Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: Copps is Magic on September 22, 2021, 02:26:44 pm
-
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/sep/22/premier-league-and-championship-clubs-to-trial-safe-standing-from-january (https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/sep/22/premier-league-and-championship-clubs-to-trial-safe-standing-from-january)
If I am reading this article correctly, we can now [in principle] apply for the pilot scheme to install safe standing at the Keepmoat.
"The announcement affects clubs subject to the government’s all-seater policy. That includes clubs in the Premier League and Championship, or any club who have been in those divisions for three or more seasons since 1994-95, plus Wembley Stadium and the Principality Stadium."
-
But will we be able to afford it?
-
I doubt cost come in any equation as we have enough space for supporters to lay down and watch the games as we never fill the stadium !!
-
But will we be able to afford it?
I posted a thread on it a few weeks ago and the view of certain people close to the club that it was that it was unlikely. I think the club have to look over the economic horizon a little on this one. Of course there will be an in front cost. It was my observation, however, that the combination of making the South unreserved, and the push to create the black bank, increased the attractiveness of the stand (numbers), particularly among youths, compared to the seasons before. My guess would be that safe standing could potentially do similar things, and pay off over the longer term.
-
Whether we can or cannot do this yet I don't know. Whether we can offord this yet or not I don't know.
But what I do know is having the south stand, a safe standing zone could completely transform the fan experience for the whole of the rovers support base.
I would leave the bottom few rows as they are and then have safe standing. The atmosphere could be immense, the capacity could be increased, the attraction of standing and a better atmosphere would bring fans back, especially with a reduction in prices.
I even think a campaign to raise funds through the fan base to fund the installation would be a huge success.
-
Whether we can or cannot do this yet I don't know. Whether we can offord this yet or not I don't know.
But what I do know is having the south stand, a safe standing zone could completely transform the fan experience for the whole of the rovers support base.
I would leave the bottom few rows as they are and then have safe standing. The atmosphere could be immense, the capacity could be increased, the attraction of standing and a better atmosphere would bring fans back, especially with a reduction in prices.
I even think a campaign to raise funds through the fan base to fund the installation would be a huge success.
Might wrong but Im pretty certain it does not change the capacity. It’s one person allocated per standing space (effectively the seat)
-
Is covid a thing of the past now?
Not watched the news for a couple of days.
-
Whether we can or cannot do this yet I don't know. Whether we can offord this yet or not I don't know.
But what I do know is having the south stand, a safe standing zone could completely transform the fan experience for the whole of the rovers support base.
I would leave the bottom few rows as they are and then have safe standing. The atmosphere could be immense, the capacity could be increased, the attraction of standing and a better atmosphere would bring fans back, especially with a reduction in prices.
I even think a campaign to raise funds through the fan base to fund the installation would be a huge success.
Might wrong but Im pretty certain it does not change the capacity. It’s one person allocated per standing space (effectively the seat)
That's not correct. I was told from the size of the terracing at the keepmoat the capacity of would increase by 80% for the seats replaced. We might have to install an intermediate step on each terrace just like on the gangway steps.
-
The pilot scheme is for Premier league and Championship clubs to apply for a license. So I assume safe standing areas have gone constructed first. The cost to league one snd two clubs who have all seater stadiums might be prohibitive.
-
As some of you may know I've played quite a significant part in the Safe Standing campaign and have done for the last 20 years or so. That's one reason why a lot of people defer to me when questions are asked about the current state of our campaign and where its up to. Mind you the campaign is about 32 years old, its just been done in various formats!
But there are a lot of misconceptions in a number of the posts above, not surprising really since the interpretation of some of the legislation is deliberately misleading and was one of the key issues we had to tackle.
Firstly, the requirements for all seater stadiums in England and Wales only applies to EPL and Championship clubs. Which essentially means that we could have ripped the seats out of the Keepmoat years ago without any issue. But that's just theoretical as we know full well that the local SAG wouldn't have allowed it, plus there's always been the threat that the element of funding that came from the Stadium Development fund could be recalled. That was never in the contract but we all knew it was a veiled threat to make sure all clubs complied.
