Safe standing: a response from Paul Barber

[Lord Bracknell]

Atilla seems to have this as a bit of a personal crusade, and like all people who feel passionately about their own views, they very rarely accept a counter arguement.

Sometimes a personal crusade is what's necessary, especially if the support of others will make a difference.

We would never have got Harvey's into the Amex if it hadn't have been for Attila's personal crusade and Derek Chapman's support. It's good to see that alliance is still intact.

 

[Easy 10]

The incidence of trouble at matches has gone down dramatically since the introduction of all seater stadia. It could be argued, therefore, that all-seater football grounds are safer.

It would be very difficult to argue with the powers that be, that other factors are involved as well and that the above is just a coincidence.

More evolved methods of policing and stewarding and an increased use of CCTV for prosecutions are also factors. Its not as though we hear about it kicking off regularly in the lower leagues on their terraces is it. I think its a bit simplistic to put the reduced instances of trouble down to all-seaters, trouble can and does still flair up from time to time regardless.

A agree its a very easy and simple excuse for the powers that be to trot out though.

 

[mune ni kamome]

This is the most garbage argument I've heard - What on earth is he actually trying to say? What is this 'bad behaviour'? In the dark ages of the 80s, I must have watched Derby from the terraces hundreds of times, and I can tell Mr Barber (who I suspect has never stood on a terrace), that every single time there was trouble, it was either a) Outside of the ground or b) In the seats. This implied correlation between the terraces and 'misbehaviour' is absolute boolocks and will stand up to no scrutiny.

Not sure about that statement. Didn't that Leeds fan that chinned the goalie manage to disappear into a standing area, initially anyway. The fact is that there are some bad boys at football matches who will misbehave if they think they can avoid being identified.

 

[cologne fan]

I'll just quote myself from the other thread. I hope I'm not breaking any rules in doing so, but I hope my experience from Germany can help.

As you can see from my name I'm a Cologne supporter, but I do have a soft spot for Brighton as it's the club most of my family supports. Living in Germany and going to matches means that I have stood in various safe standing and also terraced ends. The option that is being discused in Britain in the option of safe standing like in Hannover (http://www.stadionwelt.de/sw_stadien/fotos/stadionguides/deutschland/awd_arena/blick/blick_10.jpg) or Bremen (http://www.stadionwelt.de/sw_stadien/fotos/stadionguides/deutschland/weserstadion/innen/innen_17.jpeg). The idea is that the seats can be folded down for international games and are folded up otherwise allowing for two people to stand in the place of one seat. That way it's also very easy to state how many people can be inside to standing area of the ground. In most grounds there are still terraced areas (like in Cologne: http://www.stadionwelt.de/sw_stadien/fotos/stadionguides/deutschland/rheinenergiestadion/sued/sued_02.jpg) which are also very safe. Unlike in the old days there are walkways through the stands so that in the case of an emergency people can still quickly get to the exit. That also means that there's no crushing. The safety argument just doesn't make sense if you've got an up to date ground. Also (and this is my main point) the age of match going fans in Britain has increased due to high ticket prices and clubs are in danger of loosing a generation of fans. Safe standing would a) lead to a better atmosphere, b) more socially sustainable ticket prices and c) higher income for clubs as more people would be in the ground to spend money on food, drinks and merchandise while one could easily take half the price of a seat in a standing area of the ground.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I applaud Paul Barber for his timely and considered response, and it's good to see that the Board are in touch with what the fans are saying.

I think the bottom line is that:

a) There's clearly a big demand for safe standing
b) It's a big stewarding problem in the North Stand now
c) The club have hitherto sent out mixed message about whether or not any standing would be tolerated
d) There is a growing National Campaign for it.

I would therefore hope that the Board keep an open mind on the subject. Every club has a poor couple of seasons now and again and I think the reintroduction of standing could be a useful card to play to re-energise the stadium in the future when it is required.

Mr. Barber talks about a potential net loss in revenue if standing tickets are made cheaper with no overall increase in capacity, but what if that 'loss' - if, indeed, there needs to be one - is more than compensated for by increased ticket sales elsewhere because other fans enjoy the atmosphere created / driven by the North Stand singing section.

