses arthritis or dodgy health conditions as they age.
I did complete the survey, said I was in favour of safe standing, and also said I am in the North, and that I stand occasionally when the game is exciting ie Albion attacking the north goal.

 

[Dibdab]

From my point of view, even though the presentation of the data is very poor and biased, the only reason to bring it in is if it will improve the atmosphere. I don't think I've really seen it anywhere and thought it was making any difference on that front? If it would help then its something the club should really consider.

 

[nickbrighton]

This survey was sent to 26000 STH plus albion plus members, so well over 30 000 fans had the oportunity to have their say if they wanted Safe standing only 4500 were bothered enough to respond, and of that less than half wanted to use safe standing

Of the North Stand (where presumably the majority of safe standing would be) there are now less (% wise) wanting it than before, so from even our most vocal fans there are more that arent overly fussed about it, and the number that are, is reducing

The club have a finite amount of money to spend . Is it any surprise that they are choosing to spend it for the benifit of the whole fanbase, rather than a small minority

I have seen much more clmour for better facilities outside and inside the stadium than for safe standing on this forum, and thats what we are apparantly getting, better facilities for the vast majority, rather than for a small and reducing minority- I really cant see the problem

 

[ozzygull]

I think survey should only be sent to North Stand Season ticket holders only, as it really only affects them.

I said yes to safe standing but it's not going to happen in the WSU. I choose that area because it's got a good view and only being 5ft 3 on a good day, I prefer not to have people standing in front of me.

I have no issues with people standing in the North Stand if that is what they want to do.

 

[PeterT]

From my point of view, even though the presentation of the data is very poor and biased, the only reason to bring it in is if it will improve the atmosphere. I don't think I've really seen it anywhere and thought it was making any difference on that front? If it would help then it’s something the club should really consider.

At Wolves it seemed to help. I don’t have other examples to comment on in this country.

 

[Beanstalk]

As an older person, who doesn't object to change, I do think 'lifestyle' is very much a strange reason. Nobody chooses arthritis or dodgy health conditions as they age.
I did complete the survey, said I was in favour of safe standing, and also said I am in the North, and that I stand occasionally when the game is exciting ie Albion attacking the north goal.

Yes, I'm obviously generalising on the feedback I saw in the groups. It was more, "well I like sitting at games rather than standing, and I don't want to be put in a position where I have to stand to see the game." Most said they were annoyed at their experiences of this at away days, and the majority of those against safe standing seemed to want to go a step further and have a "dedicated sitting section" for away fans as part of our allocations. When I said lifestyle, I meant comfort than any health issues.

Obviously, not saying that we should turn the whole ground into safe standing but I think that a section for safe standing is a pretty easy compromise for all and I was surprised at how many saw it as a threat to their own way of attending football.

 

[Live by the sea]

I’m pleased , I hate standing unless we look like we might score !

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Yes, I'm obviously generalising on the feedback I saw in the groups. It was more, "well I like sitting at games rather than standing, and I don't want to be put in a position where I have to stand to see the game." Most said they were annoyed at their experiences of this at away days, and the majority of those against safe standing seemed to want to go a step further and have a "dedicated sitting section" for away fans as part of our allocations. When I said lifestyle, I meant comfort than any health issues.

Obviously, not saying that we should turn the whole ground into safe standing but I think that a section for safe standing is a pretty easy compromise for all and I was surprised at how many saw it as a threat to their own way of attending football.

I certainly agree with guaranteed sitting at away games because I have given up going to away games now, because of abuse and selfishness of our own fans. I used to ring Supporter Services to make sure I got a seat as near the front as possible, but still had fans standing up so I couldn't see the corner flag etc
The worse one was at Goodison Park where I was in the very front row, at the side of the pitch, and a wheelchair person was placed right in front of me. He was a very broad shouldered man, so basically all I could see was his back and shoulders. Luckily, an Everton steward noticed what had happened and came to invite me to sit in a carer's spot, a little further down. Not all stewards care, and spending a lot of money to look at someone's back is not my idea of fun.