Safe standing

[atomised]

Not so. SS options are varied one person per seat/spac, 1and a half or two per seat space ,which may emerge as options for the Amex. An increase in capacity would not require re modelling anything. I am sure that Exits, egress, concourses, stairs etc are built to fire regs not numbers of people, although it is a factor. The North stand could go 70% SS with normal seats for those who want them, with any of the above options for SS. If numbers were a problem we could just sick with one person per SS seat/space.

Id answer in exactly the way driver8 already has. The club have said time and again that capacity will not change with safe standing and nor would cost per space. I wasnt just saying it for the fun of it.

 

[BeHereNow]

So out of 100 voters, 74 say they want safe standing. Going back to the original question, was this reflected in clubs surveys?

Didn't Paul Barber day something like fans did want it at The Amex, but didn't necessarily want to use it? Seems a bit weird, as there must be atleast 2,500+ in the North Stand that would want to use it.

Maybe they should do another survey but only send it to North Standers. How many fans wanting it would get the club to consider to make an safe standing area?

If it turns out that half of the stand don't want it, then that explains why the atmosphere isn't always rocking and I was very wrong!

 

[BeHereNow]

Id answer in exactly the way driver8 already has. The club have said time and again that capacity will not change with safe standing and nor would cost per space. I wasnt just saying it for the fun of it.

They did say it was possible, but probably wouldn't go down that route. Didn't rule it out though.

 

[Bob'n'weave]

Paul Barber disagrees with you. He has said several times that there would be no increase in capacity due to the design of the exits/concourses.

Fine. Just go for the one for one SS option then.

 

[Bob'n'weave]

Id answer in exactly the way driver8 already has. The club have said time and again that capacity will not change with safe standing and nor would cost per space. I wasnt just saying it for the fun of it.

Again, fine. Just go for the one for one SS option. No increase in capacity at all.

 

[Perfidious Albion]

My answer would be - It all depends. The devil is in the detail. If it was introduced I would certainly try it and see if I liked it. Certainly standing at football was always better than sitting in the old days, as it is at small rock music gigs where you can can get into it better and bop around.

I had read once that each person was separated from the next one in his "pen" but that does not seem the case here.


Let us try it, then we can say...

 

[Bob'n'weave]

My answer would be - It all depends. The devil is in the detail. If it was introduced I would certainly try it and see if I liked it. Certainly standing at football was always better than sitting in the old days, as it is at small rock music gigs where you can can get into it better and bop around.

I had read once that each person was separated from the next one in his "pen" but that does not seem the case here.
View attachment 80820

Let us try it, then we can say...

Perfect example of SS in a UK ground. This in the NS with normal seats down the front, or as I suggested, in a sideways D or upside down wide V shape curve in the middle/front would be perfect, loads of noise and everyone gets a good view. No increase in capacity either.

 

[rippleman]

Paul Barber disagrees with you. He has said several times that there would be no increase in capacity due to the design of the exits/concourses.

He also said that SS would never be considered at the Amex. Totally ruled it out.

Pinch of salt?

 

[Bob'n'weave]

He also said that SS would never be considered at the Amex. Totally ruled it out.

Pinch of salt?

Yes, a large pinch.
http://www.seagulls.co.uk/news/article/2016-17/brighton-hove-albion-paul-barber-3349610.aspx

 

[Giraffe]

It's interesting how this poll shows 75% support for safe standing, and a large amount of this supporting the North Stand being converted fully.

I really do think it was the way the club handled their survey that led to the results they have suggested.

 

[Moshe Gariani]

Quick vote for SS.

Ideally on a 1.5 for 1 basis across the whole North and South Stands.

Would, IMHO, have a transformational effect on the atmosphere inside The Amex and the feel of the ground. A 50% increase in crowd density in the important atmosphere generating areas behind each goal would be very significant.

The increase in overall stadium capacity would be from 30,750 up to about 33,250 - which is only an 8% expansion and would surely be OK from planning, safety and transport perspectives.

Logistically very difficult to achieve, due to STHs in NS who prefer to sit, but far from impossible.

 

[Giraffe]

I'd change to safe standing behind both goals. Done. Yes some would moan, but overall the atmosphere would lift greatly to the benefit of the team. We are going to need to be intimidating if we go up, it's the only thing the small teams generally have over the big teams and I don't think we can argue we have that yet.

 

[Bob'n'weave]

Quick vote for SS.

Ideally on a 1.5 for 1 basis across the whole North and South Stands.

Would, IMHO, have a transformational effect on the atmosphere inside The Amex and the feel of the ground. A 50% increase in crowd density in the important atmosphere generating areas behind each goal would be very significant.

