[Football] Safe standing trial for top two divisions approved

[vegster]

Its amazing that paying for a ticket and to not be given a seat for that money is lauded as a good thing, what mugs we are !

 

[Brovion]

No point in limiting the question to those you know will say yes. This is not something to be decided by popular vote. The club has to decide based on the implications for it.

Indeed. For years the Authorities turned a blind eye to standing. There were the odd slaps on wrists - reduced ticket allowances etc, but basically the rules were regularly and routinely flouted by thousands at grounds all over the country. The combination of mass disobedience to an ill-thought out rule and impotent authorities unable and/or unwilling to enforce the regulations lead to the worst of all worlds where you had 'Standers' and 'Sitters' sharing the same space and pissing each other off.

Now sanity has prevailed and there is now a legal way for people to stand at football. Great, and I think my position has changed. Having for years supported (and been one of) those who blatantly flouted the rules and stood as much as possible I now think the rules need to be enforced. No more blind eyes. The North Stand is all-seater and therefore people must be seated. If people persist on breaking the rules by continuing to stand then the Stand needs to be closed by the Licensing Authorities. And if the club don't like it, well there IS a solution.

 

[drew]

Now, I don't necessarily disagree with you, insofar as any money (relatively small in the context of a PL club budget) spent on safe seating is ultimately being spent on improving a proportion of fan's matchday experience, rather than anything else it could be spent on.

But to claim that a rail at (roughly) hip level presents an equivalent risk to something at shin or knee level is clearly absolute bollocks, and only weakens the argument that you're trying to make.

Well it isn't bollocks. On the previous thread about this someone was claiming it would prevent all the injuries yet had no evidence, despite us being at the Amex for 10 years, of these injuries.

 

[Easy 10]

It’s not the important thing ultimately though.

Some people want to stand. They do now in certain areas at the Amex and see it as their right away from home.

Some people prefer to sit, but have to stand - particularly away from home - because others refuse to sit in an all seater stadium.

Give people a choice and it will naturally sort itself out. Demand might even increase from those who are fed up with either being asked constantly to sit when they want to stand or have to stand when they don’t want to.

I don't disagree with any of that.

But I was replying to someone who seems to think that installing safe standing will directly lead to more noise = better atmosphere = more success on the pitch, which is (IMO) utter bobbins. Its nothing like a return to terraces as we once knew them (and even then its not like the atmosphere was always jumping).

To reiterate, I'm certainly not against the club installing safe standing in the NS. I'm WSU and have no intention of moving, so its no skin off my nose. I just don't think its the panacea that some supporters are painting or imagining it as.

However...if they converted the NS to rail seating and had it as "stand where you want", first come first served - that would be a gamechanger. Just buy a NS season ticket and congregate with your mates anywhere you like for each game, that would be great (albeit some people would be pissed off at getting displaced, but you can't please everyone can you).

 

[Dave the OAP]

Can’t see the problem. We all stand in the north stand anyway!

 

[Moshe Gariani]

And the people who applied for tickets for the back four rows of the NS did so on the basis the club would turn a blind eye to standing. Anyone could apply for a rail seat season ticket and may have no interest in singing themselves, they just hope to be amongst it.

A few passengers wouldn't be a problem. The thing that matters is having the 300 or so people who would enjoy leading The Amex atmosphere in a group clustered together - rather than spread out across 50m at the back of the NS.

 

[Worthing exile]

I am in favour of safe standing as long as it allows people to sit nearer the front.

And if it creates more noise, great, but I am bored of those Palace songs. Time to think of some new ones?

 

[Insel affe]

I am in favour of safe standing as long as it allows people to sit nearer the front.

And if it creates more noise, great, but I am bored of those Palace songs. Time to think of some new ones?

hmmm...

what about....

"Sit down if you want safe standing"

 

[Moshe Gariani]

I am in favour of safe standing as long as it allows people to sit nearer the front.

And if it creates more noise, great, but I am bored of those Palace songs. Time to think of some new ones?

Klopp was interesting recently when asked about the Liverpool fans' singing and support. Also linked to this was GP clapping the Swansea fans when they sang his name last night - he was clapping them almost as quickly as I could first hear the chant. Point is that at pitch level the players and manager DO very much hear and notice what the fans are singing.

