Ultra Posted 17 April 2009 Posted 17 April 2009 I hope that we do see a return to standing areas at football grounds even in the higher leagues. Sadly, an alliance of the Premier League and the Hillsborough Families Support Campaign will ensure that won't happen. I just can't imagine clubs like Leicester taking seats out of the Walkers in order to return to standing areas. Unless, of course, we could consistently fill the Walkers to capacity, and the club might realise that extra revenue could be raised by squeezing more of us in stood up. It's not just a question of taking out seats. The gradients are too steep for safe terracing, so the surfaces would have to be relaid. The same is true of any of the stadia built during the last 20 years.
Guest Bilo Posted 17 April 2009 Posted 17 April 2009 Standing at football need not be unsafe. The main factor in the Hillsborough tragedy was the poor standard of policing rather than the terracing. Hillsborough had been used several times before for FA Cup semi-finals without serious incident, indeed Liverpool fans were allocated the same area of the stadium in the 1988 semi-final. The death of terracing in the top levels of the English game was in part a cop out to save the faces of the Police, to save all of the responsibility from being rightly placed on their shoulders and to move some onto the shoulders of terracing itself. It ignored the fact that terracing could be found up and down the country at football and other stadia and had been used for decades without serious incident. Standing didn't kill the 96, caging and treating them as if they were animals did. The crowd had to be controlled by the authorities, their safety was of secondary importance. Chelsea were even considering installing electric fencing at Stamford Bridge in the 1980s, an appalling example of how entrenched this mentality had become. Even if terracing was unsafe in England, it had only become that way through the neglect and greed of football clubs who were quick to snap up the cash of their loyal supporters but shamefully slow in spending money on their grounds. Under these circumstances, any neglected ground had the potential to become a deathtrap, seated or unseated. Let's not forget that 56 people died in a largely seated stand at Bradford. Although stadia in English football desperately needed modernising, conversion to the all seaters of today was not the only way to achieve this. I'm sure we all know that Germany has successfully introduced safe standing areas into its ultra modern arenas, with phenomenal atmospheres up and down the Bundesliga. Yet in spite of this unqualified success in a country that is so similar in its love of football and size of stadia, the introduction of stafe standing in England is further away than ever. A lot of grounds in this country suffer from sterile atmospheres, and so many grounds with so much character and history have been lost in the name of progress. Some grounds still survive after the Hillsborough disaster, but almost all are unrecognisable from that era, often to the great detriment of their character and atmosphere. Modernisation had to come of course. It did not however, have to come at that price. Other routes to crowd safety could have been taken, while losing none of the atmosphere that for so many fans is now an increasingly distant memory.
Ultra Posted 18 April 2009 Posted 18 April 2009 Standing at football need not be unsafe. The main factor in the Hillsborough tragedy was the poor standard of policing rather than the terracing. Hillsborough had been used several times before for FA Cup semi-finals without serious incident, indeed Liverpool fans were allocated the same area of the stadium in the 1988 semi-final. Not true. There had been at least one incident before, in 1981. In that instance too, fans were directed towards already overcrowded central pens. The death of terracing in the top levels of the English game was in part a cop out to save the faces of the Police, to save all of the responsibility from being rightly placed on their shoulders and to move some onto the shoulders of terracing itself. It was also about saving the face of the then government, who at the time of the disaster were trying to introduce legislation requiring all fans to carry compulsory ID cards. Many supporters' groups fought a fierce campaign against this. Once the Taylor Report came out, however, with recommendations for all-seater stadia as a means of ensuring greater crowd control, the proposals were quietly shelved. It ignored the fact that terracing could be found up and down the country at football and other stadia and had been used for decades without serious incident. Standing didn't kill the 96, caging and treating them as if they were animals