safe standing poll

[viking87]

I've done a little bit of homework over the last few days into safe standing.
And for whatever reason it seems the powers be don't like the idea.
An article in particular by matt slater \"Terrace backers look to Germany\" highlights affordable, safe terracing. But fifa etc do not provide valid evidence to say safe standing is unsafe.

Sorry I can't provide a link, but please read.

If anyone can provide a link on here that would be very helpful.


I think if we can voice this in the forum hopefully many others forums will follow.

Please give a simple to 'yes' or 'no' to wanting a safe standing area.
A small statement next to your view is optional. Thank you. RTID

[not on facebook]

yes to safe standing areas in grounds today for two reasons

choice and it will help to bring atmosphere back into our grounds.

[The Beast]

Yes please, I'd love to stand in Mick Largeant's pockets and sing songs about Brian Rowe, just like the good old days!:woot:

[Donnybob]

Are you proposing allowing fans to stand in a seated area, in front of existing seats paying the same prices as you do now, or are you proposing that clubs spend money on ripping out the seats and then charge you less to stand there?

The latter makes no sense whatsoever to the club, does it?

What are you prepared to pay for the privilege of standing - £35 a game? ....£40?

I had the misfortune to stand on the Leppings Lane terrace at Hillsborough for a Liverpool game shortly before the disaster (it was the day Alan Hansen scored). I happened to be with my wife and she became terrifed by the crush (caused by the fans being funnelled through the tunnel).

It was frightening enough for me to decide to get her out of there, which meant pushing against the tide of humanity coming the other way, and relocate in front of the police observation box on the South side.

Hillsborough was a disaster waiting to happen.

It happened, in my view, for two reasons. One, the layout of the turnstiles mean fans enetering the ground face the main tunnel and that causes congestion and overcrowding in the centre section.

Secondly, fans entering the tunnel can see the far side of the field over fans' heads and if the game is in progress the tendency is to rush forwards.

Personally I would rather sit than stand. Most mature folk would. Perhaps this is a jaundiced oppinion but those who shout loudest for the return of terracing tend to be juveniles who like to behave in a raucous manner and taunt the opposition.

Had Hillsborough been an all-seater, properly ticketed and stewarded ground 96 lives would have been saved.

I have no desire to stand on a terrace again as long as I live. Give me a seat with good sight lines and plenty of legroom. I certainly wouldn't appreciate someone standing up in front of me and obscuring my view of the game.

The way forward is to have specifically designated standing sections, available as non-allocated places (seats) limited in size and strictly stewarded so that standing is not allowed anywhere else in the ground. This should be priced higher than standard seat prices to pay for the additional security measures required and away fans should pay the same price and be allowed to stand. Let's say, £30-35 to stand, thus giving the club an incentive to change.

All seats should remain in place and crowd numbers governed by the number of seats.

Agreed?

[glosterred]

Against standing safe or otherwise

[Superspy]

Not sure if you're aware Donnybob but \"Safe Standing\" is a totally different model to the way terraces used to be.

[silent majority]

Donnybob/all,

I would love to spend the next half an hour typing out a great response to all of the above, but unfortunately I am really pushed for time. But what I would like you to do is read some of the documents which I have provided links for below. Here we explain exactly what we are campaigning for, and nobody wants a return to the terracing of old, or that seen at Hillsborough that day. The campaign is about Safe Standing and the examples are below. The disaster at Hillsborough was not caused by terracing, the main cause as identified by Lord Justice Taylor was poor policing and using a stadium without a safety certificate. As one of my colleagues explains it in a similar fashion, if there was safe standing at Hillsborough that day 96 football fans would still be here.

http://www.safestandingroadshow.co.uk/myths

http://www.fsf.org.uk/campaigns/safestanding.php

[DonnyBazR0ver]

As said above, even if legislation is passed to allow the option of 'Safe Standing' clubs will need to decide on the merit financially of installing it.

From a Keepmoat perspective, I can't see it ever happening due to
1. Cost
2. It's still a multi-purpose stadium and whoever manages it, it makes more sense to keep the seats in.

If the legislation comes in, it won't mean we can just stand up in front of our allotted seats.

[Donnybob]

As you don't want to spend half an hour typing out a response I've had a quick look at the links and sadly they do not answer the questions I've raised.

To create safe standing requires the removal of existing seats and installation of new seats. This clearly comes at a cost. Who pays?

The scenario suggesting you can pack in more fans, charge less and derive a greater income is pure fantasy. The Keepmoat has yet to have one complete sell-out. There are acres of empty seats at most games so how does providing cheap standing tickets for fans who currently pay full price equate to an increase in revenue.

It is empty seats that create a lack of atmosphere and cramming what few fans we have in smaller areas will simply increase the volume of vacant area, thus nulifying the, ahem, 'better' atmosphere.