Their favourite chants are the positive ones in support/praise of individual players. This works for the player themselves and for the others because the crowd is getting behind their team-mate.

On chants about other clubs or directed at the away fans, Klopp said that does nothing positive for the team. For me, there is still an obvious place for enjoying rivalry but focus on supporting our players is better.

 

[rippleman]

Indeed. For years the Authorities turned a blind eye to standing. There were the odd slaps on wrists - reduced ticket allowances etc, but basically the rules were regularly and routinely flouted by thousands at grounds all over the country. The combination of mass disobedience to an ill-thought out rule and impotent authorities unable and/or unwilling to enforce the regulations lead to the worst of all worlds where you had 'Standers' and 'Sitters' sharing the same space and pissing each other off.

Now sanity has prevailed and there is now a legal way for people to stand at football. Great, and I think my position has changed. Having for years supported (and been one of) those who blatantly flouted the rules and stood as much as possible I now think the rules need to be enforced. No more blind eyes. The North Stand is all-seater and therefore people must be seated. If people persist on breaking the rules by continuing to stand then the Stand needs to be closed by the Licensing Authorities. And if the club don't like it, well there IS a solution.

Well....fortunately you appear to be a lone voice in the wilderness. Why you would invite the authorities to impose sanctions on the club you claim to support?

Let me remind you that all-seater stadia came about because of the Taylor Report. That report was based on a conspiracy of lies by police officers who were responsible for the Hillsborough disaster. Had the police carried out their duties, and then not conspired to lie to Taylor LJ (as well as inquests and other enquiries) about the myriad of errors and mistakes, would Taylor have come to the same conclusion? We will never know.

The back six rows of the NS have always had permission to stand and, since our promotion season, the club's stewards have taken a far more relaxed and pragmatic attitude to standing elsewhere in the NS. The club and stewards deserve great credit in adopting this approach. Have deaths or serious injuries been caused by standing supporters? No, of course not.

I really hope that just because there is the odd weirdo around suggesting that sanctions should be imposed on the club, that it won't result in any change of policy.

 

[studio150]

I really hope that just because there is the odd weirdo around suggesting that sanctions should be imposed on the club, that it won't result in any change of policy.

But it may not be the odd lone voice, if the Government accept that the trials have been a success they may demand that there is a crackdown at grounds where standing is occurring in sections of the ground where safe standing is not present.

We will see

 

[Brovion]

Well....fortunately you appear to be a lone voice in the wilderness. Why you would invite the authorities to impose sanctions on the club you claim to support?

....

To recap my post: the current situation is a mess (and not just at Brighton). The rule is: no standing - and yet thousands do. The 'Standers' piss off the 'Sitters', the stewards sometimes try and enforce the rule but if the weight of number are against them they simply don't bother, and the authorities don't punish clubs where the fans persistently stand (which is every big club).

This has meant that 'de-facto' standing areas have arisen, such as the back two or three rows of the North Stand, but surely no one believes that this is a satisfactory situation? How far down can you stand? Can you stand in the ESL? Or at away games? What if you normally stand but this time you've got some old codger behind you with dodgy knees who can't stand?

As I said it was a mess. The Authorities have finally recognised this and now we have a solution; it is now possible to establish areas where fans can legally stand. However as we've seen from this thread the demand for standing areas is far from overwhelming, and I've no doubt if there was a poll of all fans the 'Standers' would lose. The club can then say 'no demand' and leave it at that. But there IS a demand as is amply demonstrated every match. So unless the North Stand are going to all sit down from now on we need a standing area so everybody knows exactly where they, er, stand. There is now no excuse to continue with the current situation, (at Brighton or anywhere else) and yes, if the Licensing Authorities have to give clubs a nudge then fine.

 

[blockhseagull]

To recap my post: the current situation is a mess (and not just at Brighton). The rule is: no standing - and yet thousands do. The 'Standers' piss off the 'Sitters', the stewards sometimes try and enforce the rule but if the weight of number are against them they simply don't bother, and the authorities don't punish clubs where the fans persistently stand (which is every big club).

This has meant that 'de-facto' standing areas have arisen, such as the back two or three rows of the North Stand, but surely no one believes that this is a satisfactory situation? How far down can you stand? Can you stand in the ESL? Or at away games? What if you normally stand but this time you've got some old codger behind you with dodgy knees who can't stand?

