Safe standing - time to act

[Fox92]

8 hours ago, Corky said:

Pedant alert- That's not correct. Sunderland in 1996/97 had terraces at Roker Park and Fulham in 2001/02 had standing areas at Craven Cottage. 

They kept going on about it in commentary but I thought Man City/Man Utd have both had safe standing all season so far?

[GlennyFox55]

4 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

They kept going on about it in commentary but I thought Man City/Man Utd have both had safe standing all season so far?

Legally they couldn’t call them/ advertise them as standing areas before until today.

 

Did make a difference as the upper shed home end was also fully standing which doesn’t usually happen. 

 

 

 

 

[leicesterseddon]

19 minutes ago, GlennyFox55 said:

Legally they couldn’t call them/ advertise them as standing areas before until today.

 

Did make a difference as the upper shed home end was also fully standing which doesn’t usually happen. 

 

 

 

 

Interesting. So they have turned an area where people normally choose to sit into a standing area? 
 

Seems to be both tiers of the Shed End and the lower tier of the opposite end - what is that as a % of the total capacity? Must be 15% or so at least? 

At the KP that would translate into not far short of 5K people standing… 

 

[The_77]

I had no idea it’s easier to engage in racism and hate speech when standing. Ban “Safe” Standing NOW.

 

 

 

[adam]

6 minutes ago, The_77 said:

I had no idea it’s easier to engage in racism and hate speech when standing. Ban “Safe” Standing NOW.

 

 

 

I imagine he has never been to the football. I'm pretty sure the cameras can still pick you out if your snorting some coke at your seat. 

[HybridFox]

Doubt we'll see it at the KP until the stadium expansion tbh.

 

We'll still find a way to make it tinpot though. Beat your clappers on the railings 

Edited 3 January 2022 by TK95

[KFS]

3 hours ago, The_77 said:

I had no idea it’s easier to engage in racism and hate speech when standing. Ban “Safe” Standing NOW.

 

 

 

****ing hell  

[Stadt]

At our ground we’ll need a total ‘reset’ of any area we make a standing section for it to be a success.

 

Standing inherently doesn’t make people sing. It needs to be clearly marked as a singing & standing section. 

[adam]

Why can't we have it like the old ground? Only sell adult tickets in SK1 2 3 4.  Make that area safe standing. Job done. 

[The Year Of The Fox]

14 minutes ago, adam said:

Why can't we have it like the old ground? Only sell adult tickets in SK1 2 3 4.  Make that area safe standing. Job done. 

Can you imagine the uproar? 😂😂

[Raj]

So are we getting this at the KP?

Sorry if its already posted, I can't be arsed to trawl through!!!😁

[foxile5]

19 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

Can you imagine the uproar? 😂😂

"What about MY KIDS!" 

[norwichfox]

On 03/01/2022 at 08:25, Raj said:

So are we getting this at the KP?

Sorry if its already posted, I can't be arsed to trawl through!!!😁

Same opinion here, hope someone answers you soon....

[coolhandfox]

Imagine if this is going to happen it will be when they redevelop the ground.

 

Makes relocation easier for anyone that doesn't want to stand due to the increased capacity.

[Tommy G]

On 03/01/2022 at 08:06, adam said:

Why can't we have it like the old ground? Only sell adult tickets in SK1 2 3 4.  Make that area safe standing. Job done. 

What if you take your son to the match? Force you to move? Plonker 

[adam]

11 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

What if you take your son to the match? Force you to move? Plonker 

Why do you need to sit there? There's 3 other stands. This is problem. No flexibility. 

[filbertway]

37 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

What if you take your son to the match? Force you to move? Plonker 

Yeah, easy.

[Tommy G]

2 hours ago, adam said:

Why do you need to sit there? There's 3 other stands. This is problem. No flexibility. 

 

I don't take my son to the football, but looking around SK1 alone there are hundreds of people with kids there - my point is you can't just oust people from their seats who have been there since 2002, for example. What if they dont want to? I don't think its a question of flexibility, if I want to go into a shop and buy an apple I'd like an apple, not a banana - if you are intelligent enough to understand that. 

