[Football] Safe Standing

[e77]

If it does become common in away ends there does need to still be a sitting section where people can sit and still see the game.

As for it happening the Amex, I have never seen a hint from the club that it is going to happen.

 

[drew]

If it does become common in away ends there does need to still be a sitting section where people can sit and still see the game.

As for it happening the Amex, I have never seen a hint from the club that it is going to happen.

The problem with this is that for years pretty much all away fans stand anyway.

 

[Insel affe]

Is it me, or do the safe standing rails look like Zimmer frames….

 

[Insel affe]

The problem with this is that for years pretty much all away fans stand anyway.

This, and stewards do absolutely nothing to enforce people to sit, because they are scared of any backlash this may cause.
Surely the clubs and the FA know safe standing works, so stupid to pretend, fans can NOW stand, because they said so….

 

[Silverhatch]

The problem with this is that for years pretty much all away fans stand anyway.

Yep, unsafe standing. And usually plenty in the home ends too. It’s complete bollocks for any administrator (Paul Barber included) to say that safe rail seating is not applicable to the Amex. If our club can take tops off bottles, they should take (unsafe) seats out of stadium standing areas.

 

[heathgate]

The problem with this is that for years pretty much all away fans stand anyway.

Yes, and how many fans have been injured by said standing?..... probable next to none.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[Insel affe]

Yep, unsafe standing. And usually plenty in the home ends too. It’s complete bollocks for any administrator (Paul Barber included) to say that safe rail seating is not applicable to the Amex. If our club can take tops off bottles, they should take (unsafe) seats out of stadium standing areas.

They should actually take the seats out, put on bleachers and a long rail, that would possibly increase the stadium capacity slightly in areas. You could easily do three quarters of the away allocation and all the north stand.
Actually while we’re at it take the south stand back turn that bleacher and rail too.
Stick the away fans in a section of the lower east.
Makes perfect sense

 

[Amexarmadillo]

Really struggling to understand why this safe standing is better than what we already have. It’s certainly not going to bring any of the benefit of proper terraces.

 

[portlock seagull]

If it was an unwritten rule, then there wouldn’t be any complaints about which seats are released / sold first in our away allocations. I think you’d be surprised at the small number who insist on “sitting” in the wrong place.

No, my point is, if that happens to me I’ve no problem with. It has and I just find somewhere else.

 

[drew]

Yes, and how many fans have been injured by said standing?..... probable next to none.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

I agree entirely which is why I fail to understand why those in the north stand that stand already think that by placing a rail in front of them it will somehow change the atmosphere. The atmosphere starts on the pitch. When we were winning games in the championship there was no problem with the atmosphere. We're now playing in a harder league and wins are far less frequent and that effects the atmosphere.

 

[e77]

The problem with this is that for years pretty much all away fans stand anyway.

I was in the upper tier at Stamford Bridge and so far as I could see everyone was standing up but looking down at the lower tier people were sitting down which suggests it was working itself out. If everywhere was safe standing they could justifiably refuse to sit down if someone behind them couldn't stand. I remember going to Huddersfield and one section in the away end was pre advertised as you having to sit down in it.

I am sure it can be sorted out so everyone can be happy but turning away ends into entirely safe standing is unfair.

 

[Brovion]

Here we go again. What about those that have had their season ticket for years and have a group of people they meet and get on with but as far as you're concerned they're collateral damage. The truth is that we have a standing area and it's the North stand. I don't have a bee in my bonnet, I just can't fathom why some think having a rail in front of them will improve the atmosphere. And don't come back with the claptrap about injuries from seats because there's no history of them since we've been at the Amex!!!

I think you do have a bit of a bee in your bonnet tbh. Anyway, your last sentence is 100% correct, and therein lies the problem. When sitting down became the rule we had many people (including posters on here) saying that the rule had to be enforced as standing in seating areas was inherently dangerous (as they weren't designed for that) and stewards were simply ensuring everybody's safety by making everyone sit. People who insisted on standing were dismissed as neanderthals who wanted to return to the old days, and also as dangerous lunatics who were not only were intent on injuring themselves and others but also wanted to get the club (and this doesn't just apply to Brighton) in trouble with the Authorities with their flagrant disregard of the Regulations..

Of course in spite of the threats and dire warnings thousands of people (such as yourself at away games) still tried to stand at every game, and if the numbers reached a critical mass then the stewards turned a blind eye. And of course this didn't cause thousands of injuries and hundreds of deaths each season as the statement that 'persistent standing in seated areas is dangerous' turned out to be complete bollocks.

However .... it's still the Rule/Law/Whatever - you are not allowed to stand in seated areas. 'Safe standing' is an attempt to legislate and manage what had become the de-facto norm, and I'm not sure why you're so opposed. The North Stand is an all-seater area, and if I buy a ticket there who do I complain to when I find the view from my seat is blocked by a big herbert who insisted on standing up for the whole match? At least if it was a properly-designated standing area I'd know the situation before I brought the ticket.