The proposal cites increased revenue from refreshment sales. Even if crowds did increase that would only be fine for the SMC. We do not benefit from the increase in refreshment sales, do we?

When we push for promotion later this season then we can look forward to increased ticket sales next season and the club might look favourably at supporting anything that increases capacity.

However, as looks increasingly more likely, we'll be fighting to escape relegation in front of shrinking crowds in the new year. If the worst does happen and we go down there will be no money for ground 'improvements' and no need for extra capacity so it will be a non-starter.

Great idea for Man U. Not going to happen any time soon in Doncaster.

[mushRTID]

Not with people like you shooting down anybody who dare try and change things for the better.

Its a yes from me. 1 block near the away fans is all it would take.

[bobjimwilly]

People already stand at football matches anyway. Why not let them have an area where it is safer to do so than in areas designed for seating? Makes sense to me.

[Donnybob]

'Better' is merely your perception of things.

Ask the 5,000 who walked out with 15 minutes to play last Friday if they would like to see money invested in these ground 'improvements' or on the team...

In any case, we don't own the stadium. It's not a decision that is ours to make. Of course, you can put the proposal to ratepayers and ask them if they would like to throw some more money at this white elephant.

Re: '1 block is all it would take'.

To do what, exactly? Allow a few idiots to hurl abuse at visitors? Just stop and think what you're asking for and ask who will pay and what are the risks? You are expecting rate payers to fund your indulgence and the Council to sanction a potentially highly charged conflict area.

Hence why the Police will object.

Consider my post as the voice of reason. I'll not lower myself to suggesting yours is juvenile but it is so tempting.

[mushRTID]

\"I certainly wouldn't appreciate someone standing up in front of me and obscuring my view of the game.\"

Fair comment, me neither. But basically you are saying, \"I want to sit, sod everyone else and any idea they may have to improve their matchday experience\"

\"Ask the 5,000 who walked out with 15 minutes to play last Friday\"

Slight over reaction or is it just massaging the figures to strengthen your argument?

\"To do what, exactly? Allow a few idiots to hurl abuse at visitors?\"

I dont remember myself or anyone around me abusing anyone at Peterborough whilst enjoying standing and the improved atmosphere it created. Heaven forbin there may actually be a bit of banter if this happened....banter at football bet your a right laugh to have a pint with.

\"Consider my post as the voice of reason. I'll not lower myself to suggesting yours is juvenile but it is so tempting\".

Nice patronising way to end your reply. Not exactly unexpected however.

[silent majority]

Donnybob,

Your first post was about Safe Standing in general but your second post was an attempt to demolish the argument using Doncaster Rovers as the basis for not introducing it in the English Leagues, hardly the best example you could have chosen but if our web sites and FAQ sections don't answer your questions then you you didn't spend enough time reading them. However, now I do have some time to spare I will answer your questions.

1) The question of cost. Why does it matter who pays? The regulation of all seater stadiums is a government regulation, why should they concern themselves with costs related to ground changes and improvements? They don't interfere in other financial aspects so why this one? Would you be concerned about changes in improvements to the hospitality areas of a stadium? Who pays for that?

2)The removal of seats. Not necessarily. Some clubs still have ground improvements to make, corners to fill in etc etc. Or even clubs that in recent years just bolted seats onto their existing terraces can now just remove them.

3) More fans in the same area. Not fantasy I'm afraid. The figures we use are a straight forward report of what they do in Germany, Switzerland, Austria and other countries that already use this model. The multiplication factor is 1.8, meaning for 1,000 seats you can get 1,800 standing fans in the same area.

4) Your missing the point on atmosphere. Its not a suggestion that if we cram people into one area they will do that on their own, its empirical evidence that shows that standing per se does give the individual a sense of community with his/her fellow fans and that they feel more willing and able to sing and cheer with those around them. Your not suggesting that seated fans do this do you?

5) Increased sales of food/drink. The fact that we don't get the revenue is irrelevant. Most clubs do and when we buy the stadium so will we.

6) Whether Doncaster Rovers are fighting relegation or not is irrelevant to the argument. We are a national organisation concerned about football supporters everywhere. Every study and survey in the last 20 years has suggested by a large majority that 'safe standing' is wanted. Should we ignore that because DRFC don't/can't use it?

[DonnyBazR0ver]

I'd vote for safe standing and I'd love to be able to choose that option. I hope the legislation goes through.

We'd have to campaign long and hard to get the powers that be to consider it at the Keepmoat. I've been a long campaigner for the cheapest available seats/terrace to be behind the goal with a view to recreating that 'kop' type atmosphere however, Donnybob is right, the conditions for implementing safe standing are not there.