Secondly, you have to distinguish between what some of you are calling Safe Standing with just 'standing'. We deliberately moved away from the phrase 'Safe Standing' some years ago because the safety argument had been won a long time ago, we went with 'Stand Up For Choice', which was copied by the EFL at the same time.
Because of UEFA and FIFA legislation then safe standing to EPL clubs is different to what we want or have. They have to have all seater stadiums to compete in Europe, that hasn't changed, therefore they need seats that can be locked in certain positions, that is, seats for European games and rails for EPL games.
At the Keepmoat we've had an unreserved ticketing policy for quite a while, and an agreement that stewards wouldn't force people to sit within a certain area, an area that roughly holds about 250 people. I'm not sure there's a justification for ripping out the seats and installing rails ( you don't need the seating element at our level) because it wouldn't necessarily change anything.
To increase capacity in that area the club would have to build an intermediate step on each row, and that theoretically gives an increase by a factor of 1.8. But why increase capacity when we can't fill the stadium already? I also don't see the argument that the atmosphere would be necessarily better, people are already stood so I fail to see what would change.
The prime example here is any away game. The atmosphere is so much better because just about everybody stands and like minded people get together, it shouldn't be any different at home. You don't need specific standing areas to achieve that.
-
As some of you may know I've played quite a significant part in the Safe Standing campaign and have done for the last 20 years or so. That's one reason why a lot of people defer to me when questions are asked about the current state of our campaign and where its up to. Mind you the campaign is about 32 years old, its just been done in various formats!
But there are a lot of misconceptions in a number of the posts above, not surprising really since the interpretation of some of the legislation is deliberately misleading and was one of the key issues we had to tackle.
Firstly, the requirements for all seater stadiums in England and Wales only applies to EPL and Championship clubs. Which essentially means that we could have ripped the seats out of the Keepmoat years ago without any issue. But that's just theoretical as we know full well that the local SAG wouldn't have allowed it, plus there's always been the threat that the element of funding that came from the Stadium Development fund could be recalled. That was never in the contract but we all knew it was a veiled threat to make sure all clubs complied.
Secondly, you have to distinguish between what some of you are calling Safe Standing with just 'standing'. We deliberately moved away from the phrase 'Safe Standing' some years ago because the safety argument had been won a long time ago, we went with 'Stand Up For Choice', which was copied by the EFL at the same time.
Because of UEFA and FIFA legislation then safe standing to EPL clubs is different to what we want or have. They have to have all seater stadiums to compete in Europe, that hasn't changed, therefore they need seats that can be locked in certain positions, that is, seats for European games and rails for EPL games.
At the Keepmoat we've had an unreserved ticketing policy for quite a while, and an agreement that stewards wouldn't force people to sit within a certain area, an area that roughly holds about 250 people. I'm not sure there's a justification for ripping out the seats and installing rails ( you don't need the seating element at our level) because it wouldn't necessarily change anything.
To increase capacity in that area the club would have to build an intermediate step on each row, and that theoretically gives an increase by a factor of 1.8. But why increase capacity when we can't fill the stadium already? I also don't see the argument that the atmosphere would be necessarily better, people are already stood so I fail to see what would change.
The prime example here is any away game. The atmosphere is so much better because just about everybody stands and like minded people get together, it shouldn't be any different at home. You don't need specific standing areas to achieve that.
We will possibly have to agree to disagree on whether the atmosphere would be better or not, I'm firmly in the camp of it definitely would.
SM, just a quick question for you, if seats had been bolted to the terracing in the popside do you think the atmosphere would have been the same or less so??
Others welcome to offer their opinions.
-
At the Keepmoat we've had an unreserved ticketing policy for quite a while, and an agreement that stewards wouldn't force people to sit within a certain area, an area that roughly holds about 250 people. I'm not sure there's a justification for ripping out the seats and installing rails ( you don't need the seating element at our level) because it wouldn't necessarily change anything.