 

[drew]

I think you do have a bit of a bee in your bonnet tbh. Anyway, your last sentence is 100% correct, and therein lies the problem. When sitting down became the rule we had many people (including posters on here) saying that the rule had to be enforced as standing in seating areas was inherently dangerous (as they weren't designed for that) and stewards were simply ensuring everybody's safety by making everyone sit. People who insisted on standing were dismissed as neanderthals who wanted to return to the old days, and also as dangerous lunatics who were not only were intent on injuring themselves and others but also wanted to get the club (and this doesn't just apply to Brighton) in trouble with the Authorities with their flagrant disregard of the Regulations..

Of course in spite of the threats and dire warnings thousands of people (such as yourself at away games) still tried to stand at every game, and if the numbers reached a critical mass then the stewards turned a blind eye. And of course this didn't cause thousands of injuries and hundreds of deaths each season as the statement that 'persistent standing in seated areas is dangerous' turned out to be complete bollocks.

However .... it's still the Rule/Law/Whatever - you are not allowed to stand in seated areas. 'Safe standing' is an attempt to legislate and manage what had become the de-facto norm, and I'm not sure why you're so opposed. The North Stand is an all-seater area, and if I buy a ticket there who do I complain to when I find the view from my seat is blocked by a big herbert who insisted on standing up for the whole match? At least if it was a properly-designated standing area I'd know the situation before I brought the ticket.

My point is 'what will change?'. Add a rail into the North Stand and what happens? Most of those arguing for safe standing aren't doing so because of bruised shins, it because they think it will improve the atmosphere. If the whole of the north stand had rail seating what difference would it make as those that are already season ticket holders there will still be season ticket holders there as most stand anyway.

I'd be for it if I genuinely believed it would have a massive affect on the atmosphere but I don't see that as the case as I think the atmosphere comes from what is happening on the pitch. Whenever we've had a successful season in whatever division, the atmosphere has been great and, apart from the siege mentality of 1997, every season when we've struggled it's been poor.

 

[Brovion]

My point is 'what will change?'. Add a rail into the North Stand and what happens? Most of those arguing for safe standing aren't doing so because of bruised shins, it because they think it will improve the atmosphere. If the whole of the north stand had rail seating what difference would it make as those that are already season ticket holders there will still be season ticket holders there as most stand anyway.

I'd be for it if I genuinely believed it would have a massive affect on the atmosphere but I don't see that as the case as I think the atmosphere comes from what is happening on the pitch. Whenever we've had a successful season in whatever division, the atmosphere has been great and, apart from the siege mentality of 1997, every season when we've struggled it's been poor.

Again, I agree with you re the atmosphere, simply adding a rail I don't think it will make that much difference. (I have my own views on improving the atmosphere but it's nothing to do with safe standing!). I would just welcome the clarity that if I buy a ticket in the North Stand I know I'll be standing.

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

I think you do have a bit of a bee in your bonnet tbh. Anyway, your last sentence is 100% correct, and therein lies the problem. When sitting down became the rule we had many people (including posters on here) saying that the rule had to be enforced as standing in seating areas was inherently dangerous (as they weren't designed for that) and stewards were simply ensuring everybody's safety by making everyone sit. People who insisted on standing were dismissed as neanderthals who wanted to return to the old days, and also as dangerous lunatics who were not only were intent on injuring themselves and others but also wanted to get the club (and this doesn't just apply to Brighton) in trouble with the Authorities with their flagrant disregard of the Regulations..

Of course in spite of the threats and dire warnings thousands of people (such as yourself at away games) still tried to stand at every game, and if the numbers reached a critical mass then the stewards turned a blind eye. And of course this didn't cause thousands of injuries and hundreds of deaths each season as the statement that 'persistent standing in seated areas is dangerous' turned out to be complete bollocks.

However .... it's still the Rule/Law/Whatever - you are not allowed to stand in seated areas. 'Safe standing' is an attempt to legislate and manage what had become the de-facto norm, and I'm not sure why you're so opposed. The North Stand is an all-seater area, and if I buy a ticket there who do I complain to when I find the view from my seat is blocked by a big herbert who insisted on standing up for the whole match? At least if it was a properly-designated standing area I'd know the situation before I brought the ticket.

Safe standing is very different to what is in place now. The safety rail stops people flying over the chairs in front.

 

[Brovion]

Safe standing is very different to what is in place now. The safety rail stops being flying over chairs in front.

Yes I know. I was simply referring to the concept of standing up rather than the equipment used.

 

[SweatyMexican]

But you accept with safe standing there will be an increased risk of vehicle-bat collision?

 

[drew]

Safe standing is very different to what is in place now. The safety rail stops being flying over chairs in front.

And how often does that happen?

 

[faoileán]

Here we go again. What about those that have had their season ticket for years and have a group of people they meet and get on with but as far as you're concerned they're collateral damage. The truth is that we have a standing area and it's the North stand. I don't have a bee in my bonnet, I just can't fathom why some think having a rail in front of them will improve the atmosphere. And don't come back with the claptrap about injuries from seats because there's no history of them since we've been at the Amex!!!

You are entirely missing the point.

Haven't you noticed the singing to support the team from the NS is rarely impressive and totally disjointed between the various knots of singers? Haven't you also noticed that there is regular hassle around the NS between those who want to stand and sing and those who want to sit? The point of a dedicated safe-standing section is that we can re-shuffle where people want to be.

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

And how often does that happen?[/QU

Literally every single away game when we score.