We have to get more fundamentals right in terms of increasing attendances and revenue before the exercise becomes worthwhile.

OK here's a scenario. We race up the league table, we get promoted via the play-offs and crowds have increased to near capacity. We get the windfall and we're faced with commercial decisions. Do we.

1. Build a second tier on East and/or West stands
2. Leave the capacity as it is.
3. Give all current ST holders a free Season ticket
4. Spend the windfall on the player budget
5. Implement safe standing

Or, a combination of the above.

I would suggest, on the build up to promotion and achieving it, the euphoria would be such that the debate about safe standing would diminish as the atmosphere would be electric anyway.

[viking87]

Donnybob,

I value your opinion but there's holes in your logic mate.

For a start it is down to individual enjoyment, just coz I'd like to stand up in a section where a lot of fans would prefer too, does not seperate the emotional from the more restrained fan; the hooligan from average joe. Its just down to prefence. People just like to stand.

I understand the club is in financial difficulties, Let's just say we adopt the system and have a 10% safe standing section. The keepmoat has never been filled so if your getting 1500 fans that were never there to begin with that are standing for a slightly cheaper price? what is the problem there?

[Donnybob]

Proposing a standing area in the West Stand near the away fans is your Achilles heel Silent. We already have a group of seated fans there who appear to me to turn up for no other reason than to taunt the away fans. Do they actually watch the game?

When Milwall came running over the seats looking for a ruck, did they head towards the East Stand? No. Why? Because their focus of antagonism was towards the gobby lot to their right. Face it. A standing area in that sector is provocative. Get over it. That won't happen. Concentrate your efforts on an area as far removed from the opposition as you can or you will get nowhere.

I don't give a flying fig about standing areas at other grounds and I wouldn't waste a second of my time campaigning to support it. Not my business. My interest extends only as far as the Keepmoat. I cited Man U as an example of demand exceding supply and Hillsborough as a personal turning point in my own life that has led me to sit down at games ever since. And yes, I was a bawling, riotous, exhuberant, blinkered yoof in my time.

Then I learned to watch the game and appreciate both sides.

Meanwhile those who continually big up the WSBA and DDR here on the platform you have chosen to raise what a good idea it will be to have a boisterous mob next to the away fans have already shot you down without me having to even load my weapon.

And why is it selfish for anyone to object to fans standing in front of them when they have paid top dollar for a SEAT? Standing in seats is fine if there is a concensus to do so in advance and an agreed concession with the stadium owners. Those who then choose to sit and watch with an unimpeded view can do so elsewhere.

Sadly I have to take you to task about evidence. Science recognises Primary Evidence and Secondary Evidence. Empirical evidence is derived without using scientific method or theory, it is like saying 17 people 'like' the colour blue. It's a feeling not a hard fact so please don't compound your fluffyness by adding that it gives the individual 'a sense of community'. Dear oh dear! No offence meant but are you doing Liberal Studies at school or something?

And does it ever cross your mind that some fans simply do not want to sing? Twas always the case and forever will be. You simply have to grasp that and accept it as human nature. Those who don't sing now (and God knows they've every reason not to!) won't sing because a small area is converted to standing.

Are you saying that if we had a standing area then crowd numbers would increase significantly? How does that work? Yes you can pack more fans (by a ratio of 1.8, you say) into a smaller area but that simply means other areas are less densely populated. Are you seriously suggesting 1500 fans are actively staying away as a protest and will suddenly materialise and turn up every week if they are allowed to stand?

Peterborough arguably have the worst ground in the Championship and you cite that as a an example of 'good' because you were able to stand up?

However you dress up the issue there is a significant cost. Seats have to be removed. New seats/ barriers have to be installed. So who pays for this investment? Rovers do not own the ground so it won't be them. The fans fill this forum with moans about the expense of watching and want cheaper prices so it's no good looking to them. The Council has already spent £30m on the place and lost a further £4m in running costs. Do you think they will cut back on public services to modify their asset?

You ask what catering income has to do with anything. Well, I didn't pluck increased revenue from that quarter out of the air you know. It's in the documents you directed me towards as part of the cost based analysis of justification for the changes. Again, it only works if there is a significant increase in attendances due to the introduction of standing. We both know that it won't happen and that attendances are already on the skids.

The home crowd against Coventry will be interesting. Let's see how damaging that performance against Leeds really was before accusing me of massaging figures in an argument I do not need to strengthen.

This site is about opinions. You have chosen to use it to raise support for standing areas, not at the Keepmoat, I think we've pretty much established that is not going to happen there any time soon, but at other grounds. Well frankly I don't care what they do at Elland Road, Or Hillsborough, Or Bramall Lane, I am only really interested in Doncaster, specifically the Keepmoat Stadium.