I'm in the West Stand Upper and there are a decent number who sing, but I'd wager a lot of them are like myself who stood on the North Stand as a teenager. Over time I see that atmosphere dying out because, apart from anything else, it's harder to get a new song going when you're in a row of seats rather than a bunch of 12 or 14 mates all standing together. If the North Stand lead the singing I feel much of the rest of the ground will follow.

There is nothing like a stadium full of people singing in support of the team.

 

[KZNSeagull]

More evolved methods of policing and stewarding and an increased use of CCTV for prosecutions are also factors. Its not as though we hear about it kicking off regularly in the lower leagues on their terraces is it. I think its a bit simplistic to put the reduced instances of trouble down to all-seaters, trouble can and does still flair up from time to time regardless.

A agree its a very easy and simple excuse for the powers that be to trot out though.

Quite. And you can be certain that if they ever do trial it somewhere, that if trouble does flare up it will give them grounds not to implement it across the board.

I would personally like to see it done, but I do think that those in charge will need a LOT of convincing and that those using it will have to be on their best behaviour. It will just take a few idiots to spoil it for everyone, as usual.

 

[KZNSeagull]

I'm in the West Stand Upper and there are a decent number who sing, but I'd wager a lot of them are like myself who stood on the North Stand as a teenager. Over time I see that atmosphere dying out because, apart from anything else, it's harder to get a new song going when you're in a row of seats rather than a bunch of 12 or 14 mates all standing together. If the North Stand lead the singing I feel much of the rest of the ground will follow.

There is nothing like a stadium full of people singing in support of the team.

Don't forget though that safe standing means you are allocated a place to stand - much like now, if a group of you want to sing, you have to arrange to stand together, which could be easier said than done. I like the idea though!

 

[smeariestbat]

i think it reads as folllows: 'sit down, shut up, sit down, shut up'

 

[drew]

Terracing was not the cause of Hillsborough at all, it was a combination of a heck of a lot more than that, as we now know.

Sorry, whilst I agree that terracing wasn't the cause of Hillsborough, it most certainly was a factor, one of many, that exacerbated the problem. Ask yourself the question as to whether the situation would have been as bad had there been all seating in the Leppings Lane end.

Sorry, I wasn't aware Gigg Lane is already an all-seater. But the point remains, most lower league grounds do still have terracing. The fact that Torquay (in your example) get crowds of less than half their capacity is an irrelevance. Plainmoor has a capacity of 6,500, of which 2,950 is seating (thank you Google). Therefore, if Torquays safety certificate decrees that 3,550 can safely stand at a little old ground like Plainmoor, then why on earth can this concept simply NOT be tolerated at a modern, 21st century "state-of-the-art" stadium ?

Its defintely NOT on grounds of "safety". Can we at least just put that one to bed ?

You make it sound as if everyone is saying that safety is the one and only reason. You might not like it as it doesn't support your argument but it is a factor. Some are saying that with safe standing you are allocated a place to stand but presumably there is nothing to prevent you moving to another area, possibly to be with your mates. What happens if there are more than two people standing where there is one seat as let's be honest, most who want to stand will want to congregate in the middle behind the goal, just like the old north stand?

 

[wehatepalace]

Personally I would happy to pay exactly the same for a standing season ticket as I do to sit, in fact I'd pay more if it meant an end to the North Stand V The Stewards shit that we currently have.
The argument about people causing trouble and not being able to identify them is crap, because unless I am mistaken, a safe standing area would involve people still being allocated a seat just as we are now, that coupled with the fact we are overlooked by bloody great police surveillance box.

 

[attila]

Sorry, whilst I agree that terracing wasn't the cause of Hillsborough, it most certainly was a factor, one of many, that exacerbated the problem. Ask yourself the question as to whether the situation would have been as bad had there been all seating in the Leppings Lane end.

No more than seating was a factor in the awful tragedy at Bradford. It was outdated stadia and dreadful security which caused the problems in both cases.



Y

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I'll just quote myself from the other thread. I hope I'm not breaking any rules in doing so, but I hope my experience from Germany can help.

I'm going to Koln for the Hertha match towards the end of the season. Lovely city.

 

[Easy 10]

Sorry, whilst I agree that terracing wasn't the cause of Hillsborough, it most certainly was a factor, one of many, that exacerbated the problem. Ask yourself the question as to whether the situation would have been as bad had there been all seating in the Leppings Lane end.