To increase capacity in that area the club would have to build an intermediate step on each row, and that theoretically gives an increase by a factor of 1.8. But why increase capacity when we can't fill the stadium already? I also don't see the argument that the atmosphere would be necessarily better, people are already stood so I fail to see what would change.
The prime example here is any away game. The atmosphere is so much better because just about everybody stands and like minded people get together, it shouldn't be any different at home. You don't need specific standing areas to achieve that.
Yes, but why are you reducing it to atmosphere and capacity? We are talking here about the principle of being able to stand or not, are we not? If you think being lenient on a small section of seats has solved the issue I can tell you it has not. Taking the South Stand as the example, you have the back rows of mainly young lads most people (who want to stand) do not want to get in there with, and the rest of the area where it is the same battle / social pressures in any other areas of the ground. Someone gets in there early and plonks themself down, you're done. Its the same reoccurring story at away games.
I find your apparent stance on this quite surprising I must admit, given, as you say, you are the go to guru on standing. You've campaigned for this for so long and now your opinion is - 'its not worth it', based on a few technical issues.
-
At the Keepmoat we've had an unreserved ticketing policy for quite a while, and an agreement that stewards wouldn't force people to sit within a certain area, an area that roughly holds about 250 people. I'm not sure there's a justification for ripping out the seats and installing rails ( you don't need the seating element at our level) because it wouldn't necessarily change anything.
To increase capacity in that area the club would have to build an intermediate step on each row, and that theoretically gives an increase by a factor of 1.8. But why increase capacity when we can't fill the stadium already? I also don't see the argument that the atmosphere would be necessarily better, people are already stood so I fail to see what would change.
The prime example here is any away game. The atmosphere is so much better because just about everybody stands and like minded people get together, it shouldn't be any different at home. You don't need specific standing areas to achieve that.
Yes, but why are you reducing it to atmosphere and capacity? We are talking here about the principle of being able to stand or not, are we not? If you think being lenient on a small section of seats has solved the issue I can tell you it has not. Taking the South Stand as the example, you have the back rows of mainly young lads most people (who want to stand) do not want to get in there with, and the rest of the area where it is the same battle / social pressures in any other areas of the ground. Someone gets in there early and plonks themself down, you're done. Its the same reoccurring story at away games.
I find your apparent stance on this quite surprising I must admit, given, as you say, you are the go to guru on standing. You've campaigned for this for so long and now your opinion is - 'its not worth it', based on a few technical issues.
I'm sorry but you're interpreting my words in a different way to what I put down. I never said 'it's not worth it', nor have I said it's based on a few technicalities, what I was doing was correcting some misconceptions, and that's exactly what I attempted to do.
For me to put chapter and verse on here about the technicalities and the vested interests and political manoeuvrings of certain groups and individuals would take me about a week or so, and to be honest I have other things to do today.
Firstly I never said that it was about capacity and atmosphere, others on here did that. As I explained we abandoned the term Safe Standing a long time ago and opted for the 'Stand Up For Choice' as our go to message, in other words we were promoting the principle of being able to stand. The very point you said I hadn't made.
For us it was about choice but also allowing those who wanted to sit without having their view obscured by people that want to stand. But it also works in reverse, if you want to stand then you should be able to do so without being in conflict with either stewards or fellow supporters. Segregation and defined areas for both has always been the answer.
Nor did I say that being lenient on a small section of seats was the answer, they're your words again! What I did point out was that is how its been approached so far at the Keepmoat and was an approach that we could get the local SAG to buy into. If people want sit in those areas they should be 'encouraged to move' and any supporter standing in their field of view would have my support. This is exactly the approach that Cardiff City took at their new stadium, they have a managed section of seating where they allow supporters to stand, and that was the plan here at the Keepmoat.
I can't see why you would disagree on the capacity issue. Do we really need to increase the capacity at the Keepmoat and go to the trouble of either installing rail seats (which doesn't affect capacity) or removing seats and installing additional rails which would decrease capacity, or creating and manufacturing an intermediate step which would increase capacity? I'm not convinced that is a necessary next step. The reports that have been provided to government show that standing in amongst seats is just as safe as sitting in seats, therefore an intermediate next step would be to allow standing in larger areas, but they should be defined so as to allow those who want to sit to move to other areas.
