Cheeky Monkey
Well-known member
- Jul 17, 2003
- 23,884
For me it's a necessary but too sanitised version of standing that holds no appeal whatsoever.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Safe standing
- Thread starter TomandJerry
- Start date
For me it's a necessary but too sanitised version of standing that holds no appeal whatsoever.
Whatever you do, don't mention that bloody thread from this morning.
The Birdman
New member
Sod safe standing we need a stannah lift for the WSU 
sir albion
New member
Safe standing?
It was always safe bar a few injuries and that's in over 100 years of standing in packed terraces throughout the many decades this country had it.
Should never have stopped it...
It was always safe bar a few injuries and that's in over 100 years of standing in packed terraces throughout the many decades this country had it.
Should never have stopped it...
I'm all for modern safe standing, but what you've written there is absolute nonsense, isn't it.
Oh dear. Been told off?
Actually, statistically it isn't nonsense. Train travel is intrinsically safe, but occasionally accidents do happen. More people were killed by trains than mishaps in crowded terraces at football matches. Far more people were killed on the roads.
I hate to say anything that might seem supportive of the anti-smoking fascists - but far more people have been killed by smoking than through mishaps on football terraces.
Getting pissed on through a rolled up newspaper by a bloke two rows back - yeh, happened all the time. But getting killed? No - pretty unlikely.
pastafarian
Well-known member
can only think those that are 100% against safe standing are those that have never been to a boisterous away game where safe seating is anything but.
Not everyone is able to. Additionally, it's extremely unfair on short people.
However, I'm reasonably tall and much prefer to stand.
The main point is that if there's a choice like there used to be, there's no excuse for standing up in the seated areas. I don't recall it ever happening before terraces were removed.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
The club have visited Celtic & Dortmund, to see how safe standing is done. According to the Argus, this morning, seems willing to change to safe standing, as soon as legislation is changed to allow it.
I just hope they keep some cheap seats for us oldies, who can no longer stand for 90 minutes.
I just hope they keep some cheap seats for us oldies, who can no longer stand for 90 minutes.
Folk at the Argus seem to think that the Amex could be the first English stadium to adopt safe-standing if the law changes soon. This can only be good. Sections of the north & south would be the first to undergo the change one would imagine?
Whoislloydy
Well-known member
I imagine safe standing will be North Stand only.
FINALLY! now the boring f*cks behind me will have to stand and stop telling me they can't see
FINALLY! now the boring f*cks behind me will have to stand and stop telling me they can't see
TWOCHOICEStom
Well-known member
Because it wasn't sitting in its allocated seat?
Hmmm, I take your point but think there is a major difference between the need to move about and optional engagement of a leisure activity such as watching sport. People paid their money and were treated like animals. People at Ibrox, Heysel, Hillsborough and Bradford (seats but wooden and fenced off from the pitch) all lost their lives because safety wasn't considered an important enough issue to invest in.
Something needed to be done. Granted, we want the option of safe standing because it is now a possible scenario, but to do nothing was not an option. And sir albion announcing there was nothing wrong and we should have just carried on as it was is just moronic.
Worried Man Blues
Well-known member
If safe standing did get introduced I am sure it will not be the way we would wish, as if we all wish for the same thing!
Let the short people sit at the front?