If you cannot come up with a lucid, intelligent argument in response to mine without resorting to jibes and insults then what possible chance do you stand of persuading a politician that change is good?

But good luck. You may ultimately succeed in making Leeds richer. If Uncle Ken can find a way to pack in a few more Donnywhites I'm sure he'll be interested.

[sedwardsdrfc]

with regards to ticket prices for standing im sure that if there was a standing area i could fit more people in than if the same area was seated so ticket prices could be reduced without effecting finances

however things might have changed after hillsborough so this could be wrong

[DaveDRFC]

I think the whole 'more people would come to football if you could stand' argument is a bit of a myth to be honest. People in this country seem to love doing things just because you aren't supposed to, makes me laugh seeing the people on the back rows of the stands standing up, hardly achieving much are they? If clubs opened standing sections I'm sure you would get people going into them, but you would also get plenty of people who given the option, would choose to remain sitting down. Also, the way the game is going and becoming more family and women friendly, those people who go with wives and children are still more likely to stay in the seated areas for comfort and perceived safety reasons. As people have said before, those countries who have 'safe standing' areas have not had a Hillsborough disaster. No government wants to be the one who says yes to bringing standing back and then having something like that happen again.

Also, if people love standing so much, why did only 600 odd (I think) go to Peterborough? It's only 90 minutes drive or so down the A1, was only 15 quid, on an unseasonably warm Saturday, yet not that many people went. I think this suggests that standing is not as popular as some people would have you believe, and also another point that I quite strongly believe in, that price doesn't affect people's decisions to go to football that much. All the posts on here that if we only charged 15 or 20 quid we would fill the ground. We wouldn't, simple as. We didn't fill the ground when it was free to get in. People in Doncaster for whatever reason have different priorities than to go watch the Rovers and as much as that hurts those of us on here who go week in, week out, those are the facts.

[Donnybob]

I'm banging my head against a brick wall here. Yes, you would pack more fans into one small area.

However they will have moved from another area of the ground to do this. Unfortunately they will only pay once and the proposal is that standing will be cheaper.

In other words the revenue drops.

My original post asked what price we should charge for standing to cover the increased cost of investment and stewarding - £35? £40? Conveniently ignored!

[hoolahoop]

Jeez you're a boring, staid fooker aren't you and no I'm not going to give a reasoned reply to your drivel quite simply .............it DOESN'T deserve one.

I'm all for standing and have been since the 1960's, whilst you and your boring chums are set on analysis of every aspect of each game whilst sipping your tea from a flask..........I and others will VOCALLY as well as financially support this club.

I suggest you read through some of the drivel you have written and realise that each and every other fooker in the world should have a safe freedom of choice too.

Thge Keepmoat has no atmosphere purely because of the sterile attitudes of the likes of you.

[Donnybob]

But Hoola, even last Friday night, the South Stand was barely 2/3rds full. Take away those who actually want to watch the game and the crowd would drop to 6,000 of which 4,000 were supporting Leeds.

Why not accept that it ain't ever going to happen at the Keepmoat?

I'm not the one in a minority. After all, you could only hear one set of fans on Friday night. Dare I say it, you only sing when you're winning?

[hoolahoop]

But Hoola, even last Friday night, the South Stand was barely 2/3rds full. Take away those who actually want to watch the game and the crowd would drop to 6,000 of which 4,000 were supporting Leeds.

Why not accept that it ain't ever going to happen at the Keepmoat?

I'm not the one in a minority. After all, you could only hear one set of fans on Friday night. Dare I say it, you only sing when you're winning?

Fair point re. the Leeds game and I'm not dreaming of an Anfield Kop or Stretford End type of atmosphere in the foreseeable future at the KM. The Leeds home games will always be like that for historical reasons.
However , we have and are continually trying to bring younger supporters to regularly watch the club .....it takes time.
The point remains that many fans across the country want a cheaper and more inter-active experience whilst watching football now if that can be done safely it might just might encourage more to come and more often. I concede that many of our supporters are ageing, female etc. but that can be addressed and tbf isbeing addressed but we must allow them to decide the direction it takes without forsaking the need for safety, an absence of violence and /or impinging on other folks (your's for instance) matchday experience.
I stand in the Polypipe (or should I say sit) and hear many around me complaining about that very lack of atmosphere whilst being blissfully aware that they are NOT adding to it .

It appears that we generally live in a 'I can't be arsed someone else will do it' type of society and that's what the 'safe standing' supporters are really on about i.e. a group of like-minded individuals who want to stand scream and chant without constantly being given blank/angry looks for doing what young football fans want to do. Here I don't mean mindless violence or racial and homophobic banter but the old football banter, songs and chants that help them to identify with both the club and the town. Amusingly enough when it does take off at the KM everyone can't help but join in ; I grant those occasions have been few and far between since we moved into the place but nevertheless there have been spine-tingling games there.