The increase in overall stadium capacity would be from 30,750 up to about 33,250 - which is only an 8% expansion and would surely be OK from planning, safety and transport perspectives.

Logistically very difficult to achieve, due to STHs in NS who prefer to sit, but far from impossible.

I'd change to safe standing behind both goals. Done. Yes some would moan, but overall the atmosphere would lift greatly to the benefit of the team. We are going to need to be intimidating if we go up, it's the only thing the small teams generally have over the big teams and I don't think we can argue we have that yet.

Agree. I think there will have to be a compromise though, for those who can't or don't want to stand for 90 mins.

Quote Originally Posted by Bob'n'weave View Post
It will happen slowly at BHA and other clubs, just a case of when and where IMHO. At the moment there are sections of the NS that are allowed to stand, and at away games (including ours, and Fulham was a classic!), a lot of away fans stand anyway. This is a nonsense as standing is far more dangerous in normal seats than SS or rail seating systems. Also very annoying for home fans who are told to sit when the away fans stand, creating a better noise/atmosphere.
The only concern as far as I understand it, is blocking the view of those who are seated. In the NS for instance you could have a curved D shaped section along the front rows/up the middle for normal seats with both the left, right and middle/back for SS. Everyone is happy. At the moment, allowing fans to stand (or rather, tolerating it as you can't stop 1000's of people from doing it in away sections) is probably in complete breach of a clubs H&S policy - which is probably also an insurance issue for the club, a real mine field. SS is a no brainer.
As the legislation changes we will see more clubs introduce the SS system, as Celtic has done, most successfully. You can't have clubs moaning about creating an atmosphere, handing out 'clappers' etc as a substitute for the real thing, especially when all the away fans are standing.
Hopefully common sense will prevail.

Could do this in both NS and SS.

 

[heathgate]

So why do fans stand when at away games? Our fans basically use away grounds like a safe standing place, they stand, and they make noise.

It's a given.... you cannot generate a British football style atmosphere from seated positions.... especially when your fellow sibging/standing enthusiasts are confined to seats many rows from your area.. freedom in standing has always and will always generate atmosphere.... the owners will soon twig when we continue down this route of ever increasing stadia of sterility.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[Gazwag]

So out of 100 voters, 74 say they want safe standing. Going back to the original question, was this reflected in clubs surveys?

Anybody who takes a poll on NSC as a true reflection of the wishes of the majority should look at the in or out poll back in June when a similar percentage of NSC's picked IN

 

[The Sock of Poskett]

This exactly.
It is happening at most away games, for most clubs, which is unsafe and in breach of H&S/Insurance policies because it is UNSAFE to do so, but it goes on in every ground. That is why European and Scottish clubs use SS.

In fact, I would go as far to say that standing in normal seats is more dangerous than terracing. At Fulham people were all over the place when we scored.

True - we were next to an aisle and when the second goal went in they were going down like NINEPINS. Marvellous scenes of LEGS AKIMBO etc (weren't they on Top of the Pops?) but I had concerns a few generously built gentlemen would need medical ministrations

 

[Bob'n'weave]

True - we were next to an aisle and when the second goal went in they were going down like NINEPINS. Marvellous scenes of LEGS AKIMBO etc (weren't they on Top of the Pops?) but I had concerns a few generously built gentlemen would need medical ministrations

Yeah, saw a few bigguns take a tumble at Fulham. In the old NS when one went in (lots in the days of Ward ), you would lose your sarnie/beer or a shoe, end up in a different spot etc but if you took a tumble there would be plenty of hands to pull you up. If you go for a burton in a seated section you are far more likely to get injured. Pretty f***ed up when you think its all been done for the fans 'safety'.

 

[Lower West Stander]

At the moment it seems ridiculous to me that away fans are permitted to stand in a seated section but standing is not actually allowed if the seats aren't there?

Some away sections are like the wild west anyway with stewards far too nervous to get involved and fans sitting and standing where they want.

All completely wrong at the moment so I would be in favour of testing it out first but long term very much in favour.

 

[symyjym]

There should also be child sitting on dad's shoulders area.

 

[Nixonator]

Quick vote for SS.

Ideally on a 1.5 for 1 basis across the whole North and South Stands.

Would, IMHO, have a transformational effect on the atmosphere inside The Amex and the feel of the ground. A 50% increase in crowd density in the important atmosphere generating areas behind each goal would be very significant.

The increase in overall stadium capacity would be from 30,750 up to about 33,250 - which is only an 8% expansion and would surely be OK from planning, safety and transport perspectives.

Logistically very difficult to achieve, due to STHs in NS who prefer to sit, but far from impossible.

1.5 would be great but they already stated that it would be 1 for 1 which is very disappointing.

Crowd density is also an important factor for atmosphere.