After our game on Sunday...

EASTENDER MARKY · by **EASTENDER MARKY** » 02 Oct 2006 08:55

Potter Todays atmosphere was excellent in the away end and a joy to see everyone standing through out.

Agreed.

orange · by **orange** » 10 Oct 2006 14:36

Reading fans dont want to gain more rights to choice and freedom they like being forced around by the people in suits. I thought anyone who attends football matches would prefer not to watch football in the environment of forced seating, plastic music played after goals and being shouted at for blocking advertising boards by morons in florecent coats but nope Reading fans actually like it.

bobby1413 · by **bobby1413** » 10 Oct 2006 14:42

orange Reading fans dont want to gain more rights to choice and freedom they like being forced around by the people in suits. I thought anyone who attends football matches would prefer not to watch football in the environment of forced seating, plastic music played after goals and being shouted at for blocking advertising boards by morons in florecent coats but nope Reading fans actually like it.

In the world of modern football, you will always be asked to sit down, at least in the home ends the majority of the time.

As for the music, other clubs also play it. Not everyone likes it.

Never been shouted at for blocking advertising boards.

Thinks seem different in the atmosphere this season in the stadium. I think any regular visitor will confirm this.

West Stand Man · by **West Stand Man** » 10 Oct 2006 15:38

orange Reading fans dont want to gain more rights to choice and freedom they like being forced around by the people in suits. I thought anyone who attends football matches would prefer not to watch football in the environment of forced seating, plastic music played after goals and being shouted at for blocking advertising boards by morons in florecent coats but nope Reading fans actually like it.

Well you were wrong then weren't you.

OldBiscuit · by **OldBiscuit** » 11 Oct 2006 00:09

Andy.. Get over it! The terraces are gone for good. Why do you want to go backwards to an environment that provides the neanderthals unrestricted movement, allows them to cause trouble, create havoc, and then just melt back in and hide in the crowd. But thats your perogative. Perhaps at the same time you may wish to campaign for a return of Elm Park style toilets, where you wade through a pool of piss to take a leak, and then find that the taps don't work, you get covered in cobwebs from the ceilings and then get threatened by the bloke you accidentally bump into in the darkness on the way out. You then sail up the 'Back of the Southbank Canal' to take your place for the 2nd half, but two hundred 6'6" people that stood down the other end in the first half have changed ends in anticipation of seeing the action for the second half, are stood where you were stood a few moments ago and now you get rejoin your mates, let alone see the game because its TERRACES. Campaign to close the bar because its taking away the good 'old fashioned' atmosphere that you used get! Campaign for a return of Pounds, Shillings & Pence, for the return of Black & white TV's, for the return of the six day week, abolition of electric and the return of Oil Lamps. Bring back Loin Clothe, Bows & Arrows, Swords, The Stocks, Public Executions and, last but not least, abolish civilisation. Andy, get a grip!

orange · by **orange** » 11 Oct 2006 02:52

if alcohol had been banned for a couple of years would it then be old fashioned? what about televisions or computers or anything at all for that matter? theres nothing old fashioned about terraces!id like a freedom to choose whether i stand or sit, does anyone actually want everyone to get forced to do one of the 2?

OldBiscuit · by **OldBiscuit** » 11 Oct 2006 23:25

A good campaign would be to lobby that all England games are played in close season, and stop the pointless disruption to the league programme. It will have been a very boring 2 weeks come saturday!

Cavaman · by **Cavaman** » 12 Oct 2006 13:20

RoyalBlue
West Stand Man
Andy M A few of us are meeting to discuss a peaceful protest we're planning outside our ground and during our game v Blackburn on the 29th October.

Anybody interested would be more than welcome to join us.

The main aim of this protest is to persuade our club (and hopefully others) that they should be speaking out, on behalf of their fans, in favour of safe standing areas. Many supporters are feeling increasingly alienated from their clubs as they feel strongly that the somtimes heavy handed enforcement of the regulations have a detrimental effect on the atmosphere that being a part of is integral to their support of their club. Indeed, the two supporters behind this protest have decided that they will no longer attend games at the Boleyn.

If you want to come along, drop me an email at info@standupsitdown.co.uk and I'll let you have details.

Andy M
http://www.standupsitdown.co.uk

Please ensure that you make it quite clear that you don't represent me or any of my family, all of whom love all seater stadiums.

The atmosphere at our match v Man Utd, and the atmosphere generally this season shows that sitting is NOT a negative effect.

