Safe Standing - Support the Early Day motion

[AndWhat?]

Weren't Grimsby gonna do this a year or two back? Wonder what happened to that. 

[Voll Blau]

Great progress and nice to see a club with hopes of being in the top two divisions not being deterred by the current stupid rules.

[C-man]

Good news. Would happily contribute towards the crowd-funding.

 

Excellent business move from Shrewsbury by the way -  please 90% of football fans all over England and improve safety for standing fans, all for free because they're the trailblazers.

 

[purpleronnie]

Quote

A second League One club — Northampton Town — will follow Shrewsbury by introducing a safe standing section, adding momentum to the campaign for similar facilities at Premier League grounds.

Sportsmail revealed on Tuesday that Shrewsbury will become trailblazers to prove the idea’s viability to the Premier League and Government.

The chairman and chief executive of Northampton - who came under Chinese ownership on Tuesday - have been in talks for over a year with their club’s supporters’ trust about the idea.

A survey of Northampton fans four months ago revealed that more than 85 per cent were in favour of introducing rail seats to allow standing. A section is likely to be in place at the Sixfields Stadium for the 2018-19 season.

Shrewsbury want to open their section next season and were astonished to find the club briefly trending on social media on Tuesday amid news that they will lead the way. Fans are confident that they will raise the necessary £50,000-£75,000 through crowdsourcing to get the safe-standing area built.

Shaun Harvey, the EFL chief executive, said: ‘It’s an important step on the journey towards our stated aim of seeing standing in stadiums across the EFL. I wish Shrewsbury Town every success.

‘The installation will be popular with the club’s fans and, more widely, will prove a valuable opportunity to assess its use at an English football ground. 

‘We are aware that the Government is monitoring the installation of 3,000 rail seats at Celtic Park —which the EFL has been to view — and have been seen as a success.

‘We have had a clear mandate from our clubs to lobby for changes to the all-seat policy.’

Sportsmail understands that for safe standing to be introduced at bigger clubs, the Government will want to see a coalition — including the FA, Premier League and police — hammering on the door to press the issue.

Only then are they likely to consider changing the legislation introduced after the 1990 Taylor Report into the Hillsborough disaster.

Government will also want to hear the views of the families of those left bereaved by Hillsborough, a minority of whom remain opposed. 

The Premier League will wait to see how clubs respond to a recent survey before deciding but FA chairman Greg Clarke has said he supports the idea.

The toughest task will be to convince the police. ‘I’d need to be convinced about safety and then start discussions on security,’ said Assistant Chief Constable Mark Roberts, Britain’s top football police officer.

‘Since the Taylor Report, we have had a really good safety record. Are as many fans happy sitting as standing? The shifting culture of football shows more families attending. Do we want to unpick that?’

The Football Supporters’ Federation — who have driven the campaign — are aware that there is still work to be done to convince Tottenham-supporting sports minister Tracey Crouch that the concept is viable and will hope to show her that the policy would be popular with families.

That's what we're up against, nothing's really changed.

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, purpleronnie said:

That's what we're up against, nothing's really changed.

Nonetheless, the fact the clubs are planning to actually implement this at new builds in the lower leagues is genuine progress.

[purpleronnie]

21 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

Nonetheless, the fact the clubs are planning to actually implement this at new builds in the lower leagues is genuine progress.

Well maybe, the fact these grounds can have terraces anyway does distract.  

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, purpleronnie said:

Well maybe, the fact these grounds can have terraces anyway does distract.  

But the idea of standing areas in general, terraced or rail seats, weren't even considered when these grounds were built. Owners are now re-thinking whether all-seaters are actually wants their fans want, or the be-all-and-end-all for clubs with higher ambitions, and that has to be a good thing.

[Corky]

4 hours ago, purpleronnie said:

That's what we're up against, nothing's really changed.

Why do some believe that bringing in safe standing will change vast areas of the stadium and therefore the demographic? Families can still sit in the large amount of seating areas that will still exist within stadiums if they wish to. 

[ajthefox]

It's fvcking painful reading about safe standing most of the time, it really is. So much uninformed, ignorant, hypocritical and blind bullshit flying around based on nothing more than outdated perceptions and speculation.

 

[Finnaldo]

16 minutes ago, ajthefox said:

It's fvcking painful reading about safe standing most of the time, it really is. So much uninformed, ignorant, hypocritical and blind bullshit flying around based on nothing more than outdated perceptions and speculation.

