Safe standing - did the club vote for it?

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊







Insider

New member
Jul 18, 2003
7,768
Brighton
The report in the Independent is slightly misleading. The 22 chairman/chief execs present were asked if they would sanction the trial at Peterborough, which we had no objection to.

Our stance remains the same as it was in February, which was:

Brighton & Hove Albion has engaged in dialogue with safe-standing lobbyists and many of our own supporters to outline our position, which is that the club has invested over £100m in a globally acclaimed all-seater stadium (The stadium was awarded the World's Best New Stadium Venue in 2012).

The club wants all areas of the stadium to be safely accessible to all fans – regardless of age, sex, physical ability – all of the time. This policy is currently best served by an all-seater environment. Regardless of the board's opinion, the club's current safety certificate – the means by which we can stage football matches at the Amex – does not permit standing.

Also, the economic argument does not add up for us. We are limited by our planning permission to a capacity of no more than 30,750. So to modify to safe standing would not enable us to increase capacity. Add together the cost of installation, which we would estimate to be in the millions, and then consider that those using standing areas would expect a lower ticket price, and that shows why the economic argument isn’t relevant for us.

Our safety professionals are well aware of the safe standing debate and, with colleagues from other clubs, they have been part of many presentations and debates. We have not seen any appetite for safe standing from any of football's governing bodies or from the government itself. However, should that change, and the government and football licensing authorities amend regulations to allow safe standing, our club would of course be open to further dialogue.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top