I understand your misgivings (given your experiences at Hillsborough) but times have changed and we've moved too far to the sterile sit in your seat and read a book/text type of environment. We MUST address the situation safely and allow these youngsters to come to a night club not a dinner party, I apologise for this analogy but these youngsters will simply stop going to games and the older generation will simply die/fade away too.

In essence this is not about the Keepmoat stadium experience but the experience (or lacl of) experience in most if not all of the clubs in this country. please this is a wider picture fella and I don't want to sit idly by and watch the game become as sterile as the Terraces are becoming.

[Donnybob]

I do see where you're coming from Hoola.

Unfortunately the terrace concept was destroyed by the very people it appealed to. I lived through the era of hooliganism and looking back I can't say I'm particularly proud of my behaviour at times but it did get completely out of hand, ultimately resulting in Heysel.

You can even argue that Heysel caused Hillsborough because it was 'hooligan' fencing that prevented fans from escaping the crush. In the past they would have simply hopped over the wall out of the way.

We live in violent times. Witness countless riots, looting, civil disobedience, etc. Each time we have the loony lefties trotted out who say it wasn't their fault, it was the fault of over-zealous policing.

It's not like the police enjoy it you know. Some do, but a lot get injured and hurt in the line of duty but let them lay a finger on anyone...

Take the stupidity of Marsh Farm this week. I saw folk hurling missiles at the police, someone battering the police riot shields with a spade. There weren't travellers (and let's not get into the semantics of travellers who claim not to have moved off the site in 10 years - talk about an oxymoron - they were professional activists. Anarchists.

And then we have fans gloating about 'bubble' matches, about casuals, and DDR and all that shit. Each time someone is ejected from the crowd they're innocent. I did nuffink guv. And so it goes on. Violence has not gone away, it has retreated. It has moved into dark corners but it still exists.

Those in power are happy to maintain the staus quo because the deaths and serious injuries have slumped to an all-time low. Sterile stadia achieve that.

Having vociferous fans in close proximity of each other might be great fun for those hurling 'banter' at each other, but it only takes one flash point. That is a far cry from supporting the team. Singing AT supporters is not supporting your team. It's incitement.

If Rovers fans were serious about standing then they'd abandon the WSBA concept all together and focus on the South Stand. Any belief that increased capacity will reduce prices is pie in the sky dreaming. Prices are not going to fall across the board any time soon. Certainly not in the top two divisions.

So what's the way forward? Controlled experiments in small sections of the ground funded entirely by the fans. Get the club to buy into the concept, perhaps by allowing standing in existing seats in a defined area - they allow it in the North Stand. Little by little. Prove it's safe and acceptable.

Then raise the cash for ground alterations through fund raising and persuade the Council to agree.

As I wrote. I do not give a fig for other grounds or what happens nationwide. It's not my concern. But don't try and justify it with 'empirical evidence' as it just blows the argument away.

[bobjimwilly]

Proposing a standing area in the West Stand near the away fans is your Achilles heel Silent. We already have a group of seated fans there who appear to me to turn up for no other reason than to taunt the away fans. Do they actually watch the game?

What has it got to do with you if they watch the game or not?

I don't give a flying fig about standing areas at other grounds and I wouldn't waste a second of my time campaigning to support it. Not my business.

Are you a tory by any chance?

Then I learned to watch the game and appreciate both sides.

And why is it selfish for anyone to object to fans standing in front of them when they have paid top dollar for a SEAT? Standing in seats is fine if there is a concensus to do so in advance and an agreed concession with the stadium owners. Those who then choose to sit and watch with an unimpeded view can do so elsewhere.

If you object to fans standing in front of you, a standing section would mean you don't have to put up with this any longer? You wouldn't be moaning about it any more, and those who want to stand wouldn't be moaning they're not allowed to?

Sadly I have to take you to task about evidence. Science recognises Primary Evidence and Secondary Evidence. Empirical evidence is derived without using scientific method or theory, it is like saying 17 people 'like' the colour blue. It's a feeling not a hard fact so please don't compound your fluffyness by adding that it gives the individual 'a sense of community'. Dear oh dear! No offence meant but are you doing Liberal Studies at school or something?

Is there really a need to patronise everyone this much?

Those who don't sing now (and God knows they've every reason not to!) won't sing because a small area is converted to standing.].

Which is totally fine

Are you saying that if we had a standing area then crowd numbers would increase significantly? How does that work? Yes you can pack more fans (by a ratio of 1.8, you say) into a smaller area but that simply means other areas are less densely populated. Are you seriously suggesting 1500 fans are actively staying away as a protest and will suddenly materialise and turn up every week if they are allowed to stand?

