Safe-Standing petition

[Ian Royal]

I always took such a childish pleasure in that song. I miss it.

[SPARTA]

Big steps made today.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... areas.html

Football League to lobby Government in major move for safe standing areas

The first official moves to bring back standing at all-seat stadiums in English football were being made on Thursday night after the Football League agreed to lobby the Government to allow its clubs to introduce so-called “safe standing” at grounds.
Telegraph Sport has learnt that the league’s executives were given an overwhelming mandate to challenge ground regulations implemented in the wake of the Hillsborough disaster, following a survey of all 72 of its members.

The league revealed the findings of the survey at its clubs’ meeting in Derby, with around 70 per cent of those who responded backing chief executive Shaun Harvey to begin lobbying Sports Minister Helen Grant, something he vowed to do.
It is the first time one of the English game’s governing bodies has been prepared to ask the Government to legitimise standing areas at all-seat stadiums since they were effectively outlawed almost 20 years ago.
The league had previously resisted pressure from its clubs to agitate for change but there has been a rethink since the appointment of Harvey, with Thursday’s decision a major breakthrough by campaigners for safe-standing areas.

The Football Supporters’ Federation has spearheaded moves for what is known as “rail seating” to be permitted at all-seat grounds. Implemented successfully on the continent, it involves seats being installed within protective rails at the back of a given row, allowing spectators the option of sitting or standing.

Advocates claim that it not only boosts capacity but promotes lower ticket prices and improves the atmosphere at matches, as well as being safer than the increasing trend of clubs turning a blind eye to persistent standing by many spectators.
Welcoming the news, the FSF’s safe-standing coordinator Peter Daykin told Telegraph Sport: “This sounds really encouraging and backs up the FSF’s position – a significant proportion of football supporters want to stand and many football clubs are happy to give them that choice.

“In arriving at this decision, we’re sure the clubs will have considered the arguments for and against, the opportunities standing affords, and the concerns the issue throws up.
“It’s quite right that the football family, the government and the police continue to engage in an open, honest, evidence-led debate on the subject.
“The FSF believe that a small number of controlled trials of safe standing areas is an excellent means of facilitating this debate.
“The 72 clubs of the Football League deserve great credit for the way they have approached this issue, as do the organisation’s staff and board, and we would particularly like to thank the many supporters who lobbied their clubs to say ’yes’ to safe standing.

“It’s crucial that individual fans continue to make their voices heard on this issue.”
The Sports Grounds Safety Authority, which decides whether a given stadium is fit to stage sporting events, has refused to recognise rail seating as conforming with its regulations for football matches in England, insisting that any change to that policy would require governmental intervention.
The Government in turn says it will not act unless football’s governing bodies and the police convince it safe standing poses no risk to spectators.

A recent survey found Liverpool, who endured the loss of 96 -supporters in Britain’s worst sporting disaster, were the only Premier League club actively opposed to safe standing, out of respect for the Hillsborough families.
Only one of 22 Championship clubs which attended a meeting a year ago was against safe standing trials.
The Football League could now attempt to join forces with the Football Association and Premier League, which has been opposed to change in apparent defiance of the will of an increasing number of its clubs.

The consultation document sent out to Football League clubs included the following four questions:
Should the Football League approach the Minister for Sport to request that the all-seat stadiums requirement for Championship clubs be reviewed with a view to the reintroduction of standing accommodation?
Should the Football League approach the Sports Grounds Safety Authority to request that rail seating products be licensed in Football League grounds?

Should clubs be permitted to accommodate supporters in rail seating in the Football League Championship?
Should clubs be permitted to revert from seating to standing accommodation in League One and League Two following relegation from the Football League Championship?

The final question covered the loophole that exempts grounds below the Championship from being all-seater until they are promoted to it, after which they must retain that status.

Speaking in December after revealing details of the survey to Telegraph Sport, Harvey said: “I’ve never been able to rationalise the argument in my own mind as to why a terrace is perfectly safe in League One, yet, if a club gets promoted, it’s no longer safe. Because if it’s not safe in League One, it shouldn’t be getting used.”


One day, maybe not for another decade, who knows, but we will eventually get something like this at the MadStad. Lovely!



https://picasaweb.google.com/SafeStandi ... directlink

[AthleticoSpizz]

that looks absolutely disgusting

Even battery hens don't have to pay for their roost

[North Somerset Royal]

Bristol City are to instal safe standing at Ashton Gate apparently

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26141427

[SPARTA]

They started installing some yesterday. Good on them! Only allowed for the rugby so far though, which I'm surprised about because terracing is allowed in L1 and L2.

[EPR2.0]

Why is the top of the seat back _behind_ the safe standing bar above it? Looks like a recipe for repeatedly whacking the back of your head against the bar as you sit down.

[SPARTA]

The clubs recent response to a fan inquiring about rail seats:



I get that reasoning though. We have more legroom than most clubs, including Bristol City above, and the advantage of having the row above slightly higher than other grounds, so views are also not put at risk, unlike a typically old terrace being converted back to standing.

[Ian Royal]

This is something STAR should absolutely be gathering information about interest in taking advantage of rail seats and support for safe standing if they haven't recently.

[peterroyal76]

Those coaches aren't going to run themselves Ian.

[paultheroyal]

I was convinced this would never happen so fair play.