 

 

I think you just described virtually all online discussion

[yorkie1999]

7 hours ago, ajthefox said:

It's fvcking painful reading about safe standing most of the time, it really is. So much uninformed, ignorant, hypocritical and blind bullshit flying around based on nothing more than outdated perceptions and speculation.

 

Because whilst it's got the word standing in it, you won't change a lot of peoples perception of standing at football matches and other events, mosh pits being an example.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

15 hours ago, Corky said:

Why do some believe that bringing in safe standing will change vast areas of the stadium and therefore the demographic? Families can still sit in the large amount of seating areas that will still exist within stadiums if they wish to. 

Yeah, the "I PAY FOR A SEAT I WANT TO SIT IN IT" brigade were out in force a couple of days ago, where do people get the impression that grounds will become all standing? When has a ground in England EVER been all standing ffs. It'll be 10% tops in most grounds imo.

 

8 hours ago, ajthefox said:

It's fvcking painful reading about safe standing most of the time, it really is. So much uninformed, ignorant, hypocritical and blind bullshit flying around based on nothing more than outdated perceptions and speculation.

The most frustrating thing is when people say "I don't want us to go back to safe standing". We've never had safe standing in the UK, how can we go 'back' to it? Just shows a total lack of understanding about what it is they think they're arguing against. 

[Stadt]

Never mind the fact that hundreds of thousands of fans are standing every week anyway  

[Bilo]

I'm going to be that annoying, condescending twat, but I'm probably right anyway.

 

If you're actively opposed to safe standing, you almost certainly don't understand it.

[Wymsey]

There's a formal event involving discussions with representatives about the possible future on safe-standing, in September.

https://www.soccerex.com/events/global-convention-2017/the-academy/safe-standing-a-step-forward-in-fan-experience-or-a-return-to-football-s-dark-days

[purpleronnie]

This won't help.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40687412

 

Quote

Celtic say the Green Brigade section of the club's Glasgow stadium will be closed for the next two games "amid serious safety concerns".

The club is writing to the 900 season-ticket holders affected to explain the decision and "next steps".

Uefa charged Celtic over an "illicit banner" displayed during their Champions League tie against Linfield.

 

Celtic chief executive Peter Lawwell said decisive action was needed in response to the fans' behaviour.

The Glasgow club have also been cited for a "kit infringement" and "blocked stairways" during Wednesday's 4-0 victory at Celtic Park.

In the aftermath, they condemned the conduct of "a small minority of the crowd".

In the past six years, the Scottish champions have been punished on 10 separate occasions relating to misconduct from supporters during European ties.

'Tarnishing club's reputation'

In a statement on Celtic's website, the club said the fans' behaviour during matches against Linfield in midweek and Hearts last season were a cause for concern.

The section will be closed for next Wednesday's Champions League qualifier against Rosenborg and against Hearts on the opening day of the Premiership season on 5 August.

"The safe standing area of the stadium had been working very well until the final game of last season against Hearts, when large numbers of flares were smuggled into and set off under banners within the Green Brigade section," Celtic said.

"It was an incredibly irresponsible and co-ordinated action which could have had tragic consequences.

"Safety of all supporters at Celtic Park is of paramount importance to the club.

"The safe operation of the safe standing area at Celtic Park requires effective communication and engagement with the supporters in that area.

"Unfortunately, due to the events at the Hearts and Linfield matches, the club is not satisfied that the Green Brigade section can be operated safely at this time.

 

Celtic say they will attempt to talk to the Green Brigade about a way forward before admitting them to the section in future.

Lawwell said the behaviour of the fans in the section during the Linfield and Hearts matches amounted to a "serious safety risk".

The club's chief executive added: "There is no room for debate. The safety authorities and the football authorities make the rules. They also enforce the rules.

"If the rules are broken, Celtic will be punished again and again. There is no hiding place from these realities.

"Anyone who has Celtic's interests at heart must surely recognise them and behave accordingly.

'Celtic wake-up call'

"Every club which visits here says the atmosphere is incredible and that is something that we have worked very hard to support and encourage.

"We cannot understand why supporters who are capable of contributing so much that is positive to the club can be so reckless in doing it damage.

"In addition to the serious safety concerns, we face further Uefa disciplinary action.

