Apparently we are one of the clubs interested in introducing the above in the future.. Would you approve and use the standing area?
I dont thnk you'll get many negative answers to that question. Surveys suggest 95-97% of football fans are in favour of safe standing.. plus 19 of the 20 Prem clubs voted in favour of trials. Even people who have no intention of standing are in favour because they are fed up with people standing anyway. The two big questions for me are how easy it is going to be to get the legislation changed? (which needs to happen for the top two divisions anyway) and what sort of pricing will we see? I'm not totally sure but i dont thnk Celtic offered any price reduction for their safe standing area. So would people be happy paying the same price to stand as to sit?
I don't think there'd be any strong opposition to legislation changes, however, in current circumstances I'd think the chances of it being a priority issue with sufficient resources being devoted to researching and writing the law and then finding time in the parliamentary calendar are virtually nil.
100% for it 1881 stand anyway of course but this way people can be with their mates much easier and people that want to sit down aren't impacted as they are now across many stadiums. It just needs to get done
LOL that Tammy Abraham has been absolute w@nk! Make sure you use him regularly Swansea because it'll mean one less relegation spot for us to worry about hahaha
Definitely. Not saying I'd stand every game but for some I would. Don't expect a cheaper ticket price unfortunately - a rail seat takes up as much space when sitting as standing.
Went to some Bundesliga games when I lived in Germany, and it's great 9 euros was the price of my ticket to stand in the home end Schalke v Hamburg. Ok 10 year ago but that was the Friday night main fixture everything about it was great. Surely if this was to happen at the Vic it would improve our attendance as more people would get in. Could have a bit for away supporters to in the corner below the club shop. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I can see why safe standing would be attractive to us as it would allow us to increase our capacity by a reasonable amount for a fairly small outlay, I understand that safe standing areas can accommodate 50% more fans than seats can. So changing part of the Rookery may allow up to an extra 1000 or so.
Let's hope that safe standing can be introduced. Two big reasons. 1. Those that wish to stand should be allowed to do so, on the terraces, as in the old days, but with good and frequent barriers to prevent another Hillsborough type incident. 2. Those that wish to sit (particularly at away games) should be allowed to, without a great fat lump standing in front of them preventing them from doing so, and creating a domino type effect behind.
The problem at Hillsborough was too many people being let into an already overcrowded section and not being able to escape onto the pitch because of the fences. Computerised turnstiles will prevent the first, and there are now no fences, so safe standing is certainly possible. Indeed, I would say that if sections can't get overcrowded, old-fashioned crush barriers are probably preferable to the hybrid seating/standing things currently used when one competition's rules allow standing but another's don't. The advantages of standing are that short people like me can manoeuvre themselves into a position where they can see properly, and you don't get stuck near a ****head for the whole season or longer. Also, when I go to away matches I hate bobbing up and down when the people in front jump up when the ball comes down our end and then sit down again. So let's give people a proper choice between sitting and standing. However, I can foresee a strong emotional reaction against standing by people connected with the Hillsborough disaster and by people who never go to football, and with more important issues on the political agenda at the moment I'd prefer that Parliamentary time isn't spent on this just yet.
The most amusing example of safe standing that I can recall was one game at Ayresome Park (for youngsters the old Middlesbough ground). One Watford fan who I knew (but who shall remain nameless) was so drunk that he had to be tied to a crash barrier with his and another scarf to remain upright in the second half. By the time the game ended (in a 2-1 defeat) he had tangled the scarves into such a knot that it took 3 of us 15 minutes to untie him (and 4 to carry him out past the bemused local police). Would this situation be tolerated in the new areas?
I'm all for it. I think when i was younger I use to prefer standing, maybe less so now I'm older. Take out the back 6 or 8 rows and run a safe standing area right the way across the back of the stand. There can be no arguments about people blocking anyone's view and it will help spread the 1881 and some atmosphere to more people
I don't think it needs Parliamentary time. It's secondary legislation and up to the Secretary of State to make a new regulation to amend it. So it's mainly political capital rather than time that needs burning.
We have to accept there won't be a return to the old style terraces and if that's what you're hoping for, I fear you're going to be disappointed. It'll be rail seats with a designated space and you won't be able to move around nor avoid the giant in front.
Rail seating is provided to allow seating for some matches and not for others. It certainly allows for increased capacity for Bundesliga matches too so you'd hope for a price reduction for standing. Of course it's safe. Controlling the number entering that section and having proper escaped routes secures that. So bring it on a.s.a.p. As UEA has said, it doesn't require primary legislation (I think too). And the Hillsborough support group have already had their victory this week. No need for them to go beyond their remit.
Some secondary legislation needs an affirmative vote in Parliament. My bet is that that would apply in this case as it would be controversial.
No, but the government might table it for affirmative resolution if they feel they'd get stick afterwards if they didn't. But there would be certainly be a public consultation first
