cbwfcd Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 This seems pretty recent http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/briefings/snha-03937.pdf The all-seater requirement is enforced by means of conditions in the licence issued by the Football Licensing Authority under the Football Spectators Act 1989. These provide that:? only seated accommodation shall be provided for spectators at a designated football match; and ? spectators shall only be admitted to watch a designated football match from seated accommodation. The second point there pretty much rules out a standing section or allowing people to stand. But it does go on to say. That each club has their own regulations, that come from the premier league's model recommendations, clause 9 of the model regs. 9. Nobody may stand in any seated area whilst play is in progress. Persistent standing in seated areas while play is in progress is strictly forbidden and may result in ejection from the ground.
cbwfcd Posted February 5, 2010 Posted February 5, 2010 Which is more dangerous: people standing to watch the game, or people forced to sit down becoming angry and rioting. There is a tipping point that is close to being reached at the Reebok. If enough people stand at once, they won't do anything. If its just the odd few, they will tell them to sit down. Which is less dangerous? chucking out the few who would rather get angry and riot than watch the game. They force people at the front to sit down, eject them if they don't, soon enough people get the message and fall in line. If people wanted to make a better atmosphere sat down they could do... Just have to live with the fact that it will be like this until something changes higher up.
DeaneWhite Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 Which is less dangerous? chucking out the few who would rather get angry and riot than watch the game. They force people at the front to sit down, eject them if they don't, soon enough people get the message and fall in line. If people wanted to make a better atmosphere sat down they could do... Just have to live with the fact that it will be like this until something changes higher up. There is no appetite in Parliament or at the FA, FIFA or UEFA to bring terracing back. It will simply never happen and the families of the 96 will see to that. In fact, it is far more likely that Germany will be forced to go all-seater and even our non-league grounds forced to do the same, than we ever see terracing back in the top two divisions. As a semi-pro singer I can tell you that belting out a song whilst sat down is tricky. Most singers stand, as it allows the diaphragm more freedom, aiding breathing and projection, and therefore voume. That is a symptom of all-seater stadia. It is nothing to do with the quality of fans. Sitting down makes people quiet- that is why children have "naughty chairs". Football supporters have effectively been put in the "naughty chair" for years. If supporters want to watch the game in silence, they should stay at home and watch it on television or an internet stream. The view is far superior to any seat in any stadium. The financial contribution from gate receipts to club coffers is practically nothing as a percentage of income these days. Supporting a club means just that- getting behind the lads and supporting them, not sitting there in silence and then moaning when a pass or shot goes astray.
cbwfcd Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 There is no appetite in Parliament or at the FA, FIFA or UEFA to bring terracing back. It will simply never happen and the families of the 96 will see to that. In fact, it is far more likely that Germany will be forced to go all-seater and even our non-league grounds forced to do the same, than we ever see terracing back in the top two divisions. As a semi-pro singer I can tell you that belting out a song whilst sat down is tricky. Most singers stand, as it allows the diaphragm more freedom, aiding breathing and projection, and therefore voume. That is a symptom of all-seater stadia. It is nothing to do with the quality of fans. Sitting down makes people quiet- that is why children have "naughty chairs". Football supporters have effectively been put in the "naughty chair" for years. If supporters want to watch the game in silence, they should stay at home and watch it on television or an internet stream. The view is far superior to any seat in any stadium. The financial contribution from gate receipts to club coffers is practically nothing as a percentage of income these days. Supporting a club means just that- getting behind the lads and supporting them, not sitting there in silence and then moaning when a pass or shot goes astray. Agreed. But if supporters who want to watch the game in silence went home, the stadium would be empty. I do think if performances and results improve then the atmosphere will improve, slighlty.
DeaneWhite Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 Agreed. But if supporters who want to watch the game in silence went home, the stadium would be empty. I do think if performances and results improve then the atmosphere will improve, slighlty. All the silent supporters do is absorb the sound anyway. Strangely, if they did stay at home, the Reebok Roar might just make an appearance! Seriously though, improved performances will make for a better atmosphere, but it is unlikely the atmosphere will ever be as good as people remember at Burnden. It's up to our supporters to prove me wrong......!
Arrested development Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 When Oasis, Coldplay etc play gigs at the Reebok, People in the seated areas are allowed to stand. If it's deemed unsafe to stand at a football match, why is allowed at a music gig, given it's the same venue?
MickyD Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 What the hell happened amongst the away supporters today? The stewards got reet shirty with one lad and then all his mates gobbed off to them so about three or four got turfed out. I'd have thought losing over 1% of your support in one hit would be difficult under normal circumstances but today it actually happened!
gonzo Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 When Oasis, Coldplay etc play gigs at the Reebok, People in the seated areas are allowed to stand. If it's deemed unsafe to stand at a football match, why is allowed at a music gig, given it's the same venue? well said! that comment complteley closes the issue.how possibly can there be any argument from anyone including the club,fa or anyone else that says its unsafe to stand at a football match when thousands stand bouncing up and down at an oasis concert in the very same seats?
no balls Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 well said! that comment complteley closes the issue.how possibly can there be any argument from anyone including the club,fa or anyone else that says its unsafe to stand at a football match when thousands stand bouncing up and down at an oasis concert in the very same seats? Because there's a possibility they're not football fans. Everyone who knows about H&S knows football fans are a danger to themselves & others.