But you're still missing one key point here, nothing has changed for us here in league 1. The announcement yesterday was about EPL and Championship clubs being allowed to apply for pilot projects, so far the pilots that have been run have been a handful of EPL clubs but the new announcement has invited applications, which is a major step forward.
The SGSA report, when released, is the one that affects us. That's the one where they tell the government that there are a range of options available to manage standing in stadiums at all levels. The government of the day needs to overwrite that all seater legislation and that hasn't been done yet.
PS - I didn't say I was the 'go to guru' either, I just pointed out that I've been involved in the campaign for a long time, some people know that, and then I get asked questions about it.
-
As some of you may know I've played quite a significant part in the Safe Standing campaign and have done for the last 20 years or so. That's one reason why a lot of people defer to me when questions are asked about the current state of our campaign and where its up to. Mind you the campaign is about 32 years old, its just been done in various formats!
But there are a lot of misconceptions in a number of the posts above, not surprising really since the interpretation of some of the legislation is deliberately misleading and was one of the key issues we had to tackle.
Firstly, the requirements for all seater stadiums in England and Wales only applies to EPL and Championship clubs. Which essentially means that we could have ripped the seats out of the Keepmoat years ago without any issue. But that's just theoretical as we know full well that the local SAG wouldn't have allowed it, plus there's always been the threat that the element of funding that came from the Stadium Development fund could be recalled. That was never in the contract but we all knew it was a veiled threat to make sure all clubs complied.
Secondly, you have to distinguish between what some of you are calling Safe Standing with just 'standing'. We deliberately moved away from the phrase 'Safe Standing' some years ago because the safety argument had been won a long time ago, we went with 'Stand Up For Choice', which was copied by the EFL at the same time.
Because of UEFA and FIFA legislation then safe standing to EPL clubs is different to what we want or have. They have to have all seater stadiums to compete in Europe, that hasn't changed, therefore they need seats that can be locked in certain positions, that is, seats for European games and rails for EPL games.
At the Keepmoat we've had an unreserved ticketing policy for quite a while, and an agreement that stewards wouldn't force people to sit within a certain area, an area that roughly holds about 250 people. I'm not sure there's a justification for ripping out the seats and installing rails ( you don't need the seating element at our level) because it wouldn't necessarily change anything.
To increase capacity in that area the club would have to build an intermediate step on each row, and that theoretically gives an increase by a factor of 1.8. But why increase capacity when we can't fill the stadium already? I also don't see the argument that the atmosphere would be necessarily better, people are already stood so I fail to see what would change.
The prime example here is any away game. The atmosphere is so much better because just about everybody stands and like minded people get together, it shouldn't be any different at home. You don't need specific standing areas to achieve that.
We will possibly have to agree to disagree on whether the atmosphere would be better or not, I'm firmly in the camp of it definitely would.
SM, just a quick question for you, if seats had been bolted to the terracing in the popside do you think the atmosphere would have been the same or less so??
Others welcome to offer their opinions.
I'm not sure what you're asking for though. Are you asking for rail seats to be built? Or just to revert to standard type terracing but with additional rails?
But the point I made was that you don't need rail seats, or rails, or any other contraption to develop an atmosphere, you just need people willing to do so. And the clear example is at away games, people always stand amongst seats and yet there doesn't appear to be a problem in atmosphere generation.
-
Would we benefit at the KMS from a section that is clearly marked as a standing area and communicating that to those in that area? Yes it is light touch at the moment but could we not go the next step and say look this is a/the standing area first and foremost and encourage it? That costs nothing and starts to solve the issue once and for all doesn't it? It could maybe just need a small amount of signage, or stickers on seats?
-
The reason the South Stand was made unreserved was to accommodate the varying numbers of those who want to stand. This means it can ebb and grow depending on attendances etc.
