Stoke City 16-1

[Malcolm Clarke]

With Paddy Power to be the first PL club to introduce safe standing ( as we call it rather than "terracing") along with half the league.

www.paddypower.com/football/football-specials/terracing-specials

I find it fascinating and encouraging that they have opened a book at all, which just shows how fast the debate is now moving. 5-1 for it happen before the end of 2015 - remarkably short odds.

Villa are understandably favourites given their strong public support for the idea. West Ham 2nd favourites - again not surprising given David Gold's regular tweets on the subject.

The three teams coming up - Cardiff, Hull and Palace have all come out strongly in support - far more so than the three who have gone down

[Meggsy]

The day that I can stand at the football again can not come sooner.

There is a reason that the German league is a lot more louder and energetic than the Premiership.

[LGH87]

I thought Peter Coates has openly said he is against the idea though?

[Malcolm Clarke]

I agree, Meggsy. I now think it is going to happen, but I wouldn't like to put a timescale on it. The most significant change is that an increasing number of football clubs are now publicly supporting it. In February a motion to support pilot schemes was passed at a meeting of Championship clubs, with only Middlesborough voting against.

In the PL, Villa have been the prime movers but as stated above, some strong support troops have now come in to join them. There is a long way to go, and a Government still to convince, but we are now in a better place on this debate than we have ever been since the law was introduced, and far better than I would have dared to imagine a couple of years ago.

[stokiejoeofalsager]

Swap the ends round. Have away fans in half of what is now the boothen end, put the boothen end back where it should be to the south of the ground, make the whole new boothen (south stand) safe standing (i'm sure we'd easily fill it) and if it's a success extend it up to make it massive!

[Gods]

You wouldn't have to ask me twice to stand, bring it on, please

[Deleted]

I also remember Coates publicly arguing against this.

[block30row19]

I think some people are a bit misguided about this safe standing lark. It will be nothing like the standing and terracing of the old days. Not the same at all. Just rows upon rows of barriers in front of each row. Not like you can walk around at all.
Backward step for me.

[Deleted]

The Football Supporters' Federation is leading the call and Premier League side Aston Villa have already expressed their willingness to experiment.
But Coates said: "It almost seems a backward step to me.
"Huge amounts were spent on improving stadia around the country and, of course, it was brought in for a reason.
"I think there has to be compelling reasons to change it back and I'm not sure I have seen any compelling reasons.
"Maybe it might be useful at somewhere like Liverpool if they are going to re-develop their stands at Anfield."


Read more: www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/Stoke-City-Tony-Pulis-splash-cash-left-cover-says/story-17198599-detail/story.html#ixzz2VkccAgAr
Follow us: @thisisstaffs on Twitter | thisisstaffordshire on Facebook

[MarkWolstanton]

Jun 9, 2013 19:08:09 GMT Malcolm Clarke said:

With Paddy Power to be the first PL club to introduce safe standing ( as we call it rather than "terracing") along with half the league.

Why do you call it 'safe standing' as a matter of interest, Malc?

I could understand referring it as safer than some standing used to be but safe???

[BristolMick]

Hillsborough is still a raw memory and a lot of lessons were learned and actions taken which have massively improved the football watching experience. However terraces were not the cause of the tragedy and certainly if terraces were designed as per the safe standing rail seats such a tragedy could not have happened.

The stupid thing about the current no standing rules is that it is very difficult to enforce and as a result it forces people to stand if their view is blocked by people in front who are standing. Where is the choice then for people who actually want to sit such as Mabel who got caught up in a crowd surge at Southampton?

When we had terraces and seats, you never had standing in seated areas. You paid your money and took your choice. And that's how it should be!

BM

[hollybush]

There are many, many people, including me, who don't want to stand. We have found excellent seats in the Boothen and elsewhere, which we have had for many years. Why should we be forced to give them up so you lot can stand? What is your solution for all the fans who are happy the way things are? You want to stand, so fuck 'em?

[boskampsflaps]

Jun 9, 2013 19:43:51 GMT LGH87 said:

I thought Peter Coates has openly said he is against the idea though?

He is.

[Gods]

Jun 9, 2013 19:56:59 GMT block30row19 said:

I think some people are a bit misguided about this safe standing lark. It will be nothing like the standing and terracing of the old days. Not the same at all. Just rows upon rows of barriers in front of each row. Not like you can walk around at all.
Backward step for me.

Is that right? Would you have a 'place' then on a particular row?

The best thing about standing for me was the fact that you could stand with whoever you liked, wherever you liked, for as long as you liked and then go stand somewhere else if you liked ...'keep on rockin' in the free world'

[kingstokie]

You can bet on anything nowadays cant you?

[checkmatestokie]

I think I'm right in saying that Boothen is a district in between the Victoria Ground and the Britannia Stadium and as it is to the south of the old Victoria Ground site then obviously, being in between the two, the New Boothen End is correctly sited at the north of the Britannia Stadium.