You were clearly so absorbed in the game that you failed to spot large sections of the crowd, including virtually all of the away support, standing up throughout the game. I think this might have had something to do with the great atmosphere as I'm sure that any vocal coach will tell you that it is best to be standing if you really want to project your voice!
Also interesting that the Safety Office clearly decided that it was safer allowing the crowd to stand than trying to get his stewards/the police to make them sit down! Clearly standing really isn't that dangerous!

Having just got used to the idea of standing in front of my seat so as not to upset all those in front of me who want to stand NOW I have to shout and chant as well! What is this football supporting lark coming to?

Andy M · by **Andy M** » 12 Oct 2006 17:55

OldBiscuit Andy.. Get over it! The terraces are gone for good. Why do you want to go backwards to an environment that provides the neanderthals unrestricted movement, allows them to cause trouble, create havoc, and then just melt back in and hide in the crowd.

I actually find your sterotyping of football fans who wish to stand quite insulting. Then again, it's pefectly ok for people to make such sweeping statements about football fans isn't it?

I should be so used to ill informed arguments (especially coming from people who make assumptions as to what we're trying to achieve rather than understand what we're all about) but it never fails to infuriate me when people just trot out stupid responses without having the first class clue what they're on about.

Have you not heard of CCTV?

Do you not realise that if people want to make trouble they do so well away from the ground?

Have you not heard of banning orders meaning many "neanderthals" are banned from football?

Does it not occur to you that at many clubs fans have remained standing regardless of the installation of seats without riots breaking out?

Are you not aware that the Germans stand and that their standing areas are so successful they are actually being extended?

Are you not aware that terraces actually still remain at many clubs?

OldBiscuit · by **OldBiscuit** » 12 Oct 2006 23:25

Andy, you are so, so, so naive. You are living in a fantasy world of misguideness. CCTV does not stop trouble, it just enables the authorities to identify the culprits AFTER the events. Trouble makers cause trouble away from the ground, but would soon return to causing trouble inside the ground should terraces return. Banning orders are only applicable to those that have been caught and have been proven far from foolproof. A few incidents of disorderly behaviour have broken out in all seater stadiums, in fact Millwall did a pretty good job at the Mad Stad back in 1999, but rioting is quite difficult in all seaters, (seats get in way, stops running battles. Had to point that out due to your short sight) and the stewards were soon able to deal with it a lot quicker than they could possibly have done on terraces.(Bristol City, Portsmouth, Etc. @ Elm Park). Yes, terraces still remain, at Cardiff for example. I rest my case there. And what has German football got to do with English football. German football is rife with hooliganism.
Terraces were the original class insult to ordinary folk. 'We the 'well off' will have the seats and the ordinary bloke can stand on terraces, thats good enough for them, they should be so grateful'. How patronising!

You also don't seem to realise that as the club has grown over the last ten years, should for some ludicrous reason that the terraces did return, its not going to be 5,000 people scattered comfortably around the ground as it was at Elm Park, it would be 35,000 squeezed in, with no chance of reaching any of the facilities. Victoria for queen, you cock!

Andy M · by **Andy M** » 13 Oct 2006 11:23

Andy, you are so, so, so naive. AND YOU ARE SO, SO, SO PATRONISING.

You are living in a fantasy world of misguideness.

CCTV does not stop trouble, it just enables the authorities to identify the culprits AFTER the events. I'D SAY CCTV ENSURES THAT THE VAST MAJORITY BEHAVE THEMSELVES BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT THE CCTV IS ON THEM. -

Trouble makers cause trouble away from the ground, but would soon return to causing trouble inside the ground should terraces return.

WOULD THEY? WHY? COME ON, BACK UP YOUR CLAIM, PLEASE. AND AS PER EARLIER POST , WE'RE NOT CAMPAINING FOR TERRACES. THE CULTURE HAS CHANGED, HOOLIGANS ARE NOW A MINORITY WITH THE DAYS OF 1000S OCCUPYING OTHER ENDS HAVE GONE AND WENT BEFORE END OF TERRACING. CCTV, BETTER POLICING ETC ARE ALL FACTORS IN THIS.

Banning orders are only applicable to those that have been caught and have been proven far from foolproof. AGREED, BUT A MAJOR DETERERNT, I'D WAGER.