Those who want to stand head for the upper central areas whilst those who don't should be prepared to use the outer lower areas. It's an organic thing that means we don't have to set specific areas. Just like going to an away match, you can find where it's OK to stand as long as you don't stand deliberately too far away from the other standers and block someone who wants to stay seated.
As S_M says, atmosphere is created by the people inside the stadium not the stadium furniture.
-
Would we benefit at the KMS from a section that is clearly marked as a standing area and communicating that to those in that area? Yes it is light touch at the moment but could we not go the next step and say look this is a/the standing area first and foremost and encourage it? That costs nothing and starts to solve the issue once and for all doesn't it? It could maybe just need a small amount of signage, or stickers on seats?
Yes,but we're not there yet, we need the SGSA to release their report and then all the local SAG's will respond accordingly. Currently everything is being done by turning a bit of a blind eye.
-
Those that want to stand in the ss do so anyway, without any need to shell out on rail seats
-
Just to reiterate the points I've made above as to where we are in reality, we've asked for clarity on the legal position and received this from the SGSA;
"For now, a relatively simple procedure whereby Government repeals the all-seater order for the participating grounds and SGSA issues them with a new licence which says, in effect, the all-seater policy remains in place except in specific areas designated for standing. This is a bit of a workaround. In the longer-term we would advocate for re-opening the Football Spectators Act but that would mean primary legislation."
So that means, the legislation stays, apart from the grounds, and areas within those grounds, that the SGSA gives permission to.
-
Those that want to stand in the ss do so anyway, without any need to shell out on rail seats
Not entirely true there are people that get there and sit down 6 rows from the back and that's why you see the aisles packed out week in week out.
-
Those that want to stand in the ss do so anyway, without any need to shell out on rail seats
Not entirely true there are people that get there and sit down 6 rows from the back and that's why you see the aisles packed out week in week out.
What makes you think installing rail seats would change this? The rail seats still only accommodate one person per seat space.
-
I am old enough to remember standing at Belle Vue and old enough that now I prefer to sit down. My season ticket seat that I’ve held since the Keepmoat opened is at the back does that mean I have to give it up so others can stand?
In the 70’s in a match against Hull ( I’m sure someone on here can give the exact date?) the police decided to move the crowd on the Pop stand. The result of this was terrifying!! I was lifted off my feet and carried up and down the terrace as were many other people. I would have fallen if the two Rovers fans near me hadn’t supported me. ‘We won’t let you fall luv’ and they didn’t.
It’s a no from me on the so called Safe Standing. I’m also reluctant to go to away games because of the rude fans who insist on standing anywhere in the stands. The Arsenal game was a point in question where they even stood on the front row! I also would like to know why fans wishing to sit down are expected to sit in seats at the front with a poor view.
-
Make South Stand all standing (and some portions of the North Stand for away fans) and then insist everywhere else is seated.
For Rovers away games as much as is possible provide an option between a) those who wish to stand and b) those who don’t and prefer to sit / have no choice due to disability.
-
I am old enough to remember standing at Belle Vue and old enough that now I prefer to sit down. My season ticket seat that I’ve held since the Keepmoat opened is at the back does that mean I have to give it up so others can stand?
In the 70’s in a match against Hull ( I’m sure someone on here can give the exact date?) the police decided to move the crowd on the Pop stand. The result of this was terrifying!! I was lifted off my feet and carried up and down the terrace as were many other people. I would have fallen if the two Rovers fans near me hadn’t supported me. ‘We won’t let you fall luv’ and they didn’t.
It’s a no from me on the so called Safe Standing. I’m also reluctant to go to away games because of the rude fans who insist on standing anywhere in the stands. The Arsenal game was a point in question where they even stood on the front row! I also would like to know why fans wishing to sit down are expected to sit in seats at the front with a poor view.
What a terrible post. Self-serving arrogance in the face of potential solutions.
Having a dedicated area to stand does not impede on your right to sit. It makes it clearer.
-
Now then Copps is Magic. Calling other posters names because they have a different opinion to you doesn’t constitute a logical argument.
