Please understand that it's not the offering of a different opinion that is the issue. The issue is that you offer an
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Ok, so you currently stand up, with nothing but a plastic seat, at around your knee level, and a slight gradient separating you from the person in front of you, yeah? Does that feel safe?
Now take that experience, but add your very own rail at the correct height for you to comfortably lean on, whilst also preventing the possibility of you falling forwards during wild celebrations. Those people standing behind you can no longer fall in to you, as they also have their own rail preventing them from doing so.
Does that sound like an improvement?
LeeMcl
Regarding your post about how it was in the standing areas in the past. This is just from my experience going to grounds in Germany and being in the standing areas.
Often the standing areas are very well regulated, some, such as Bayern, even have electronic turnstiles just before you enter the standing area, where the barcode on the ticket is scanned, to ensure only those with tickets for that area are allowed in. This is to stop what used to happen quite often where 2 people would go in with tickets for that area and one would go out and smuggle a mate back in with the others ticket. I'm sure that the modern stadiums being built now, would be able to introduce a system like this.
Often the standing areas are very well regulated, some, such as Bayern, even have electronic turnstiles just before you enter the standing area, where the barcode on the ticket is scanned, to ensure only those with tickets for that area are allowed in. This is to stop what used to happen quite often where 2 people would go in with tickets for that area and one would go out and smuggle a mate back in with the others ticket. I'm sure that the modern stadiums being built now, would be able to introduce a system like this.
That’s a valid point. I could not, with that example, argue against the rails. That is something about safe standing that would be a clear benefit as protection against surge is key to reduction of risk.
Considering the club have installed and ear marked areas of the new south Stand for Safe Standing in the future, it’s likely to happen and so when it does if it works it would be a positive and then my cynical mind will be put to rest.
I regret if my original post seemed a bit too closed to debate, was not my intention at all
The reason you're being shot down is that your 'opinion' is not an opinion but a series of falsehoods....
Safe standing requires the same entry procedures as seating so no £10 won't get you in
You have an assigned 'seat' where you have to go, just as you do now, so standing in the same spot for 90 minutes is exactly what you will do ....
and your last point ensure that stewards could keep areas from being overloaded how do you think they do it now? or do you always sit in the director's box for your £10 ...
Your comments are unfounded with no basis in fact, that's why you're getting ripped a new one, nothing to do with 'opinions' when it's all nonsense .....
The reason you're getting panned for this post is because a lot of us feel like we've been here over and again - the same old objections about safe standing come out and every one of them is fruitless. The comments you make are the comments that everyone makes when they haven't actually looked into what safe standing really means. And it's those comments that are holding back the proper discussion over whether or not we should be bringing it in - people asserting a somewhat ignorant viewpoint rather than actually looking at the proposal.
Let me address your points though, as there will be others reading who also are unaware of what we're actually campaigning for.
Turnstile admissions allowing too many in. Every match now is all-ticket and the automated barriers & search staff can effectively prevent those without a ticket from attending.
Standing in the same spot/being barged out of the way. This will not be different from seating, as one critical difference between terraces & safe standing is that you do have an allocated seat - it's just that it's locked upright, for you to stand in front of. In this regard it is in fact identical to the current situation whereby people stand in front of their regular seat. There is no new risk of you being pushed away from your "seat" because everyone in the area will have their own.
The average football fan's behviour. If you honestly believe that the demographic of the average fan at Tottenham hasn't changed beyond recognition over the last 30 years then I'll struggle to reason with you. Of course, there are still a decent number of loutish types who'll be tanked up before the game and cause problems - but they're a minority now and, possibly more importantly, what's considered acceptable has move on greatly. The general intention from stewards is to err towards caution; if someone was to attempt to piss anywhere other than the toilets they'd be kicked out without question. An you know what? Those "louts" will likely all be in the standing area, not the seating areas you'll be in.
In fact, I think it can all be summed up by these two points:
1. Safe standing is NOT open terraces - every person has an allocated space in front of a seat. Every single row has a rail the full length aisle to aisle.
2. Standing in rail-seat areas is much safer than the current situation of standing in seated areas.
3. Allocated standing areas will greatly reduce instances of standing in seated areas.
4. If you don't want to stand or have someone stand in front of you, don't go in the standing area...
No guarantee of course, but it should. They mainly say that to avoid debating petitions that either aren't anything to do with Parliament (e.g. if it was about an issue that's actually devolved to the Scottish Parliament or the London Mayor), or could start a diplomatic incident.
However, "Parliament" doesn't necessarily mean "The House of Commons". Petitions are often debated in the smaller Westminster Hall, in front of a small number of MPs, without any vote taking place - so it's good for raising publicity and potentially showing public support for an issue, but not much else. It's still very easy for the Government to block if they're so minded.
I honestly don't think that the Government are interested in blocking it, I just think they're not particularly interested and feel they have bigger fish to fry. The fact that Tracey Crouch refers to the calls as an insignificant minority is proof of that disinterest.
Your points of view are absolutely yours and I can understand the need to be open to the idea and principle of safe standing. Change can be good. You are right to challenge other opinions and I respect that, perhaps the reply is a bit top heavy for a fair debate, and opinions are always subjective, we are not all going to agree on everything, but certainly the counter points given are welcomed.
Last edited:
Thanks for the helpful information, I appreciate the time taken to reply.The reason you're getting panned for this post is because a lot of us feel like we've been here over and again - the same old objections about safe standing come out and every one of them is fruitless. The comments you make are the comments that everyone makes when they haven't actually looked into what safe standing really means. And it's those comments that are holding back the proper discussion over whether or not we should be bringing it in - people asserting a somewhat ignorant viewpoint rather than actually looking at the proposal.
Let me address your points though, as there will be others reading who also are unaware of what we're actually campaigning for.