A few incidents of disorderly behaviour have broken out in all seater stadiums, in fact Millwall did a pretty good job at the Mad Stad back in 1999, PROVING THAT SEATS DON'T STOP TROUBLE , INDEED, ONE OF THE MOST FAMOUS INCIDENTS OF HOOLIGANSIM WAS MILLWALL IN SEATS AT LUTON AFTER WHICH THATCHER DECLARED WAR ON FOOTBALL FANS.

but rioting is quite difficult in all seaters, (seats get in way, stops running battles. Had to point that out due to your short sight) and the stewards were soon able to deal with it a lot quicker than they could possibly have done on terraces.(Bristol City, Portsmouth, Etc. @ Elm Park). ONE INCIDENT IN 1999? YOU'LL HAVE TO DO BETTER THAN THAT, IS THAT ALL YOU CAN CITE? AS FOR THE OTHER "FEW", YOUR POINT IS WHAT, EXACTLY? THERE ARE A HANDFUL OF INCIDENTS INVOLVING A HANDFUL OF FANS OUT OF THE TENS OF THOUSANDS THAT ATTEND GAMES EACH WEEK? TERRACES IN LOWER DIVISIONS, WE DON'T GET FIGHTS THERE....

Yes, terraces still remain, at Cardiff for example. I rest my case there. And what has German football got to do with English football. German football is rife with hooliganism. YES IT WELL MAY BE, BUT IS IT IN THE GROUNDS? DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT THE AUTHORITIES WOULD ALLOW THE EXTENSION OF THEIR ARRANGEMENTS IF THEY THOUGHT THAT THE TERRACES MADE FOR HOOLIGANSIM. YOU'LL BE BLAMING THE EXISTANCE OF NEO NAZIS IN GERMANY ON STANDING ACCOMMODATION NEXT!

Terraces were the original class insult to ordinary folk. 'We the 'well off' will have the seats and the ordinary bloke can stand on terraces, thats good enough for them, they should be so grateful'. How patronising! ORIGINAL INSULT? OH PLEASE, WHAT WORLD ARE YOU LIVING IN? IF THE "ORD I NARY" FOLK WERE THAT UNHAPPY WITH THE TERRACES WHY DID THOUSANDS POOR THROUGH THE TURNSTILES WEEK IN, WEEK OUT. WHY DO MANY THOUSANDS WANT THE RETURN OF STANDING ACCOMMODATION TODAY. BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO STUPID TO REALISE THAT THEY ARE "ORDINARY FOLK" WHO DON'T DESERVE SEATS OR ARE KNUCKLE DRAGGERS WHO'D RIOT IN YOUR BOOK, NO DOUBT!

You also don't seem to realise that as the club has grown over the last ten years, should for some ludicrous reason that the terraces did return, its not going to be 5,000 people scattered comfortably around the ground as it was at Elm Park, it would be 35,000 squeezed in, with no chance of reaching any of the facilities. 35,000 SQUEEZED IN? NOT EVEN GOING TO BOTHER RESPONDING TO THIS GEM!

IF YOU WOULD CARE DO SOME RESEARCH ON THE NET, YOU'LL FIND THAT MAJOR ACADEMICS WHO UNDERSTAND THE SUBJECT FAR BETTER THAN YOU OR I DO NOT BLAME HOOLIGANISM ON STANDING ACCOMMODATION...

Victoria for queen, you c*ck![/quote]

I'm not actually a Reading supporter but will be coming to your stadium for our away fixture. As I always do when people resort to puerile insults I invite them to meet with me for a pint before the game so we can discuss this face to face. I'd be pleased to extend that invitation to you, so you can, if you so wish, carry on calling me a cock simply because you don't agree with me.

ruprecht · by **ruprecht** » 13 Oct 2006 11:51

Andy M, I'd ignore Old Biscuit and his sweeping statements as he just seems like a blinkered, bitter old man. He doesn't have the faintest clue what SUSD are trying to achieve and it looks like he just wants an argument with someone.

Jerry St Clair · by **Jerry St Clair** » 13 Oct 2006 12:36

ruprecht Andy M, I'd ignore Old Biscuit and his sweeping statements as he just seems like a blinkered, bitter old man. He doesn't have the faintest clue what SUSD are trying to achieve and it looks like he just wants an argument with someone.

Well done, you saved me the trouble.

Royalphil · by **Royalphil** » 13 Oct 2006 12:50

I find this debate pointless... do you see terraces in the new plans for the Mad Stad?

It ain't gonna happen...

I too enjoyed the old days of terraces at Elm Park... and, somewhat, the standing at Upton Park the other Sunday....