-
It is in fact you who is disregarding others opinions. You are saying no one has a right to stand because YOU prefer to sit. I don't have such arrogance, sorry. If people want to sit, they should be able to.
-
It is in fact you who is disregarding others opinions. You are saying no one has a right to stand because YOU prefer to sit. I don't have such arrogance, sorry. If people want to sit, they should be able to.
Sorry Copps but that is a very rude and disrespectful response to Lindy.
In no way did I read Lindy’s post as self-serving arrogance.
He/she expressed a personal opinion and everyone is entitled to that without being subjected to rudeness.
Lindy might be a bruiser of a bloke who can stand up for himself but what if Lindy is an elderly female Rovers fan who has followed the club for decades and finds the prospect of unreserved standing a concern?
Let’s be a bit more considerate?
-
It is in fact you who is disregarding others opinions. You are saying no one has a right to stand because YOU prefer to sit. I don't have such arrogance, sorry. If people want to sit, they should be able to.
Sorry Copps but that is a very rude and disrespectful response to Lindy.
In no way did I read Lindy’s post as self-serving arrogance.
He/she expressed a personal opinion and everyone is entitled to that without being subjected to rudeness.
Lindy might be a bruiser of a bloke who can stand up for himself but what if Lindy is an elderly female Rovers fan who has followed the club for decades and finds the prospect of unreserved standing a concern?
Let’s be a bit more considerate?
But getting yourself a seat at the back of the stand then demanding people around you sit down isn't very considerate either.
When it's the other way around, the person standing gets dog's abuse.
-
If Lindy is in the west or the East then they will be able to hold onto their back row seat. In the West especially the seating is in relatively small sections so I wouldn’t have thought standing would be introduced. My seats above one of the tunnels and there’s only three rows so that’s out for standing.
Making the South top half standing would be great for the atmosphere and it would be good to see a bit of bouncing around!
-
Lindy's post is typical of those who don't understand the argument about safe standing. Campaigning for standing never meant that you would have to stand, only that you would have a right to do so in certain areas.
The campaign was about giving people a choice to do either without affecting those around them.
If the post needs criticising, (and it's not the first time I've seen that type of post on here and elsewhere) it has to born in mind that the poster hasn't taken the trouble to understand the argument.
People talk about standing at Belle Vue, but let's not forget we had a choice there too. We could pay for seats in the main stand or in the cowshed when it existed. There'll be the same option going forward.
-
There wasn't many seats at Belle Vue. Good job we moved when we did sounds like thousands wouldn't come the way people go on about it
-
What a terrible post. Self-serving arrogance in the face of potential solutions.
Having a dedicated area to stand does not impede on your right to sit. It makes it clearer.
Someone having a different opinion to yours whilst giving reasoned arguments doesn't make them self-serving or arrogant. Please show more respect and maturity. Lindy has raised some legitimate concerns with bringing back standing namely: -
- If it happens Rovers need to carefully assess where the standing areas are placed. Remembering not all people can or want to stand and so ensuring the options for where people can sit (at the back of stands/behind the goal wherever) aren't reduced.
- There have been severe health and safety issues, and indeed tragedies, from standing areas in the past. Lindy is right to raise these concerns. After all the Government, to a degree must share these concerns, hence why this is only being introduced now and only as a trial.
- On a broader point people with young children, short people, the elderly and people with mobility issues are discouraged from attending away matches due to the selfish, thoughtlessness of people standing which forces the majority to stand.
I don't see any lack of understanding of the argument in Lindy's post either, just a different opinion, suggesting so is condescending.
Just on my last bullet point. Want an example of an opinion which lacks understanding and is self-serving arrogance how about..... "The atmosphere is so much better [at away games] because just about everybody stands ....... it shouldn't be any different at home." Yep nuts to the fans who simply can't stand during a match so long as you're enjoying a better atmosphere.
-
What a terrible post. Self-serving arrogance in the face of potential solutions.
Having a dedicated area to stand does not impede on your right to sit. It makes it clearer.