[Deleted]

Jun 9, 2013 20:02:50 GMT hollybush said:

There are many, many people, including me, who don't want to stand. We have found excellent seats in the Boothen and elsewhere, which we have had for many years. Why should we be forced to give them up so you lot can stand? What is your solution for all the fans who are happy the way things are? You want to stand, so fuck 'em?

Sit at the front, i presume.. Standing at our games is rife home & away anyway, so can't see the issue as long as they stay towards the back.



TEST

[BristolMick]

Jun 9, 2013 20:02:50 GMT hollybush said:

There are many, many people, including me, who don't want to stand. We have found excellent seats in the Boothen and elsewhere, which we have had for many years. Why should we be forced to give them up so you lot can stand? What is your solution for all the fans who are happy the way things are? You want to stand, so fuck 'em?

The point is that Everyone should have a choice, you can choose to sit and someone else can choose to stand. As it is at the moment very often there is no choice to sit because too many people stand forcing everyone to stand. This is a real problem at away games and I cannot remember the last time I was able to sit.

BM

[MarkWolstanton]

The problem is that Hillsborough was not caused by terracing, unsafe standing or whatever else people want to call it. The reasons why it happened have not been removed and as such no standing in my view can ever be called 'safe'.

Until the circumstances in this country change to allow the management of terracing to happen they should never return in my view. And that comes from someone who has spent half of his life loving being on the terraces.

As Mick has highlighted; we can't even manage seating properly at our professional football games never mind the proposed hybrid standing/seating solutions being proposed.

[Malcolm Clarke]

Jun 9, 2013 19:43:51 GMT LGH87 said:

I thought Peter Coates has openly said he is against the idea though?

That is why if you fancy a flutter on Paddy Power, I don't think Stoke City are a good bet on this one, even at 16-1 - although in this debate things can change very quickly e.g if the corners were redeveloped after any change in the law or allowing of pilots, and there was significant supporter pressure for it, which there hasn't been at Stoke so far.

Although our away support now routinely stands at most away games, there is very little persistent standing at the Brit., which is a factor which tends to push clubs towards supporting it.

I'd say that Paddy Power has probably got his top 5 pretty much spot on. If you do fancy a flutter, I'd say go for Villa pdq at that price, although you might still have to wait several years for a pay-out.

[hollybush]

Jun 9, 2013 20:10:23 GMT BristolMick said:

Jun 9, 2013 20:02:50 GMT hollybush said:

There are many, many people, including me, who don't want to stand. We have found excellent seats in the Boothen and elsewhere, which we have had for many years. Why should we be forced to give them up so you lot can stand? What is your solution for all the fans who are happy the way things are? You want to stand, so fuck 'em?

The point is that Everyone should have a choice, you can choose to sit and someone else can choose to stand. As it is at the moment very often there is no choice to sit because too many people stand forcing everyone to stand. This is a real problem at away games and I cannot remember the last time I was able to sit.

BM

The point I am trying to make is; why should anyone be forced to give up their current seat so someone else can stand? This would be the result if the ideas of many posters on here went through. 90% of people on the Boothen sit throughout the game, so having a choice doesn't come into it. We sit because we want to, so why should we move to a worse seat so you can stand?

[stokiejoeofalsager]

Jun 9, 2013 20:07:38 GMT checkmatestokie said:

I think I'm right in saying that Boothen is a district in between the Victoria Ground and the Britannia Stadium and as it is to the south of the old Victoria Ground site then obviously, being in between the two, the New Boothen End is correctly sited at the north of the Britannia Stadium.

Ahh never knew that mate. In which case, keep the boothen where it is would still be good if we expanded it up. I'd rather that than the corners if i'm honest if it's one continuous stand.

[Stafford-Stokie]

I hope they don't bring it into the Seddon. I stand at the back and don't want anyone standing in front of me.
Seriously though it wouldn't be too hard to sort. Just put a crash rail at the front of the step we now sit at and mark your seat/area with 2 white lines. Just stand in front of your seat where it is now and lean on the barrier in front. Sorted.
I really couldn't go back to seating again and hope the stewards continue with their blind eye for the back row. I also love standing at away games and try and get tickets towards the back of the stand so as not to block others view if they are sitting.

[Malcolm Clarke]

Jun 9, 2013 19:58:54 GMT MarkWolstanton said:

Jun 9, 2013 19:08:09 GMT Malcolm Clarke said:

With Paddy Power to be the first PL club to introduce safe standing ( as we call it rather than "terracing") along with half the league.

Why do you call it 'safe standing' as a matter of interest, Malc?

I could understand referring it as safer than some standing used to be but safe???

It's a good question, Mark. You get into linguistics here. Some of my colleagues think we shouldn't be afraid of using the word terracing, because of course there are still terraces at many clubs in leagues 1 and 2 ( and indeed the Championship last season with Peterborough) which meet Green Guide requirements and are licensed by the Sports Ground Safety Authority and Local authorities as "safe".

Of course, no football ground ( or rugby ground, racecourse etc or railway train, road etc ) is totally risk-free, i,e 100% safe, unless it's empty. The Green Guide defines what constitutes a required level of "safety" for both seated and standing areas and we would not advocate departing from that.