Unfortunately choice is not an option these modern days...

...seats are safer...

...end of.

Top Flight · by **Top Flight** » 13 Oct 2006 14:24

Wheres the petition? I'll sign it!

Anyone who remembers the South Bank, I am sure would be in favour of having a choice to stand up! Football was far more enjoyable when you could go to the game and stand for 90 minutes.

Andy M is only saying that people who want to stand should have an area where they can stand and people who want to sit should have an area where they can sit!

How can people not be in favour of that! If there was an area where people could stand with lower prices to reflect the fact that standing is less comfortable than sitting. This might make football more attractive to lower income working class people again and I bet the pen would be full each game!

I don't see why half the East Stand towards the away end can't be converted into German style safe terracing when the stadium expansion goes ahead. That way there will be just as many seats that the Mad Stad had before. So that absolutely no one would lose out and the stadium capacity would increase from 38,000 to possibly 45,000.

I am 100% in favour of a standing area. Why can't people who want to stand have a chance to have an area where they can stand?

People who want to sit have an area where they can sit! What is so wrong about that?

West Stand Man · by **West Stand Man** » 13 Oct 2006 15:02

Top Flight Wheres the petition? I'll sign it!

Anyone who remembers the South Bank, I am sure would be in favour of having a choice to stand up! Football was far more enjoyable when you could go to the game and stand for 90 minutes. ACTUALLY I DON'T THINK I WOULD BE IN FAVOUR. I HATED STANDING FOR 2 HOURS

Andy M is only saying that people who want to stand should have an area where they can stand and people who want to sit should have an area where they can sit!

How can people not be in favour of that! If there was an area where people could stand with lower prices to reflect the fact that standing is less comfortable than sitting. This might make football more attractive to lower income working class people again and I bet the pen would be full each game! BUT THEY WOULDN'T BE CHEAPER, BECAUSE THE NEW SO CALLED SAFER STANDING STILL OCCUPIES A SIMILAR SPACE PER FAN TO SEATING. SO YOU'D PROBABLY HAVE THE DISCOMFORT OF STANDING - BUT PAY THE SAME AS A SEATED FAN?

I don't see why half the East Stand towards the away end can't be converted into German style safe terracing when the stadium expansion goes ahead. That way there will be just as many seats that the Mad Stad had before. So that absolutely no one would lose out and the stadium capacity would increase from 38,000 to possibly 45,000. GERMAN STANDING AREAS ARE NOT THE RIGHT COMPARATOR. THE LEVEL OF TROUBLE IN BUNDESLIGA GROUNDS IS SUFFICIENT TO KILL OFF THE IDEA IN THIS COUNTRY; SO FAR AS CAPACITY IS CONCERNED SEE ABOVE.

I am 100% in favour of a standing area. Why can't people who want to stand have a chance to have an area where they can stand? BECAUSE THE LAW SAYS SO.

People who want to sit have an area where they can sit! What is so wrong about that?

[/quote][/b]

Top Flight · by **Top Flight** » 13 Oct 2006 16:14

West Stand Man
Top Flight Wheres the petition? I'll sign it!

Anyone who remembers the South Bank, I am sure would be in favour of having a choice to stand up! Football was far more enjoyable when you could go to the game and stand for 90 minutes. ACTUALLY I DON'T THINK I WOULD BE IN FAVOUR. I HATED STANDING FOR 2 HOURS

Andy M is only saying that people who want to stand should have an area where they can stand and people who want to sit should have an area where they can sit!

How can people not be in favour of that! If there was an area where people could stand with lower prices to reflect the fact that standing is less comfortable than sitting. This might make football more attractive to lower income working class people again and I bet the pen would be full each game! BUT THEY WOULDN'T BE CHEAPER, BECAUSE THE NEW SO CALLED SAFER STANDING STILL OCCUPIES A SIMILAR SPACE PER FAN TO SEATING. SO YOU'D PROBABLY HAVE THE DISCOMFORT OF STANDING - BUT PAY THE SAME AS A SEATED FAN?

I don't see why half the East Stand towards the away end can't be converted into German style safe terracing when the stadium expansion goes ahead. That way there will be just as many seats that the Mad Stad had before. So that absolutely no one would lose out and the stadium capacity would increase from 38,000 to possibly 45,000. GERMAN STANDING AREAS ARE NOT THE RIGHT COMPARATOR. THE LEVEL OF TROUBLE IN BUNDESLIGA GROUNDS IS SUFFICIENT TO KILL OFF THE IDEA IN THIS COUNTRY; SO FAR AS CAPACITY IS CONCERNED SEE ABOVE.