Edited 4 January 2022 by Tommy G

[purpleronnie]

4 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

 

I don't take my son to the football, but looking around SK1 alone there are hundreds of people with kids there - my point is you can't just oust people from their seats who have been there since 2002, for example. What if they dont want to? I don't think its a question of flexibility, if I want to go into a shop and buy an apple I'd like an apple, not a banana - if you are intelligent enough to understand that. 

You'll still be getting your apple though you just need to walk down a different aisle to get it.

[filbertway]

57 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

You'll still be getting your apple though you just need to walk down a different aisle to get it.

I wonder if he'll be intelligent enough to understand that

[adam]

1 hour ago, Tommy G said:

 

I don't take my son to the football, but looking around SK1 alone there are hundreds of people with kids there - my point is you can't just oust people from their seats who have been there since 2002, for example. What if they dont want to? I don't think its a question of flexibility, if I want to go into a shop and buy an apple I'd like an apple, not a banana - if you are intelligent enough to understand that. 

Why do you need to get personal?  You're going on about my intelligence and that's the best you can do. 

Some of these kids will have to move anyway if we bring in safe standing. 

Edited 4 January 2022 by adam

[Voll Blau]

I actually hope the standing area would be child-friendly, to some degree. I've quite a few mates who I know would be saddened if they couldn't take their kids on to such a section. Plus, what better way to inspire the next generation of supporters?

[Golden Fox]

It was only a matter of time, but likely in terms of balance, there is an article on the BBC website today with a headline about standing being a step backwards: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/59908736.

 

It gives voice to a Hillsborough campaigner... Its been covered before, but simplistically, Hillsborough was about ticketing and cages, with too many people being let into a section which didn't have any escape. The fact that it was a standing section was a bit of a moot point - it was more that that without set places, that was the area people without tickets would target so as not to get thrown out.

 

Reading the comments made, it says that "return to standing carries "risk"" and then does not make a single point as to what that risk is. (The question of what happens if maintenance isn't looked at properly is no different from any other area of a stadium and again, I can't see how that is a specific point against standing).

 

Its frustrating that these trials would not be taking place if the arguments against hadn't been slowly discredited, but there still seems to be an agenda to keep bringing them up anyway.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

1 hour ago, Golden Fox said:

It was only a matter of time, but likely in terms of balance, there is an article on the BBC website today with a headline about standing being a step backwards: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/59908736.

 

It gives voice to a Hillsborough campaigner... Its been covered before, but simplistically, Hillsborough was about ticketing and cages, with too many people being let into a section which didn't have any escape. The fact that it was a standing section was a bit of a moot point - it was more that that without set places, that was the area people without tickets would target so as not to get thrown out.

 

Reading the comments made, it says that "return to standing carries "risk"" and then does not make a single point as to what that risk is. (The question of what happens if maintenance isn't looked at properly is no different from any other area of a stadium and again, I can't see how that is a specific point against standing).

 

Its frustrating that these trials would not be taking place if the arguments against hadn't been slowly discredited, but there still seems to be an agenda to keep bringing them up anyway.

Pretty insulting given the Hillsborough survivors group back safe standing.

[Freeman's Wharfer]

On 04/01/2022 at 15:24, Tommy G said:

 

I don't take my son to the football, but looking around SK1 alone there are hundreds of people with kids there - my point is you can't just oust people from their seats who have been there since 2002, for example. What if they dont want to? I don't think its a question of flexibility, if I want to go into a shop and buy an apple I'd like an apple, not a banana - if you are intelligent enough to understand that. 

Why can’t you?

 

People pay for admission to the match, not to reserve some seat for their entire lifetime.

 

What do you think happens when it’s a cup tie and the away allocation is big enough that L1 needs to be given over? I’ve had a season ticket there since 2008 but I don’t start getting precious about ‘my seat’ - I simply move elsewhere because what I’m going for is the match, to see my team and not to sit in the exact same spot every time.