"safe standing" is a convenient piece of shorthand to indicate that it would comply with the safety standards of the day i.e the Green Guide.

It is not true that you you would necessarily have an allocated space if "rail seats" were introduced. I missed our last game of the season because I was part of a delegation which went to see Borussia Dortmund's last home game of the season to see their standing arrangments in a match at first hand. We stood in the "rail seats" on the famous "yellow wall" - 24,000 standing fans behind one goal. You get a ticket for a particular section, and the number of tickets sold for each section cannot exceed its safe capacity, but once in that section, you can stand where you like, feeling very safe because of the rails. Needless to say, the atmosphere was fantastic.

[Lakeland Potter]

Jun 9, 2013 20:23:42 GMT stokiejoeofalsager said:

Jun 9, 2013 20:07:38 GMT checkmatestokie said:

I think I'm right in saying that Boothen is a district in between the Victoria Ground and the Britannia Stadium and as it is to the south of the old Victoria Ground site then obviously, being in between the two, the New Boothen End is correctly sited at the north of the Britannia Stadium.

Ahh never knew that mate. In which case, keep the boothen where it is :) would still be good if we expanded it up. I'd rather that than the corners if i'm honest if it's one continuous stand.

As far as expanding the end of the Brit upwards is concerned..........

There is no problem in expanding what is now known as the Boothen End upwards - it is at the north end of the ground and would not cast a bigger shadow on the pitch if it was extended. The south stand, however, is at the south end of the pitch (surprise surprise) and would block a lot of light from the pitch to the detriment of the grass if it was extended. The lights they use to aid the grass growth can never provide nearly enough light to compensate for losing light by increasing the height of the south stand.

[stokiejoeofalsager]

Jun 9, 2013 20:33:30 GMT Lakeland Potter said:

Jun 9, 2013 20:23:42 GMT stokiejoeofalsager said:

Ahh never knew that mate. In which case, keep the boothen where it is would still be good if we expanded it up. I'd rather that than the corners if i'm honest if it's one continuous stand.

As far as expanding the end of the Brit upwards is concerned..........

There is no problem in expanding what is now known as the Boothen End upwards - it is at the north end of the ground and would not cast a bigger shadow on the pitch if it was extended. The south stand, however, is at the south end of the pitch (surprise surprise) and would block a lot of light from the pitch to the detriment of the grass if it was extended. The lights they use to aid the grass growth can never provide nearly enough light to compensate for losing light by increasing the height of the south stand.

current boothen end it is then. I suppose if we extended it up enough, the new extended part could be the safe standing area. That way current ticket holders wouldnt be effected. The same could be said for the corners I suppose.

[Lakeland Potter]

Jun 9, 2013 20:44:46 GMT stokiejoeofalsager said:

Jun 9, 2013 20:33:30 GMT Lakeland Potter said:

As far as expanding the end of the Brit upwards is concerned..........

There is no problem in expanding what is now known as the Boothen End upwards - it is at the north end of the ground and would not cast a bigger shadow on the pitch if it was extended. The south stand, however, is at the south end of the pitch (surprise surprise) and would block a lot of light from the pitch to the detriment of the grass if it was extended. The lights they use to aid the grass growth can never provide nearly enough light to compensate for losing light by increasing the height of the south stand.

current boothen end it is then. I suppose if we extended it up enough, the new extended part could be the safe standing area. That way current ticket holders wouldnt be effected. The same could be said for the corners I suppose.

You can make the whole of any corner safe standing without obscuring the sightlines of the pitch for the seated areas at either side - even if the people standing were ten feet tall!

[Malcolm Clarke]

The questions about displacing existing season-ticket holders are fair ones, but would be issues for each club to decide, hopefully with full consultation with its supporters, if the law is changed.

To be clear - we do not think that any club should be required to introduce standing areas if it does not want to. Neither do we think that any supporter should be required to stand if they do not want to ( or indeed cannot) - although of course that is happening on an increasing scale at the moment with fans standing in front of people who want to sit, mainly in away sections ( a problem which would be greatly reduced if clubs were allowed to advertise away seats on the basis of standers at the back; sitters towards the front).

This should be a matter for individual clubs to decide in consultation with their fan base, provided of course they comply with the Green Guide, not a matter for central Government requirement - particularly an illogical law which only applies to the top 2 divisions so that, for example, had Peterborough stayed up, they would have had to get rid of their popular terrace but now that they have gone down, they don't, as though the safety of a ground could possibly be a function of the quality of football played on the pitch.

[bayernoatcake]

Massive step back, I hope the campaign dies on its arse! Good luck!

[hollybush]

I don't see how any club, no matter how much consultation goes on, can risk alienating thousands of loyal seating supporters to make space for what would be, at a guess, a smaller number of dedicated standers. I don't think there's as big a call for standing as some would have you think, people are used to sitting now. By the way, I am not discussing away fans, but the majority of home fans in any 'popular' end.