Someone having a different opinion to yours whilst giving reasoned arguments doesn't make them self-serving or arrogant. Please show more respect and maturity. Lindy has raised some legitimate concerns with bringing back standing namely: -
- If it happens Rovers need to carefully assess where the standing areas are placed. Remembering not all people can or want to stand and so ensuring the options for where people can sit (at the back of stands/behind the goal wherever) aren't reduced.
- There have been severe health and safety issues, and indeed tragedies, from standing areas in the past. Lindy is right to raise these concerns. After all the Government, to a degree must share these concerns, hence why this is only being introduced now and only as a trial.
- On a broader point people with young children, short people, the elderly and people with mobility issues are discouraged from attending away matches due to the selfish, thoughtlessness of people standing which forces the majority to stand.
I don't see any lack of understanding of the argument in Lindy's post either, just a different opinion, suggesting so is condescending.
Just on my last bullet point. Want an example of an opinion which lacks understanding and is self-serving arrogance how about..... "The atmosphere is so much better [at away games] because just about everybody stands ....... it shouldn't be any different at home." Yep nuts to the fans who simply can't stand during a match so long as you're enjoying a better atmosphere.
Hmm, that's interesting. Somebody classing my post as condescending when in actual fact I called it exactly as it is. Not only that but it's obvious you haven't read my post properly as you've misinterpreted what I wrote. I'm sure you're seeking an argument so let me put you straight on a few issues.
Firstly I'd like you to point out to me where the, quote, 'severe health and safety issues, and indeed tragedies, from standing areas in the past' actually are. Where are these? Bearing in mind Hillsboro had nothing to do with standing, it was a tragedy born out of Police incompetence and neglect, so that wouldn't be classed as one. The disaster at Bradford occurred in a seating area, and in fact all major tragedies that have taken place in football stadiums over the last 20 years have occurred in seated areas so I'm intrigued to know where these tragedies occurred. Part of our successful campaign stemmed from the fact that we could prove that standing areas weren't unsafe, we collected the data that allowed us to do that so I'm intrigued by your assertion.
The reason Lindy doesn't understand the argument, and I said I'd had this argument many times, is that for some reason he thinks the reintroduction of standing areas will force him to stand, it won't. It's about giving choices to him and others to enjoy the game the way they see fit and not be forced to do anything they don't want to. That is clearly a misunderstanding of the position and in no way is it condescending to point that out.
Yes there are issues at away games with people standing, which again was part and parcel of our campaign. Again we emphasise the choice of the individual to enjoy the game the way they wish to, so that those who do have mobility issues, or are of a certain age can enjoy the game, we have no wish to force them to stand.
And finally, pointing out that my post lacks understanding and is self serving arrogance as you put it, is not helped by you adding a completely different context to my post and made a point that I clearly didn't.
If anybody lacks understanding and demonstrates self serving arrogance its been you in your determination to have a pop at me whilst not reflecting accurately on what I posted nor on my intentions within my posts.
I wondered how long it would take for you to show your colours again hstripes, it didn't take that long did it?
-
hstripes,
two points;
1) try answering the questions I asked before calling my posts condescending
2) My facts are facts, they're not opinions. I haven't spent 20 years on a campaign to have to rely on opinions.
-
There seems to be a general assumption that rail seating, if fitted, should go behind a goal and towards the rear.
This may seem like a reasoned argument based on the premise that the vocal support of a club, that would be more in favour of standing, would migrate naturally to this area.
But does this make it right?
Is there not an argument that some people want to sit higher up in a stand to afford themselves a more grandstand view of the pitch.?
Look at celtics model. Their rail seats have been erected in a corner of one stand.
Should those wanting to stand be given automatic right to the upper area directly behind the goal ?
-
If anybody's interested in reading a bit more about rail seats, then here's a link to the Safe Standing Roadshow. DRFC supporters may remember the demo unit that I brought to the Keepmoat once during a 'Meet The Owners' night.
https://www.safestandingroadshow.co.uk/news/latest-news/green-light-for-safe-standing-trials