Such a shame Dirk flounced and left these boards before he could happily gloat.

[melonhead]

i cant see the club being able to squeeze sufficiently more standers in than seaters given the design of the stadium
therefore its not a financially viable option to pay out loads redoing the seats, cos there wont be a significant increase in ticket sales.
why would they bother

[Nameless]

I'm obviously missing something.
If clubs plan to instal this type of set up then there is no increase in capacity whatsover as they will have to sell one ticket per 'seat'. If they sell more than one ticket per seat space the issue will be with evacuation times, crushing in exits and inadequate facilities.
But if the rules will allow standing then the seat part is redundant anyway and an unnecessary cost.

This type of seat is only of use where clubs play in competitions with differing rules. So the German clubs have the seats locked away for league games and locked down for European games. Football League clubs don't need them.

I understand that the current thinking is that having crush barriers on everystep is safer, but that doesn't need the seats.

Anyone have any clue why we seem to be heading towards inappropriate, over engineered solutions to this ?

[Royal Monk]

[tmesis]

I'm obviously missing something.
If clubs plan to instal this type of set up then there is no increase in capacity whatsover as they will have to sell one ticket per 'seat'. If they sell more than one ticket per seat space the issue will be with evacuation times, crushing in exits and inadequate facilities.
But if the rules will allow standing then the seat part is redundant anyway and an unnecessary cost.

This type of seat is only of use where clubs play in competitions with differing rules. So the German clubs have the seats locked away for league games and locked down for European games. Football League clubs don't need them.

I understand that the current thinking is that having crush barriers on everystep is safer, but that doesn't need the seats.

Anyone have any clue why we seem to be heading towards inappropriate, over engineered solutions to this ?

The only real positive is it being a kind of foot in the door towards getting real terracing back.

I fully agree through that replacing current seats with rail seats is utterly pointless. You'd be far better off just installing a handrail on each row and leaving the seats as they are, like the seats here at Kaiserslautern.

[Ian Royal]

I'm obviously missing something.
If clubs plan to instal this type of set up then there is no increase in capacity whatsover as they will have to sell one ticket per 'seat'. If they sell more than one ticket per seat space the issue will be with evacuation times, crushing in exits and inadequate facilities.
But if the rules will allow standing then the seat part is redundant anyway and an unnecessary cost.

This type of seat is only of use where clubs play in competitions with differing rules. So the German clubs have the seats locked away for league games and locked down for European games. Football League clubs don't need them.

I understand that the current thinking is that having crush barriers on everystep is safer, but that doesn't need the seats.

Anyone have any clue why we seem to be heading towards inappropriate, over engineered solutions to this ?

All of the information about it says it increases capacity. So it must be that you don't sell based on the seats unless they are being used. Clearly you'd need to make sure the concourses and exits could accomodate the extra.

The Mad stad does seem like it would be difficult and expensive to convert. But if we're expanding at any point it should certainly be something to consider. It could provide a cheaper ticket option and be more attractive to those who miss standing and have fallen out of love with the game.

[SPARTA]

i cant see the club being able to squeeze sufficiently more standers in than seaters given the design of the stadium
therefore its not a financially viable option to pay out loads redoing the seats, cos there wont be a significant increase in ticket sales.
why would they bother

The club back safe standing but first they'd need to:

1. Add extra fire exits
2. Increase the size of the concourse(s)

Rail seats offer up to 80% increase in capacity, so if we did ever want to move towards 30-38,000 it wouldn't need a roof being taken off any more. The ground wouldn't wouldn't really change much except for the larger concourses and additional exits.

[Green]

Royals give thumbs up
http://www.readingfc.co.uk/news/article/reading-fc-safe-standing-140214-1359838.aspx

Reading Football Club have given their backing to a Football League investigation into the introduction of safe standing.

Although, as already been st8d on this thread:

"At this stage it's too early for us to consider the location of any standing here at Madejski Stadium. There are many factors involved - safety, cost, number of turnstiles, size of concourse, financial viability and much more - that will all be looked at if and when the consultation is successful."

And shout out to an old friend

Football Supporters' Federation National Council member and Royals supporter Jon Keen said, "I’m delighted that Reading Football Club, like so many other Football League Clubs, has voted to support the concept of safe standing.

"While I think everyone appreciates that a lot would need to happen before we ever see safe standing areas at Madejski Stadium, this support will hasten the day that Loyal Royals who prefer to stand can do so.

"It’s great that Reading have responded to the clear demand amongst supporters for safe standing areas – including demand from supporters who may themselves prefer to sit but know that many fellow supporters do prefer to watch football standing up."

[TBM]

Am i alone in not really wanting to go back to standing? - i used to feel shattered at the end of a game at Elm Park

I'd rather just sit through a game now and jump up when we score.....

[Green]

Am i alone in not really wanting to go back to standing?

I'd rather just sit through a game now and jump up when we score.....

I'd like to experience the proper terraces a few more times but in a "safe" environment like that - don't really get it. We were stood up for most of the match at Millwall away - what's the difference really.

[TBM]

Am i alone in not really wanting to go back to standing?

I'd rather just sit through a game now and jump up when we score.....

I'd like to experience the proper terraces a few more times but in a "safe" environment like that - don't really get it. We were stood up for most of the match at Millwall away - what's the difference really.

Plus what is the point of the "seat" behind you - if you sit down you won't see anything