Lincoln Imp
Well-known member
- Feb 2, 2009
- 5,964
The first sentence is probably right and the last two definitely are.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Safe standing
- Thread starter Publius Ovidius
- Start date
The first sentence is probably right and the last two definitely are.
Lincoln Imp
Well-known member
- Feb 2, 2009
- 5,964
So all football league clubs voted for safe standing.
So it looks like there has been a change in the views of our management. Didn't perry once say he would only see standing at football matches over his dead body?
So where would it be then? North stand or south stand?
The standing or the body?
- Aug 8, 2005
- 26,523
Too many scarred childhood memories of not being able to see properly I suspect.
That's the only drawback of having a highly successful but incredibly short businessman as your owner.
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
Half right, it is more to do with being able to safely evacuate the stands. For instance my understanding is that changing the North Stand to rail seats wouldn't lead to an increase in capacity because the capacity with normal seats is already at the maximum allowed by current regulations (I'm sure Martin Perry has said this at some point) - so what would be the cost advantage in changing the seats?
Richy_Seagull
Well-known member
There are simply no valid arguments for not giving clubs the option to have safe standing at stadiums if they want to. Like others have said, however, I very much doubt we will be seeing it at the Amex.
Brighton Breezy
New member
One of the main arguments for safe standing as far as I see it would be the tickets could be sold at a more affordable rate, a la Germany.
If it doesn't increase the capacity at The Amex, the club won't do it. Hardly going to spend money to change the seats to standing only to then charge less for the same space.
And, of course, ambitious Championship clubs won't make changes which will not be allowed by the Premier League.
If it doesn't increase the capacity at The Amex, the club won't do it. Hardly going to spend money to change the seats to standing only to then charge less for the same space.
And, of course, ambitious Championship clubs won't make changes which will not be allowed by the Premier League.
Perfidious Albion
Well-known member
I always preferred the freedom of a standing terrace and the option of being able to move to find the best view...but what I saw on the net of a "safe-standing" proposal would give none of that.
The pics showed a sort of cage that you stood in, stuck in one designated spot, just like having a booked seat except that you had to stand.......If it was like that, no thanks ..
The pics showed a sort of cage that you stood in, stuck in one designated spot, just like having a booked seat except that you had to stand.......If it was like that, no thanks ..
- Aug 8, 2005
- 26,523
If a stadium is full, you won't see safe standing. However for a lot of Championship clubs they have gaps all over the place and therefore putting back standing makes a lot sense to them. Will make the atmosphere much much better again.
That is something the club should really consider as whilst it may be less income through the door, a real increase in atmosphere could make a big difference to results.
That is something the club should really consider as whilst it may be less income through the door, a real increase in atmosphere could make a big difference to results.
GingerBeerMan
3-0
- Dec 29, 2011
- 8,022
I see it the opposite way. As it'll increase capacity by 50% wherever it's implemented, surely it's only worth the time/money to change the seating if we are selling out rather than if there are spare seats to every match.
dougdeep
New member
You're being picky. How is moving people about, not transport?
Because 'transport' is about getting people to and from the ground. Evacuation procedures within the ground is not transport. It's about the capacity of exits and walkways. You can put as many extra trains and buses on as you like (transport) but with finite space to get people out safely in an emergency you cannot increase the capacity of the ground.
Why would it increase capacity?
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
No offence was intended
. Though I would say that transport to and from the stadium is different to 'elf and safety, but you're right they do both have an impact on the total overall capacity of our particular stadium.
- Aug 8, 2005
- 26,523
Sadly you're wrong, becuase safe standing doesn't get that many more people into an area, but the cost reduction would be greater it would only reduce income for a club where they are achieving their capcity week in week out. It would have to be new additional punters for it to pay dividends for the club.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
Is that because he's only 4'3" tall? Can't he bag himself a seat in the front row?
Moshe Gariani
Well-known member
- Mar 10, 2005
- 12,070
Third in LB with what is now looking a rather lame gag...
seagullsovergrimsby
#cpfctinpotclub
The counter argument from the club would be that rail seating gives the fans a choice of standing up but a reduction in prices isn't feasible as the capacity remains the same after a costly refurb.
c0lz
North East Stand.
Not sure you would need to rip the seats out in the north stand at the Amex why cant they be modified after all its only the safety rail of some sort. no it wont increase capacity but i do believe you would see a fuller stadium and with those not wanting to sit/stand moving to sitting area's then leaving those who do want to sit/stand moving into the north stand and making a bigger and better atmosphere.
seagullsovergrimsby
#cpfctinpotclub
Have you seen the designs for rail seating ? The existing seats would have to be taken out for rail seating to be put in their place.
No, your wrong, it allows 1 1/2 to 2 times as many people in the same area (provided the concourse, exits, etc. are suitable).