Safe Standing - Support the Early Day motion

[foxy boxing]

let's at least experiment with rail seating like they have in germany but i guess it won't work because if a few people stand then everyone else has to, to get a good view. maybe some standing areas for fans who want to stand but the moment there is trouble the authorities would want it shut down. if fans can be responsible enough to behave standing up while watching the match then fine but there will always be a few to ruin it for everyone else.

[C-man]

43 minutes ago, foxy boxing said:

let's at least experiment with rail seating like they have in germany but i guess it won't work because if a few people stand then everyone else has to, to get a good view. maybe some standing areas for fans who want to stand but the moment there is trouble the authorities would want it shut down. if fans can be responsible enough to behave standing up while watching the match then fine but there will always be a few to ruin it for everyone else.

It would be a small area available to people who wish to stand only. Would have zero negative impact on those wishing to sit - only positive as they'd no longer have the potential for fans to be stood in front of them. 

[AndWhat?]

44 minutes ago, foxy boxing said:

let's at least experiment with rail seating like they have in germany but i guess it won't work because if a few people stand then everyone else has to, to get a good view. maybe some standing areas for fans who want to stand but the moment there is trouble the authorities would want it shut down. if fans can be responsible enough to behave standing up while watching the match then fine but there will always be a few to ruin it for everyone else.

 

Not sure what you mean about if some stand then others will have too?

 

The standing section will obviously not block anyone's view who is in a seated section.

 

With regards to your other point, we have had standing at Filbert Way for 14+ years with no major trouble. Having a safe area for these fans to stand instead of the dangerous status quo is nothing but positive. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

This is the thing, if it's managed and thought out properly there are literally no negative impacts for anyone in the ground. 

Edited 7 October 2016 by Sol thewall Bamba

[Ted Maul]

9 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

This is the thing, if it's managed and thought out properly there are literally no negative impacts for anyone in the ground. 

That's the problem it has faced from the start- educating people on the benefits, and reassuring people that there are no negatives. However, a lot of the people who matter in the decision making are not willing to see the other side of the coin. It's the easy option for a politician to just dismiss it as "dangerous, remember Hillsborough?" and not put their time and effort in.

 

The one I've never understood though- the families of the Hillsborough disaster are against it. Surely the whole premise of their campaign was that it was the police's fault for letting too many people into the same section of the ground. I would have thought that better policing/ticketing in the modern era, coupled with there being a reinforced rail in front of every row to prevent surges, would make them see it differently.

[AndWhat?]

2 minutes ago, Ted Maul said:

That's the problem it has faced from the start- educating people on the benefits, and reassuring people that there are no negatives. However, a lot of the people who matter in the decision making are not willing to see the other side of the coin. It's the easy option for a politician to just dismiss it as "dangerous, remember Hillsborough?" and not put their time and effort in.

 

The one I've never understood though- the families of the Hillsborough disaster are against it. Surely the whole premise of their campaign was that it was the police's fault for letting too many people into the same section of the ground. I would have thought that better policing/ticketing in the modern era, coupled with there being a reinforced rail in front of every row to prevent surges, would make them see it differently.

 

They are just blinded by grief. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

2 minutes ago, Ted Maul said:

That's the problem it has faced from the start- educating people on the benefits, and reassuring people that there are no negatives. However, a lot of the people who matter in the decision making are not willing to see the other side of the coin. It's the easy option for a politician to just dismiss it as "dangerous, remember Hillsborough?" and not put their time and effort in.

 

The one I've never understood though- the families of the Hillsborough disaster are against it. Surely the whole premise of their campaign was that it was the police's fault for letting too many people into the same section of the ground. I would have thought that better policing/ticketing in the modern era, coupled with there being a reinforced rail in front of every row to prevent surges, would make them see it differently.

It sounds dismissive but the vast majority of people who raise issues don't know what rail seating is and how it works, and certainly haven't experienced it first hand. 

The point about the Hillsborough Justice Campaign is a good one, I thought 'justice' meant proving it was the Police's fault, not the fault of the stadium facilities or the fans themselves. I think Spirit of Shankly have spoken to them recently and they're starting to come around to the idea. 

[Ted Maul]

8 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

It sounds dismissive but the vast majority of people who raise issues don't know what rail seating is and how it works, and certainly haven't experienced it first hand. 

The point about the Hillsborough Justice Campaign is a good one, I thought 'justice' meant proving it was the Police's fault, not the fault of the stadium facilities or the fans themselves. I think Spirit of Shankly have spoken to them recently and they're starting to come around to the idea. 

Excellent news, if true. In my opinion, those families being against it probably swayed a lot of people who didn't know what safe standing was, and gave those opposing it some easy ammo. With their blessing, campaigners will be able to distance it from Hillsborough as much as they can.

[Fox92]

Pretty sure all the Kop actually stand at Anfield?