Again, you come across as quite patronising here mate. SM is not saying that, but if we did start selling out, a seating section would give the stadium a higher capacity.

However you dress up the issue there is a significant cost. Seats have to be removed. New seats/ barriers have to be installed. So who pays for this investment? Rovers do not own the ground so it won't be them. The fans fill this forum with moans about the expense of watching and want cheaper prices so it's no good looking to them. The Council has already spent £30m on the place and lost a further £4m in running costs. Do you think they will cut back on public services to modify their asset?

Again, the issue of cost isn't anything to do with us. The safe standing legislation would simply mean it would be up to clubs whether they implement it or not. To use the argument doncaster can't afford it, so no-one should be allowed is ridiculous.

This site is about opinions. You have chosen to use it to raise support for standing areas, not at the Keepmoat, I think we've pretty much established that is not going to happen there any time soon, but at other grounds. Well frankly I don't care what they do at Elland Road, Or Hillsborough, Or Bramall Lane, I am only really interested in Doncaster, specifically the Keepmoat Stadium.

Brilliant.

If you cannot come up with a lucid, intelligent argument in response to mine without resorting to jibes and insults then what possible chance do you stand of persuading a politician that change is good?

...from the most patronising poster in this thread?

[Donnybob]

There, there...

[Donnybob]

Now that's patronising!

[hoolahoop]

I do see where you're coming from Hoola.

Unfortunately the terrace concept was destroyed by the very people it appealed to. I lived through the era of hooliganism and looking back I can't say I'm particularly proud of my behaviour at times but it did get completely out of hand, ultimately resulting in Heysel.

You can even argue that Heysel caused Hillsborough because it was 'hooligan' fencing that prevented fans from escaping the crush. In the past they would have simply hopped over the wall out of the way.

We live in violent times. Witness countless riots, looting, civil disobedience, etc. Each time we have the loony lefties trotted out who say it wasn't their fault, it was the fault of over-zealous policing.

It's not like the police enjoy it you know. Some do, but a lot get injured and hurt in the line of duty but let them lay a finger on anyone...

Take the stupidity of Marsh Farm this week. I saw folk hurling missiles at the police, someone battering the police riot shields with a spade. There weren't travellers (and let's not get into the semantics of travellers who claim not to have moved off the site in 10 years - talk about an oxymoron - they were professional activists. Anarchists.

And then we have fans gloating about 'bubble' matches, about casuals, and DDR and all that shit. Each time someone is ejected from the crowd they're innocent. I did nuffink guv. And so it goes on. Violence has not gone away, it has retreated. It has moved into dark corners but it still exists.

Those in power are happy to maintain the staus quo because the deaths and serious injuries have slumped to an all-time low. Sterile stadia achieve that.

Having vociferous fans in close proximity of each other might be great fun for those hurling 'banter' at each other, but it only takes one flash point. That is a far cry from supporting the team. Singing AT supporters is not supporting your team. It's incitement.

If Rovers fans were serious about standing then they'd abandon the WSBA concept all together and focus on the South Stand. Any belief that increased capacity will reduce prices is pie in the sky dreaming. Prices are not going to fall across the board any time soon. Certainly not in the top two divisions.

So what's the way forward? Controlled experiments in small sections of the ground funded entirely by the fans. Get the club to buy into the concept, perhaps by allowing standing in existing seats in a defined area - they allow it in the North Stand. Little by little. Prove it's safe and acceptable.

Then raise the cash for ground alterations through fund raising and persuade the Council to agree.

As I wrote. I do not give a fig for other grounds or what happens nationwide. It's not my concern. But don't try and justify it with 'empirical evidence' as it just blows the argument away.

Bob , we could argue about Heysel and Hillsborough all day long but the crux of the matter is that this game has been lovingly taken too by the masses and shouldn't be emasculated by one or two incidents that have been addressed since. That is exactly what this game is all about and why supporters of clubs desperately try and grab on to anything that will take away exactly that sterile atmosphere that you are so fond of hence your quote.......

Those in power are happy to maintain the staus quo because the deaths and serious injuries have slumped to an all-time low. Sterile stadia achieve that.

This game is known as the people's game , loved and cherished throughout the world because it wasn't organised and sterile.....why would you seek to espouse this authoritarian attitude is quite beyound me and many others
We have discussed at great length the need for safety for all but to this extreme ? Did it never occur to you that it could be just this authoritarian attitude that lights the fuse that has the disaffected and disgarded folk of this country running around our streets causing mayhem.
The problems you raise about the likes of the DDR etc are raised beyond any reasonable proportions and to use this tiny ragtag group as part of your argument for whether folk are allowed to stand or sit is daft in the extreme. On that basis you would have to close every bar in Donny on a Satdi night because there may be a small group out for trouble and getting rat arsed and not allow reasonable drinkers the opportunity to have a pint or two!!