did. The crowd had to be controlled by the authorities, their safety was of secondary importance. Chelsea were even considering installing electric fencing at Stamford Bridge in the 1980s, an appalling example of how entrenched this mentality had become. No other club considered taking that step. It says more about Chelsea's chairman of the time (a certain Ken Bates) than anything else. Even if terracing was unsafe in England, it had only become that way through the neglect and greed of football clubs who were quick to snap up the cash of their loyal supporters but shamefully slow in spending money on their grounds. Under these circumstances, any neglected ground had the potential to become a deathtrap, seated or unseated. Let's not forget that 56 people died in a largely seated stand at Bradford. Following that disaster (and a previous one at Ibrox), local authorities were given responsibility for ensuring that grounds were safe. Unfortunately, not all of them took this as seriously as they should have done. Sheffield Wednesday, for example, did not have a valid safety certificate at the time of the Hillsborough disaster, yet were largely exonerated for their role in it. Although stadia in English football desperately needed modernising, conversion to the all seaters of today was not the only way to achieve this. I'm sure we all know that Germany has successfully introduced safe standing areas into its ultra modern arenas, with phenomenal atmospheres up and down the Bundesliga. Yet in spite of this unqualified success in a country that is so similar in its love of football and size of stadia, the introduction of safe standing in England is further away than ever. For reasons I gave earlier, the concept of "safe standing" is seen, sadly as a contradiction in terms. A lot of grounds in this country suffer from sterile atmospheres, ...as they did in the 80s, when they were largely empty. Even teams like Arsenal and Villa struggled to get crowds above 15000 during much of that decade. ..and so many grounds with so much character and history have been lost in the name of progress. Some grounds still survive after the Hillsborough disaster, but almost all are unrecognisable from that era, often to the great detriment of their character and atmosphere. Modernisation had to come of course. It did not however, have to come at that price. Other routes to crowd safety could have been taken, while losing none of the atmosphere that for so many fans is now an increasingly distant memory. As I've argued on other threads, the decline in atmosphere (if indeed there has been one) has less to do with the introduction of all-seater stadia than with the change in the attitude of modern supporters, who tend to be more passive. However, the noise and passion of yesteryear can still be found, most notably on big European nights at Anfield (and sometimes even Old Trafford) and in Old Firm games. The game is far more inclusive to fans than it was 20 years ago, and that should be welcomed rather than deplored.
Tomassi Posted 18 April 2009 Posted 18 April 2009 Ultra i applaud your views on a totally different argument, i think by including all seater stadiums, fans have a greater perception of the modern game, as they can see everything thats going on. I was at Anfield last week, particularly studying the movement of Torres on and off the ball, and i'm convinced if i was standing, my views would be obstructive and would only see bits (that was certainly the flaw of standing in the kop at Filbo). On TV you can only appreciate the quality to the extent of what they show you, but by the experience i had last week, it was so much more than what the players do with the ball. I think the people who wants to bring back standing are those who want a bit more happenning away from the action, but the game has become an entertainment to the value that you can really learn so much from sitting down and studying the plays from actually watching the football thats being played. Dont bring back standing! I dont care how ''safe'' people think they can make it, if someone falls over during a mass celebration towards the front of the stand you know they are in trouble
Daggers Posted 19 April 2009 Posted 19 April 2009 The blinkered refusal of people to accept the advances made in safe-standing terracing in use in other countries is idiotic. People making choices for others because they believe they know mor ethan I do what is better for me. Old terracing was poorly designed, the policing was shit and the fencing was a murder weapon...things have moved on while you all had your heads buried in the ground. What happened in the past was awful but the world continues to turn; just because a boat sinks doesn't mean no one should be allowed back on the water.