One of many factors yes, but it was not the actual cause. If a drunk driver ploughs into a bus queue, you don't go and ban all cars do you.

You make it sound as if everyone is saying that safety is the one and only reason. You might not like it as it doesn't support your argument but it is a factor. Some are saying that with safe standing you are allocated a place to stand but presumably there is nothing to prevent you moving to another area, possibly to be with your mates. What happens if there are more than two people standing where there is one seat as let's be honest, most who want to stand will want to congregate in the middle behind the goal, just like the old north stand?

Safety may not be the only excuse constantly peddled for the resistance to the re-introduction of terracing, but its certainly The Big One thats always trotted out. And this is despite the irrefutable FACT that thousands and thousands of fans up and down the country week in, week out are still standing on terraces perfectly safely, wihout incident, and without causing riots.

I also find it aggravating to have my intelligence insulted with mealy-mouthed bobbins about it being against their "inclusive philosphy" for young, elderly or disabled fans, as if we're calling for the entire bloody stadium to be terraced.

And if people start standing in areas they shouldn't, then exactly as is if they're trying to sit where they shouldn't, its a matter for the stewards to deal with. Persistant offenders would get banned. All I keep hearing is reasons why its apparently either hugely dangerous or simply impossible to bring this in. Sorry, I'm not buying it. It works elsewhere, absolutely no reason why it couldn't work in this country. Unfortunately there there just isn't the will or enthusiasm for it from those who we must obey.

 

[c0lz]

More evolved methods of policing and stewarding and an increased use of CCTV for prosecutions are also factors. Its not as though we hear about it kicking off regularly in the lower leagues on their terraces is it. I think its a bit simplistic to put the reduced instances of trouble down to all-seaters, trouble can and does still flair up from time to time regardless.

A agree its a very easy and simple excuse for the powers that be to trot out though.

Not only that the safe standing/seats should still have row and seat numbers attached. so no different to all seater's.

 

[Dr. Notthenineo'clocknews]

Don't forget though that safe standing means you are allocated a place to stand - much like now, if a group of you want to sing, you have to arrange to stand together, which could be easier said than done. I like the idea though!

I will ALWAYS vote for "safe standing" but it's not for me anymore, I want the 'unsafe' standing that I had to "suffer" c1978. If it's rows and numbers i'll stay in the East thanks

 

[Easy 10]

Not only that the safe standing/seats should still have row and seat numbers attached. so no different to all seater's.

Indeed.

There's also the fact that unlike in days gone by, we can't just rock up and pay on the gate, tickets always have to be purchased in advance via the clubs database. Even if safe-standing was introduced, then doubtless there'd be no change to that policy, so its much harder to be "anonymous" and cause trouble these days.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Not sure about that statement. Didn't that Leeds fan that chinned the goalie manage to disappear into a standing area, initially anyway. The fact is that there are some bad boys at football matches who will misbehave if they think they can avoid being identified.

The Leeds fan who attacked Kirkland returned to the crowd who were all standing up in the LOWER SEATED TIER of the West Stand (Leppings Lane End) at Hillsborough.

 

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

I havnt been in the North, but imagine the rise of each step is the same as the other stands, quite deep, and if standing was allowed then if there was a surge ala the old North Stand at the Goldstone, then the chance of injury would be quite significant. So on a safety issue it will never happen. The safety certificate has been issued for seating only.
I would like standing, but I can see the pitfalls, but appreciate Paul Barbers response.

 

[Dr. Notthenineo'clocknews]

I havnt been in the North, but imagine the rise of each step is the same as the other stands, quite deep, and if standing was allowed then if there was a surge ala the old North Stand at the Goldstone, then the chance of injury would be quite significant. So on a safety issue it will never happen. The safety certificate has been issued for seating only.
I would like standing, but I can see the pitfalls, but appreciate Paul Barbers response.

this is why, although i'd vote for it, it's not for me,because of the design there would NEVER be a surge, and poor ol Mother Brown is now sadly six foot under

 

[yxee]

Why would there ever be a surge with electronic ticket inspection, allocated standing areas, and a 2 foot concrete barrier separating the stand and the pitch? The safety aspect just seems absurd, unfortunately that (rather than any other reason) is what appears to be the bottleneck to safe standing because without legislation there can be no trial, and without people realising that it's actually safe there can be no legislation by popular consent.

Catch 22.