There is nothing wrong with banter flying between sets of supporters be it in the NW corner or the Polpipe, it's irrelevant because this banter will happen before and after the match too, healthy banter is exactly that i.e. HEALTHY.

I too ran around in the 60/70's and both saw and took part in events that I'm none too proud of now, believe me many of those events were in the Stands too not just in the Terracing. The game, the supporters and more importantly Society has moved on from all that in this country. Most of the scuffles took part before and after games and rarely during them. So Bob your argument doesn't hold any water whatsoever.

I don't have any answers on the Hillsborough affair but my gut instinct is that like many of such disasters there would have been 6 of one and 1/2 a dozen of another in terms of blame compounded by human error/ineptitude. I am not one of those that completely lays out the carpet of blame solely on the Policing and Stewarding on that occasion.

As for me I am keeping an 'open' mind in much the same way as I did at the time. Heysel was another matter all and sundry witnessed who was at fault on that day.

I hope you reconsider your position , take Filo's points and think them through btw as well as my own.

[sedwardsdrfc]

I do see where you're coming from Hoola.

Unfortunately the terrace concept was destroyed by the very people it appealed to. I lived through the era of hooliganism and looking back I can't say I'm particularly proud of my behaviour at times but it did get completely out of hand, ultimately resulting in Heysel.

You can even argue that Heysel caused Hillsborough because it was 'hooligan' fencing that prevented fans from escaping the crush. In the past they would have simply hopped over the wall out of the way.

We live in violent times. Witness countless riots, looting, civil disobedience, etc. Each time we have the loony lefties trotted out who say it wasn't their fault, it was the fault of over-zealous policing.

It's not like the police enjoy it you know. Some do, but a lot get injured and hurt in the line of duty but let them lay a finger on anyone...

Take the stupidity of Marsh Farm this week. I saw folk hurling missiles at the police, someone battering the police riot shields with a spade. There weren't travellers (and let's not get into the semantics of travellers who claim not to have moved off the site in 10 years - talk about an oxymoron - they were professional activists. Anarchists.

And then we have fans gloating about 'bubble' matches, about casuals, and DDR and all that shit. Each time someone is ejected from the crowd they're innocent. I did nuffink guv. And so it goes on. Violence has not gone away, it has retreated. It has moved into dark corners but it still exists.

Those in power are happy to maintain the staus quo because the deaths and serious injuries have slumped to an all-time low. Sterile stadia achieve that.

Having vociferous fans in close proximity of each other might be great fun for those hurling 'banter' at each other, but it only takes one flash point. That is a far cry from supporting the team. Singing AT supporters is not supporting your team. It's incitement.

If Rovers fans were serious about standing then they'd abandon the WSBA concept all together and focus on the South Stand. Any belief that increased capacity will reduce prices is pie in the sky dreaming. Prices are not going to fall across the board any time soon. Certainly not in the top two divisions.

So what's the way forward? Controlled experiments in small sections of the ground funded entirely by the fans. Get the club to buy into the concept, perhaps by allowing standing in existing seats in a defined area - they allow it in the North Stand. Little by little. Prove it's safe and acceptable.

Then raise the cash for ground alterations through fund raising and persuade the Council to agree.

As I wrote. I do not give a fig for other grounds or what happens nationwide. It's not my concern. But don't try and justify it with 'empirical evidence' as it just blows the argument away.

Bob , we could argue about Heysel and Hillsborough all day long but the crux of the matter is that this game has been lovingly taken too by the masses and shouldn't be emasculated by one or two incidents that have been addressed since. That is exactly what this game is all about and why supporters of clubs desperately try and grab on to anything that will take away exactly that sterile atmosphere that you are so fond of hence your quote.......

Those in power are happy to maintain the staus quo because the deaths and serious injuries have slumped to an all-time low. Sterile stadia achieve that.

This game is known as the people's game , loved and cherished throughout the world because it wasn't organised and sterile.....why would you seek to espouse this authoritarian attitude is quite beyound me and many others
We have discussed at great length the need for safety for all but to this extreme ? Did it never occur to you that it could be just this authoritarian attitude that lights the fuse that has the disaffected and disgarded folk of this country running around our streets causing mayhem.
The problems you raise about the likes of the DDR etc are raised beyond any reasonable proportions and to use this tiny ragtag group as part of your argument for whether folk are allowed to stand or sit is daft in the extreme. On that basis you would have to close every bar in Donny on a Satdi night because there may be a small group out for trouble and getting rat arsed and not allow reasonable drinkers the opportunity to have a pint or two!!