As I said it was a mess. The Authorities have finally recognised this and now we have a solution; it is now possible to establish areas where fans can legally stand. However as we've seen from this thread the demand for standing areas is far from overwhelming, and I've no doubt if there was a poll of all fans the 'Standers' would lose. The club can then say 'no demand' and leave it at that. But there IS a demand as is amply demonstrated every match. So unless the North Stand are going to all sit down from now on we need a standing area so everybody knows exactly where they, er, stand. There is now no excuse to continue with the current situation, (at Brighton or anywhere else) and yes, if the Licensing Authorities have to give clubs a nudge then fine.

Or fans will just get ejected for standing which helps absolutely no one.

I don’t think a few rows standing can at this time be evidence of enough demand for the club to consider it.

Maybe other clubs fans have been far more proactive and demanding in their desire for safe standing, I do remember the response to the club questionnaire being ‘lukewarm’ so maybe there isn’t a real demand for it.

It needs to be more than a couple of the back rows and a few odd standers to make it viable for the club to spend the ££££

 

[sully]

Or fans will just get ejected for standing which helps absolutely no one.

I don’t think a few rows standing can at this time be evidence of enough demand for the club to consider it.

Maybe other clubs fans have been far more proactive and demanding in their desire for safe standing, I do remember the response to the club questionnaire being ‘lukewarm’ so maybe there isn’t a real demand for it.

It needs to be more than a couple of the back rows and a few odd standers to make it viable for the club to spend the ££££

I’m guessing you don’t do away games. Everyone stands. It’s not “a few” nor just the back rows. If it was, we’d all accept that is wasn’t a goer.

As I and others have repeatedly said, the questionnaire from the club was cleverly worded to get a negative response. They knew what answer they wanted and engineered it. A more honest set of questions might get a very different response.

Unless you sit in the North Stand and don’t want to move or stand, I can’t see why anyone would object. The North Stand predominantly stand up already, so why would they object if they didn’t have a seat to sit on?

 

[drew]

So if there was safe standing, where do people think it should go and for how many? It would have to be located where it doesn't affect the view of others so that means the back rows. Guess what, the back rows of the north stand already stand.

 

[sully]

So if there was safe standing, where do people think it should go and for how many? It would have to be located where it doesn't affect the view of others so that means the back rows. Guess what, the back rows of the north stand already stand.

The South should have it too. Maybe the Eastern end of it. It’s about time away ends at all grounds catered for people who want to sit. [emoji6]

 

[e77]

If the questionnaire from the club was written to get a negative response, that probably gives a fair indication of the likelihood of the club doing it.

 

[portlock seagull]

Want to stand
Always stood behind goal, Goldstone, P & A. Southstander at W.
Don’t mind people having a beer
Don’t want to get soaked by idiots chucking their beer about though.

You simply can’t have the first 3 without creating the last as a by product. It’s a no from me therefore. Football and our culture invalidates any comparative arguments with other sports or indeed countries. That’s right, “we” can’t be trusted and “we” know it!

 

[blockhseagull]

I’m guessing you don’t do away games. Everyone stands. It’s not “a few” nor just the back rows. If it was, we’d all accept that is wasn’t a goer.

As I and others have repeatedly said, the questionnaire from the club was cleverly worded to get a negative response. They knew what answer they wanted and engineered it. A more honest set of questions might get a very different response.

Unless you sit in the North Stand and don’t want to move or stand, I can’t see why anyone would object. The North Stand predominantly stand up already, so why would they object if they didn’t have a seat to sit on?

Yes attend most away games, my point isn’t about other clubs it is about ours.

I don’t have an objection, and don’t see an issue with safe standing myself.

My point was mainly based around the club not being that keen and the post saying that closing stands to force clubs to install safe standing would force their hand, which I think would lead to fans being ejected before the club would allow it to get to a stage where stands were shut.

Unless my memory is failing me I don’t think it’s the questionnaire that the club have based this on completely, I do remember there was a forum regarding safe standing also which was also poorly attended.

 

[Charlies Shinpad]

I bet if the club contacted all the STH in the North Stand and asked the question 'are you happy to stand at all future games?"
It would be a resounding YES vote

Sent from my CPH2195 using Tapatalk