[Sol thewall Bamba]

4 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

Pretty sure all the Kop actually stand at Anfield?

Yep, and they stand to a man away from home as well. 

[steveherbe]

18 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Yep, and they stand to a man away from home as well. 

Yeah but it's not their fault, they are from Liverpool hence always the victims

[purpleronnie]

26 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

Pretty sure all the Kop actually stand at Anfield?

Not unless its a big game. First 20 or so rows almost always sit.

[Guest CityFan 06]

Off the top of my head Liverpool, Leeds, Everton and Middlesbrough all have stands at home in which fans are stood. Any others? Villa maybe. (By the way I'm not making a point here, just stating a few clubs who do stand at home).

[AndWhat?]

28 minutes ago, CityFan 06 said:

Off the top of my head Liverpool, Leeds, Everton and Middlesbrough all have stands at home in which fans are stood. Any others? Villa maybe. (By the way I'm not making a point here, just stating a few clubs who do stand at home).

 

Man Utd must have 30k standing every home game. 

[Guest CityFan 06]

1 minute ago, AndWhat? said:

 

Man Utd must have 30k standing every home game. 

Yep, must be. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

1 hour ago, CityFan 06 said:

Off the top of my head Liverpool, Leeds, Everton and Middlesbrough all have stands at home in which fans are stood. Any others? Villa maybe. (By the way I'm not making a point here, just stating a few clubs who do stand at home).

There's got to be 100K fans across the leagues every weekend standing in areas that aren't designed for standing yet nothing gets done about it becasue football fans are treated like shit. 

[promised land]

47 minutes ago, AndWhat? said:

 

Man Utd must have 30k standing every home game. 

Not having that, that's almost half the entire stadium, Stretford end lower tier stand and a lot do behind the other goal near away fans, but not 30k of them in a 75k capacity.

 

No one stands on tiers 2 and 3.

 

Their main stand the Alex Ferguson one holds over 25k over 3 tiers, hardly anyone stands there, they all jump up when they're attacking a goal as you hear the seats all clattering back.

[lestajigs]

1 hour ago, AndWhat? said:

 

Man Utd must have 30k standing every home game. 

No they do not  

[Fox92]

16 minutes ago, lestajigs said:

No they do not  

All the lower tier of the Stretford End stand tbf.

Edited 7 October 2016 by Fox92

[promised land]

9 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

All the lower tier of the Stretford End stand tbf.

Nowhere near 30k though as my post above says.

[AndWhat?]

1 hour ago, promised land said:

Not having that, that's almost half the entire stadium, Stretford end lower tier stand and a lot do behind the other goal near away fans, but not 30k of them in a 75k capacity.

 

No one stands on tiers 2 and 3.

 

Their main stand the Alex Ferguson one holds over 25k over 3 tiers, hardly anyone stands there, they all jump up when they're attacking a goal as you hear the seats all clattering back.

Entire bottom tier next to away fans, entire top tier of Stretford End and half the bottom tier plus 3k away fans.

 

Must be in the high 20's. 

[promised land]

46 minutes ago, AndWhat? said:

Entire bottom tier next to away fans, entire top tier of Stretford End and half the bottom tier plus 3k away fans.

 

Must be in the high 20's. 

SAF stand holds just over 25k, (to try and gauge crowd sizes) so you could be in the right ball park with 20k's i'll give you that. 

 

One way to view it would be the King power when full, all those standing at old Trafford? 30k ish no way, but 20k's maybe you're right.

Edited 7 October 2016 by promised land

[AndWhat?]

3 minutes ago, promised land said:

SAF stand holds just over 25k, (to try and gauge crowd sizes) so you could be in the right ball park with 20k's i'll give you that. 

 

One way to view it would be the King power when full, all those standing at old Trafford? 30k ish no way, but 20k's maybe you're right.

 

Yeah think 30k was a bit of an exaggeration.

 

But even if it was just 10k, it's a ridiculous amount of people to be standing at one ground every other week. How the government continue to pretend there isn't need for safe standing is beyond me. 

[promised land]

38 minutes ago, AndWhat? said:

 

Yeah think 30k was a bit of an exaggeration.

 

But even if it was just 10k, it's a ridiculous amount of people to be standing at one ground every other week. How the government continue to pretend there isn't need for safe standing is beyond me. 

It's certainly more than 10k but I take your point in a supposedly all seater it's more than a lot of championship, league 1,2 grounds have in total.

 

But I can't see safe standing in the top flights any time soon, they will drag their heels over it, the hillsborough inquest has gone on for over a quarter of a century.

 

The last thing they will want is every ground reverting to standing with this still in the news, even if it is safe. 

[kushiro]

Thanks to those who keep pushing this issue on this thread and elsewhere.

 

Here's a good piece on the differing views of the two main Hillsborough groups:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/oct/05/liverpool-supporters-consult-hillsborough-safe-standing-anfield