Turnstile admissions allowing too many in. Every match now is all-ticket and the automated barriers & search staff can effectively prevent those without a ticket from attending.
Standing in the same spot/being barged out of the way. This will not be different from seating, as one critical difference between terraces & safe standing is that you do have an allocated seat - it's just that it's locked upright, for you to stand in front of. In this regard it is in fact identical to the current situation whereby people stand in front of their regular seat. There is no new risk of you being pushed away from your "seat" because everyone in the area will have their own.
The average football fan's behviour. If you honestly believe that the demographic of the average fan at Tottenham hasn't changed beyond recognition over the last 30 years then I'll struggle to reason with you. Of course, there are still a decent number of loutish types who'll be tanked up before the game and cause problems - but they're a minority now and, possibly more importantly, what's considered acceptable has move on greatly. The general intention from stewards is to err towards caution; if someone was to attempt to piss anywhere other than the toilets they'd be kicked out without question. An you know what? Those "louts" will likely all be in the standing area, not the seating areas you'll be in.
In fact, I think it can all be summed up by these two points:
1. Safe standing is NOT open terraces - every person has an allocated space in front of a seat. Every single row has a rail the full length aisle to aisle.
2. Standing in rail-seat areas is much safer than the current situation of standing in seated areas.
3. Allocated standing areas will greatly reduce instances of standing in seated areas.
4. If you don't want to stand or have someone stand in front of you, don't go in the standing area...
As per my original post I felt I was “CYNICAL” about the concept, I somewhat still am, but this reply does help to highlight the concept in clearer terms.
I read earlier about the use of safe standing in NFL ( party stands I think they said ) they make it work, So the principle must be sound.
It also seems very likely that in the end the idea will be adopted, so it will be a case of seeing how it works out once in use. Every reason why it will be a positive addition to stadiums.
As said above the rails, stopping the surges is for me vital, so on that basis I can better see the concept working, especially considering how easy it is to get involved in falling forward!
Side question - Looking at the concept how would the Seat actually be deployed? Would some fans not be looking straight ahead into the bars in the event of being at a seated event or do the bars go in and out ?
The more I have looked at the issue today, then I have to concede there seems to be no significant negativity to the idea. Which is hugely surprising. But equally positive, it is not a return to the past but a logical response to some of the current issues. Fuck it at this rate I will end up converted to the whole idea, bastards!
Last edited:
In theory I think the bars can drop down if the stand's been designed for it. In practice it really doesn't matter because fans who stand every game aren't likely to start sitting down instead on a European night because of some nonsensical UEFA regulation.Thanks for the helpful information, I appreciate the time taken to reply.
As per my original post I felt I was “CYNICAL” about the concept, I somewhat still am, but this reply does help to highlight the concept in clearer terms.
I read earlier about the use of safe standing in NFL ( party stands I think they said ) they make it work, So the principle must be sound.
It also seems very likely that in the end the idea will be adopted, so it will be a case of seeing how it works out once in use. Every reason why it will be a positive addition to stadiums.
As said above the rails, stopping the surges is for me vital, so on that basis I can better see the concept working, especially considering how easy it is to get involved in falling forward!
Side question - Looking at the concept how would the Seat actually be deployed? Would some fans not be looking straight ahead into the bars in the event of being at a seated event or do the bars go in and out ?
The more I have looked at the issue today, then I have to concede there seems to be no significant negativity to the idea. Which is hugely surprising. But equally positive, it is not a return to the past but a logical response to some of the current issues. Fuck it at this rate I will end up converted to the whole idea, bastards!
Thanks. You are right of course.
Different example. I went to Leeds Arena for a concert and they have clear glass screens between some rows which puts bars in eye line of the stage, it’s an extremely odd design feature.
They are interested in blocking it. It isn't laziness, it is a distinct policy. Let's not forget that Tracey Crouch has patently ignored safety advice from the government's own advisory board, the SGSA and the industry specialist "union", the Football Safety Officers Association. Presumably on orders from "on high" as Tracey Crouch is a lucid, logical, and, kind of unheard of for a Tory, a human Sports Minister with an interest in Sport. I have no doubt personally that left with a decision based on it's own merit, Tracey Crouch would have allowed the trial at the Hawthorns.
This is a decision based purely on fear. Fear of a repeat of Hillsborough and Hysel (I know, I know!). Fear of being the government who overturned a piece of legislation that has, like it or not, rendered British football stadia amongst the safest public spaces in the world. Fear of risk. All based on "feeling" and ignorance of operational reality. From a government perspective, all seater stadia work. Why change it because a few thousand people fancy standing instead of sitting for 90 minutes? By declining the trial, they are not placing any football club at a financial loss either. From a non football fan, for a senior minister looking at the every scrap of evidence around the issue, why would you add risk in to an area that has been so derisked over the past 30 years?
The disappointing thing for me is that the Labour Party and their football arm, haven't been more vocal. Tom Watson particularly disappointing.
I think the debate will consist of them saying "The petition demonstrates a large amount of public interest in the issue of safe standing, however research carried out by the Football League found that only 5% of fans actually want to see it introduced and there are still concerns over safety in grounds, so we are rejecting it for the foreseeable future. NEXT!" Don't get me wrong, I signed the petition and really want safe-standing introduced as I think it's the only thing that's going to save the rapidly diminishing match-day experience, but a chamber full of people with no interest in football other than pretending to support whichever team is in their constituency is not where this change is going to happen.
Getting really close now...
It's flying along now, over 150 signatures in the 10 mins since I posted that...
Petition: Allow Premier League and Championship football clubs to introduce safe standing
Petition: Allow Premier League and Championship football clubs to introduce safe standing
Nailed it
65k at NWHL it is then!