Alexikokopops Posted 21 April 2009 Posted 21 April 2009 Ultra i applaud your views on a totally different argument, i think by including all seater stadiums, fans have a greater perception of the modern game, as they can see everything thats going on. I was at Anfield last week, particularly studying the movement of Torres on and off the ball, and i'm convinced if i was standing, my views would be obstructive and would only see bits (that was certainly the flaw of standing in the kop at Filbo). On TV you can only appreciate the quality to the extent of what they show you, but by the experience i had last week, it was so much more than what the players do with the ball. I think the people who wants to bring back standing are those who want a bit more happenning away from the action, but the game has become an entertainment to the value that you can really learn so much from sitting down and studying the plays from actually watching the football thats being played. Dont bring back standing! I dont care how ''safe'' people think they can make it, if someone falls over during a mass celebration towards the front of the stand you know they are in trouble Ah yes, I do enjoy watching Barry Hayles' subtle movements across the Walkers' grass akin to those of Fernando Torres....
Matt Posted 16 April 2010 Posted 16 April 2010 21 years ago yesterday, The anniversary seems to have just passed by with no coverage/memorial this year - The news being more interested in clouds in the sky and politicians bullshitting on what they 'promise' to deliver. I've been thinking for the past week the anniversary must be coming up (Couldn't remember the date but guessed it was coming up) and if it was for seeing half a page in the paper today I wouldn't have known it was 21 years ago yesterday. RIP the 96.
Fosse Boy Posted 16 April 2010 Posted 16 April 2010 Ultra i applaud your views <img src="http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumbsup.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="thumbsup.gif" /> on a totally different argument, i think by including all seater stadiums, fans have a greater perception of the modern game, as they can see everything thats going on. I was at Anfield last week, particularly studying the movement of Torres on and off the ball, and i'm convinced if i was standing, my views would be obstructive and would only see bits (that was certainly the flaw of standing in the kop at Filbo). On TV you can only appreciate the quality to the extent of what they show you, but by the experience i had last week, it was so much more than what the players do with the ball. I think the people who wants to bring back standing are those who want a bit more happenning away from the action, but the game has become an entertainment to the value that you can really learn so much from sitting down and studying the plays from actually watching the football thats being played. Dont bring back standing! I dont care how ''safe'' people think they can make it, if someone falls over during a mass celebration towards the front of the stand you know they are in trouble Oh my lantern, only just noticed this. Nobody's saying stadia should be all-standing FFS. Just that there should be a choice. People enjoy football in different ways and it's about time the authorities recognised that. Anyway, back to the tragic issue at hand, the memory of the 96. Never forgotten. One day there will be justice.
RedHux Posted 16 April 2010 Posted 16 April 2010 Standing at football need not be unsafe. The main factor in the Hillsborough tragedy was the poor standard of policing rather than the terracing. Hillsborough had been used several times before for FA Cup semi-finals without serious incident, indeed Liverpool fans were allocated the same area of the stadium in the 1988 semi-final. I'd just like to point out as someone who there at both semi finals and at a forest vs wednesday game the terracing at the leppings lane end was a disaster waiting to happen. Once in the centre pen there's no way of getting out to the two pens on either side. As soon as you head to the middle bit you can't realistically turn round and go back to the entrance of the other two pens. I was present at a forest wednesday game and didn't see a ball being kicked because there wasn't room to turn round. It was my second worst experience at a game. Was just horrible. That said terracing itself isn't unsafe imo. There were other factors at play on the day of the disaster. Here's pretty much what I witnessed the day of the disaster but put much more eloquently then I ever could.
Tilley Posted 17 April 2010 Posted 17 April 2010 21 years ago yesterday, The anniversary seems to have just passed by with no coverage/memorial this year - The news being more interested in clouds in the sky and politicians bullshitting on what they 'promise' to deliver. I've been thinking for the past week the anniversary must be coming up (Couldn't remember the date but guessed it was coming up) and if it was for seeing half a page in the paper today I wouldn't have known it was 21 years ago yesterday. RIP the 96. What? The whole country is pretty much grounded and we have the most important general election in years coming up very soon. Of course that is going to get more media coverage! Hillsborough got all its media coverage last year for its special 20th anniversary, not that I am dismissing it and saying people shouldn't remember it but Christ almighty, of course those two stories are more media worthy.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.