Casino Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 i've never read a gig review that mentions a last minute goal
Carlos Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 i've never read a gig review that mentions a last minute goal You go and look up Enter Shikari at Reading last year and tell me you've ever been in owt like this at football. I ain't. Here you go love
chief wiggum Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 Because there's a possibility they're not football fans. Everyone who knows about H&S knows football fans are a danger to themselves & others. Well I know a bit about H & S and there is nothing in the 'Green Guide' to safety at sports grounds (even the most recent 2008 edition) that says any sports stadium should be all seater per se. None of this is driven by the HSE, it was brought in by the last Tory government and endorsed and enthusiastically taken up by the FA / Premier League. It was done to increase ticket prices, fundamentally, and to get rid of 'terrace culture' i.e. working class people having fun.
Ani Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 Well I know a bit about H & S and there is nothing in the 'Green Guide' to safety at sports grounds (even the most recent 2008 edition) that says any sports stadium should be all seater per se. None of this is driven by the HSE, it was brought in by the last Tory government and endorsed and enthusiastically taken up by the FA / Premier League. It was done to increase ticket prices, fundamentally, and to get rid of 'terrace culture' i.e. working class people having fun. Fucking statto.
no balls Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 Well I know a bit about H & S and there is nothing in the 'Green Guide' to safety at sports grounds (even the most recent 2008 edition) that says any sports stadium should be all seater per se. None of this is driven by the HSE, it was brought in by the last Tory government and endorsed and enthusiastically taken up by the FA / Premier League. It was done to increase ticket prices, fundamentally, and to get rid of 'terrace culture' i.e. working class people having fun. I was taking the piss FFS! I give in, I really do.
victor meldrew Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 You go and look up Enter Shikari at Reading last year and tell me you've ever been in owt like this at football. I ain't. Here you go love their gig tonight in blackpool was cancelled due to h & s. they were so loud in warm up the roof started falling in. i kid you not.
Carlos Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 their gig tonight in blackpool was cancelled due to h & s. they were so loud in warm up the roof started falling in. i kid you not. that's what it takes to cancel a gig - a building collapse, not a bit of ice on a road.
Guest Biff Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 Why? When was standing at a football game PROVED to be dangerous? Don't quote Hillsborough at me. That was caused by scouse scallys who thought they were onto a free football game and a bunch of inept coppers. Don't quote Heysel, that was caused by Scouse scallys . . . common theme here! Neither of the situations is going to happen anytime soon at the Reebok. Am I wrong in suggesting that the Bradford City fire was started in an area of seating? Were these seats partly the cause of folk being unable to escape? So, there you have it; I've managed to turn your "It's too dangerous" argument on its head. I'm all for each to their own but, if you choose to sit in the ESL near the scoreboard, don't be too surprised if, when you excercise your right to sit down, you only get to see the back of the person in front of you. Go find an area where you can sit down all game and not add to the atmosphere of the game. It is not standing per se that is dangerous but standing in areas where there are rows of seats. You will remember from standing on the terraces at Burnden Park that when the game got exciting with goalmouth action there was generally a crowd surge down the terrace which rarely resulted in tragedy. A similar crowd surge in a seated area could result in falling over the row of seats in front with people from behind falling on top. Do those people who insist on standing in the seated areas, when they watch football at home on TV stand or sit in their armchair to watch it? And if they sit, why?
DeaneWhite Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 It is not standing per se that is dangerous but standing in areas where there are rows of seats. You will remember from standing on the terraces at Burnden Park that when the game got exciting with goalmouth action there was generally a crowd surge down the terrace which rarely resulted in tragedy. A similar crowd surge in a seated area could result in falling over the row of seats in front with people from behind falling on top. Do those people who insist on standing in the seated areas, when they watch football at home on TV stand or sit in their armchair to watch it? And if they sit, why? You still see crowd surges in seated areas- even where sitting is strictly enforced- they end up running down the gangways, which is far more dangerous. People who stand in seated accommodation tend to remain in the are immediately in front of their own seat. There is more room in the first place and, although the risers are higher, the treads are far deeper. The danger element comes when people stand behind one another, or a slight nudge from behind forces you off balance and on to the step below. Then the one in fron is forced to do the same, and so on, until stopped by a barrier. That is not as much of a threat in seasted accommodation, as the supporters are generally spread out a lot more. A nudge from behind doesn't necessarily cause you to step down- and in fact, is less likely to happen at all, as the person behind is further away. Granted, any incident could be worse due to the greater fall from step to step, but the risk is reduced due to the chances of such an incident being much lower. Hillsborough was caused by letting too many people into to small an area. If the higher powers made the same decision in an all-seater stadium as they did back then, there would have been more like 300 killed. Burnden was caused by too many people getting into the Embankment End. Those spectators who forced their way in would have caused a disaster whether all seated or not. On the subject of the safety of seating, when were the seats in the ESL last checked? My wife and I were sat there and after coming back to our seats at half time, we found that the seat my wife had been sitting on had been jumped on and broken by "some lads" as they were described by other supporters nearby. On inspection, the rod that prevents the seat from going through more than ninety degrees was broken off. Closer inspection shows that it had rusted through and anyone larger than my wife (who, as luck would have it is petite) would have broken it just by sitting on it and could have been injured.
Recommended Posts