"This is not a decision we have taken lightly, but the behaviour of fans in this section is posing a direct risk to the safe operation of the stadium and is also seriously tarnishing the club's hard-won reputation."

Celtic manager Brendan Rodgers expressed disappointment to be talking about "stadium safety and paramilitary banners rather than our progress into the next round of Europe".

Rodgers added that the use of pyrotechnics, unacceptable banners and ignoring stewards enforcing basic stadium safety measures "are simply not on".

"The fans have a responsibility to behave in the stadium and I would urge everyone involved to see the damage this is causing to the club," he said.

"Hopefully this is a wake-up call. The players thrive on the cauldron that the fans create at Celtic Park, but there are clearly boundaries that you can't step over."

 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

Shame about what happened at Celtic, but it happened because they have the most aggressive active fans group in the country, not because they have a safe standing section. They still would have done it if they had been stood in seating areas like they used to be.

[ajthefox]

18 hours ago, purpleronnie said:

This won't help.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40687412

 

 

 

44 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Shame about what happened at Celtic, but it happened because they have the most aggressive active fans group in the country, not because they have a safe standing section. They still would have done it if they had been stood in seating areas like they used to be.

Stupid cvnts. Of course what you said is true, but try telling that to anyone who already thinks this is a bad idea and they won't agree.

 

This kind of shit is the last thing we need.

[BenTheFox]

On 28/03/2017 at 13:34, Voll Blau said:

Again, this is not "reverting" to anything as I made clear in an earlier post. This technology has never been available in England before.

 

Other benefits other than civil liberties:

 

- Spectator safety: Literally tens of thousands of people stand up at football grounds every week. This is not going to change. Rail seating, with crush barriers on every single row, will allow them to do so safely.

- Comfort: Standing can be more comfortable for supporters with conditions such as back problems (like me), and taller people (also me). Should we not be allowed to choose to do so rather than being forced to sit on what can often be extremely uncomfortable plastic seats for extended periods of time?

 

Care to refute either of those points?

This. Seating areas at football grounds are very uncomfortable for people my size and I'm 5ft11/6ft. There are people that go to the games who are far taller than me. 

[Basingstoke Fox]

Liverpool's main supporters group Spirit of Shankly have been engaging with supporters about this. They have a few people with a decent background on the panel, I've watched about 25 minutes so far but it seems like it'll be a productive discussion:

 

 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

SoS should be one of the leading parties in this campaign imo. They and the wider LFC fan base fought for almost 30 years to prove that the disaster was caused by Police incompetence and nothing else, not standing, not the fans. 

[Basingstoke Fox]

16 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

SoS should be one of the leading parties in this campaign imo. They and the wider LFC fan base fought for almost 30 years to prove that the disaster was caused by Police incompetence and nothing else, not standing, not the fans. 

I get the impression that they are very much in favour of safe-standing, but they're equally cautious about the approach they take with introducing the discussion and also putting across their views. They are being pro-active though and hopefully those who flat out reject the idea saying "there is no such thing as safe standing" based on nothing but their "opinion" rather than hard evidence, will at least listen to reasoning for it.

 

I'll be interested to see whether anybody changes their stance based on the points made and if so how many.

[davieG]

Scudamore is cautious on the issue of safe standing, too. 'We are in the middle of a detailed consultation with fan groups and clubs,' Scudamore says. 'We have no position yet. 

'The only thing I would say is I don't think (support for safe standing) is as universal as some of the supporter groups would have you believe. We have to consider the wider public, not just those with the loudest voices. 

'Even if the view is we would like to introduce it, we have to convince the Government. I haven't in my time met a sports minister who wants to reverse the legislation on their watch.'

[purpleronnie]

That's what I've said all along, you can persuade the premiership all you like but changing the governments stance would be incredibly hard, they've never shown any interest in changing the rule/laws. 

 

[ajthefox]

3 hours ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

SoS should be one of the leading parties in this campaign imo. They and the wider LFC fan base fought for almost 30 years to prove that the disaster was caused by Police incompetence and nothing else, not standing, not the fans. 

Definitely.

 

One of the things that grates on me is that many members of the Hilsborough families have spent 30 years trying to prove that, and yet oppose standing because they claim it is unsafe. I don't say this lightly but it's for me it's a hypocritical stance to take. Heaven forbid anyone with any sort of authority say that in public though, I can only imagine that would go down like a sack of shit tied to an anvil.

Edited 24 July 2017 by ajthefox