Rather hard to move to safe standing section.....as there isn`t one, you absolute ****wit.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Safe Standing at the AMEX
- Thread starter AWAYDAY
- Start date
Rather hard to move to safe standing section.....as there isn`t one, you absolute ****wit.
****ing stroll on. You having a bad day?
Aveacarlin'
New member
- Jul 5, 2011
- 1,177
On a purely selfish level, it's a yes from me.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Mackenzie
Old Brightonian
The “dead zone” as I like to call it.
The area that non-season ticket holders only buy if there is NO alternative. It would be a great place to have safe standing because currently it is the worst place in the entire stadium for any sort of fan involved. No one sings.
Silverhatch
Well-known member
Big section of the South Stand should be safe standing (currently very un-Safe standing) because no away fans sit down anyway. If away fans currently unsafely stand then the home fans should have the right to safe stand. Big central section of the North Stand anyone?
Nixonator
Well-known member
I'd move to wherever it is installed +3.
Silverhatch
Well-known member
We (Currently) generate in TV revenue in one year what it cost to build the entire stadium. The cost issue is a concern but not the main concern. Behind closed doors the conversations will be about atmosphere/environment/safety/crowd culture and where to site seats and how you do that without pissing off existing customers/fans. And what to do with away fans where everyone routinely UN-Safely stands (this includes Senior citizens and kids).
AWAYDAY
Active member
- Jul 21, 2009
- 237
- Thread starter
- #28
It seems there are sensible points on both sides.
Cost is a factor to some degree and there is the problems spelled out about the governments atttitude to the issue. However there does seem to be a lot of interest (I notice a twitter poll today got 500+ positive responses from Albion fans)
I’m not sure what fans/the clubs objections to a new discussion on the subject would be if Parliament get behind the idea. Surely clubs should contribute to the debate rather than sit on their hands..
Cost is a factor to some degree and there is the problems spelled out about the governments atttitude to the issue. However there does seem to be a lot of interest (I notice a twitter poll today got 500+ positive responses from Albion fans)
I’m not sure what fans/the clubs objections to a new discussion on the subject would be if Parliament get behind the idea. Surely clubs should contribute to the debate rather than sit on their hands..
Wasn't drinking within sight of the pitch banned within the same legislation that brought us all seater stadia ? If so it would seem sensible to attempt to change the legislation all in one go than via piecemeal campaigns. That said, my gut feeling is that safe standing will be kicked into the long grass ..... again.
Bob'n'weave
Well-known member
This for me is the crux of the matter. Fans standing in seating areas puts clubs in breach of H&S legislation. If it was a building site, it would be shut down. Away fans (6,000+BHA fans at Fulham) all standing is a good example. Every fan standing with a barrier (back of the seat in front) at knee height is just about the unsafest way to watch a football match, far worse than terracing. For examples of how SS is safe the Gov only need to pop up to Celtic or any of the Euro cubs who have had this in place for a few years now with no safety issues. For examples of how the current situation of standing in seating areas is unsafe, they only have to pop to any PL/Championship game and see for themselves.
Publius Ovidius
Well-known member
The only thing that concerns me about this, is if there is a specific area that will be deemed safe standing, those of us in the NS by the back who do stand, as agreed by mr perry, will be forced to sit or move to wherever that will be.
It may well be the NS, but it may only ge the corners.
It may well be the NS, but it may only ge the corners.
Captain Sensible
Well-known member
I’m glad that the argument for and against are mainly cost based and fan/club interest based. At least at a fan level we know it has nothing to do with safety. However in parliament, im sure their misunderstanding of the whole situation will mean the discussion goes back 30 years and discusses safety and hooligans etc.
The fact that in reality, the only objections are based on personal preference and costs, verses pro’s of Improved atmosphere and personal preferences, means that there is not a legitimate reason to keep the current law. Safe Standing and eventually beer in view of the pitch will eventually come in.
The fact that in reality, the only objections are based on personal preference and costs, verses pro’s of Improved atmosphere and personal preferences, means that there is not a legitimate reason to keep the current law. Safe Standing and eventually beer in view of the pitch will eventually come in.
The Large One
Who's Next?
It was.
But it's more prudent to fight the battles which can be won. Safe standing is probably the easier of the two. There is a link between beer and misbehaviour; there is little or none between standing and misbehaviour. For the former, it would need careful consideration; for the latter we've already have that careful consideration mapped out as we've been doing it all the while we've been supposed to sit down - yet the government doesn't want to know.
It's like the default setting is we're being treated like naughty boys and girls until such time as we can be proved that we can behave ourselves. This is the level of condescension we have reached. The government knows its arguments have been weakened (or rather - the fans' arguments have been strengthened) since the Hillsborough Inquest finally reached its verdicts, and is now forced to play its oxymoronic trump card of 'you can't stand until you prove you can stand safely'.
And don't get me wrong - successive governments since 1991 have turned their back on this. The fact that the likes of Jack Straw and Alan Johnson ignored the pleas of the Liverpool families (the entire justification for the law in the first place) is just as appalling.
The Large One
Who's Next?
The government - or rather, the SGSA - won't cite Celtic or Dortmund as satisfactory examples of this system working, because they're not in England and the culture is different.
They have yet to provide any evidence to back up this assertion.
West Brom too. West Brom and Hudds kept the away support very quiet. However Burnley we really stepped our game up, one of the better away games this season for atmosphere.
Surrey Phil
Well-known member
- Aug 3, 2010
- 1,476
I know there will be reasoned arguments on both sides but personally I think this would be a real step backwards given all that has gone before. You have to stand at all away games, so the only thing I'd change is to ban the tw*** at the front who won't sit down!!!
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I agree with safe standing, but I would hope the standing area would be at the back so us oldies can sit near the front without anyone getting in our way.
There should be a choice for fans.
Bob!
Coffee Buyer
- Jul 5, 2003
- 11,125
Yup.
The simple way (if it were to come in ) would be to ask al NS STH whether they wish to take up the offer of Safe Standing to find out how many seats they need to convert.
Then convert that many seats to standing across the back of the stand.
Move people to seats / standing with their groups as appropriate.
Postman Pat
Well-known member
Maybe start with back half of N1 E&F and allow people there to move out, and then extend into D&G after a trial season.