There is nothing wrong with banter flying between sets of supporters be it in the NW corner or the Polpipe, it's irrelevant because this banter will happen before and after the match too, healthy banter is exactly that i.e. HEALTHY.

I too ran around in the 60/70's and both saw and took part in events that I'm none too proud of now, believe me many of those events were in the Stands too not just in the Terracing. The game, the supporters and more importantly Society has moved on from all that in this country. Most of the scuffles took part before and after games and rarely during them. So Bob your argument doesn't hold any water whatsoever.

I don't have any answers on the Hillsborough affair but my gut instinct is that like many of such disasters there would have been 6 of one and 1/2 a dozen of another in terms of blame compounded by human error/ineptitude. I am not one of those that completely lays out the carpet of blame solely on the Policing and Stewarding on that occasion.

As for me I am keeping an 'open' mind in much the same way as I did at the time. Heysel was another matter all and sundry witnessed who was at fault on that day.

I hope you reconsider your position , take Filo's points and think them through btw as well as my own.

[/i]

Schooled

[silent majority]

Donnybob,

I'm not going to argue with you on here because it's impossible to get the argument across in this format, but I am going to correct some of the inaccuracies that you continue to promote.

1) I don't understand how proposing a standing section in the NW corner is my Achilles heel. Why? Because I didn't! I never mentioned a standing section anywhere in the Keepmoat.

2) My post was about Safe Standing in general, I was answering in that capacity. And yet again I ask the question (which you fail to answer) is, why should Doncaster have any bearing on a national campaign for standing?

3) Meanwhile those who continually big up the WSBA and DDR here on the platform you have chosen to raise what a good idea it will be to have a boisterous mob next to the away fans have already shot you down without me having to even load my weapon.

I just don't see the relevance to the argument for Safe Standing in that bit above.

4) I have never said it was selfish of fans to complain about paying for a seat when people stood in front of them. But what I have said on numerous occasions that our campaign is for choice. Choice for those who want to, or have to sit as well as choice for those who want to stand.

5) Dear oh dear! No offence meant but are you doing Liberal Studies at school or something? How insulting do you want to be? Let me just post this next bit just for you;

Why do people stand at football matches?
Given that ‘persistent’ standing has been accepted as an issue there are questions concerning why it is that people choose to stand in the context of a designated football match. There have already been considerable amounts of research conducted into this question by various parties. The most comprehensive studies are the ‘Stand Up Sit Down’ (SUSD) Survey conducted by the football fans census; the ‘Atkins Report’ commissioned by Trafford Borough Council and a ‘Summary Report of Supporters Panels’ conducted by the Premier League. (In addition some small scale data gathering was conducted using online surveys as part of this research project.) The data and analyses arising from these studies tend to agree on the underlying causes of standing.

Now that's where my research comes from, where does yours come from??

6) The numbers argument. You can't have it both ways I'm afraid. A lot of people on this forum and throughout football complain about the cost of tickets and not surprisingly we are losing the next few generations of football supporters because of cost. The average age of a ST holder in the Premiership is 42 years, not sustainable for much longer. The alternative is to lower costs, attract more fans and put them into stadiums that have a choice of ticket prices.

7) I never quoted Peterborough as a good place to stand? Er explain?

8) Of course there is a cost, but we are not forcing standing areas on anybody. If clubs want to do it let them get on with it, if they can't afford it then so be it. I don't see your argument there either.

9) Dismissing food revenue from the equation based on your sliding attendance argument doesn't work either, again you can't argue both sides of the coin.

10) see how damaging that performance against Leeds really was before accusing me of massaging figures in an argument I do not need to strengthen.

Again I have no idea what you are talking about! I never accused you of anything.

11) If you cannot come up with a lucid, intelligent argument in response to mine without resorting to jibes and insults then what possible chance do you stand of persuading a politician that change is good

What jibes, what insults?

12) But good luck. You may ultimately succeed in making Leeds richer. If Uncle Ken can find a way to pack in a few more Donnywhites I'm sure he'll be interested.

What complete and utter nonsense!

Finally, we aren't a bunch of kids who got together one night and thought it might be a good idea to kick up a fuss about standing in football stadiums. Just to give you some idea, the committee that I'm on comprises of the top stadium designers in the UK,several politicians and their researchers, civil engineers, Safety Officers, FA Council members, a couple of Barristers and their legal researchers etc etc. If you want I could bore you to tears about the 'Green Guide' on stadium safety and C values and what that implies for seated and standing spectators, but I'll spare you that!

We regularly meet up with the FA, FL, PL, FLA, ACPO, UKFPU, the Sports Minister, several leading MP's and numerous club owners and CEO's. I think I'm safe in the knowledge that we know a bit more about this subject than you do.