I am 100% in favour of a standing area. Why can't people who want to stand have a chance to have an area where they can stand? BECAUSE THE LAW SAYS SO.

People who want to sit have an area where they can sit! What is so wrong about that?

[/b][/quote]

I bet you enjoyed tearing my argument to pieces!

But anyway, what Andy M is asking for is CHOICE. That is all. Why can't people who want to stand stand? I believe that people should have that choice!

Andy M · by **Andy M** » 13 Oct 2006 16:34

[quote="West Stand Man"][quote="Top Flight"] ACTUALLY I DON'T THINK I WOULD BE IN FAVOUR. I HATED STANDING FOR 2 HOURS

Nobody is asking you to stand.

BUT THEY WOULDN'T BE CHEAPER, BECAUSE THE NEW SO CALLED SAFER STANDING STILL OCCUPIES A SIMILAR SPACE PER FAN TO SEATING. SO YOU'D PROBABLY HAVE THE DISCOMFORT OF STANDING - BUT PAY THE SAME AS A SEATED FAN?

Why bang n about discomfort when it won't effect you? An element of supporters wish to stand so obviously can't find it so uncomfortable. And as previously, nobody is asking you to stand.

As for costs, could you just explain how you know what the pricing would be?

GERMAN STANDING AREAS ARE NOT THE RIGHT COMPARATOR. THE LEVEL OF TROUBLE IN BUNDESLIGA GROUNDS IS SUFFICIENT TO KILL OFF THE IDEA IN THIS COUNTRY; SO FAR AS CAPACITY IS CONCERNED SEE ABOVE.

I'm well aware of the trouble in Germany but my understanding is that that this is mostly driven by neo Nazi skin heads rather than the trouble we had in this country and that huge efforts are being made to stop this. I've had a quick search on Google but can't actually find anything that indicates that is that level of trouble inside the grounds. Maybe you could let me have the facts and figures that back up your assertion? I'm more than willing to stand corrected. And as I said earlier, if there was so much trouble would the authorities be extending the standing areas they have.

BECAUSE THE LAW SAYS SO. The law doesn't say so at all. Standing is against ground regulations and not the law.

TOP FLIGHT - thanks for your support. The petition can be found at http://www.standupsitdown.co.uk

shadesrwrf · by **shadesrwrf** » 13 Oct 2006 18:14

OldBiscuit Andy, you are so, so, so naive. You are living in a fantasy world of misguideness. CCTV does not stop trouble, it just enables the authorities to identify the culprits AFTER the events. Trouble makers cause trouble away from the ground, but would soon return to causing trouble inside the ground should terraces return. Banning orders are only applicable to those that have been caught and have been proven far from foolproof. A few incidents of disorderly behaviour have broken out in all seater stadiums, in fact Millwall did a pretty good job at the Mad Stad back in 1999, but rioting is quite difficult in all seaters, (seats get in way, stops running battles. Had to point that out due to your short sight) and the stewards were soon able to deal with it a lot quicker than they could possibly have done on terraces.(Bristol City, Portsmouth, Etc. @ Elm Park). Yes, terraces still remain, at Cardiff for example. I rest my case there. And what has German football got to do with English football. German football is rife with hooliganism.
Terraces were the original class insult to ordinary folk. 'We the 'well off' will have the seats and the ordinary bloke can stand on terraces, thats good enough for them, they should be so grateful'. How patronising!

You also don't seem to realise that as the club has grown over the last ten years, should for some ludicrous reason that the terraces did return, its not going to be 5,000 people scattered comfortably around the ground as it was at Elm Park, it would be 35,000 squeezed in, with no chance of reaching any of the facilities. Victoria for queen, you cock!

At the point you resorted to juvenile name calling you lost. What a shame you couldn't continue to have a reasoned and civilised argument.

Andy M · by **Andy M** » 13 Oct 2006 19:06

Royalphil :shock:

I find this debate pointless... do you see terraces in the new plans for the Mad Stad?

It ain't gonna happen...

I too enjoyed the old days of terraces at Elm Park... and, somewhat, the standing at Upton Park the other Sunday....

Unfortunately choice is not an option these modern days...

...seats are safer...

...end of.

Why are seats safer? Proof please and I'd advise you not to say Hillsborough.

After our game on Sunday...

Re: After our game on Sunday...

Who is online