Brighton say no to safe standing

[StanSP]

"Brighton & Hove Albion, in spite of the massive increase in attendances that the move to Falmer has brought about, cannot quite afford to take its supporters for granted just yet."

Hmmmmmmmm £30 for friendlies , auto cup schemes etc... I think they're trying.

Heard you're charging £37 for Newcastle to visit in the FA Cup. That's outrageously high!

Anyway, it's shame they've totally rejected safe-standing with such a lame, weak excuse.

[Freeman's Wharfer]

Such a demonstration of misunderstanding from the club about what some supporters want, as someone has already said, the reasoning and contradictions in that statement are embarrassing.

Why come out against it? What would the problem have been in taking a stance of "we're not publicly supporting the campaign" rather than saying "we do not support the campaign and here's why"?

I'm sceptical as to whether we'll get safe standing in England. The people who make the decisions (the same people who put out statements such as this one) are too far removed from what it's actually like to sit/stand watching a football match from the places where fans watch from (i.e. not the posh seats).

The thing is we've moved away from the whole point of why standing was out-lawed. It was perceived to be a safety risk. But now we hear about cost, views, unacceptable behaviour. All things that were not factors originally. Seating was brought in as a safety measure, and the fact that it's now been proved that we can have safe-standing should make it a no-brainer. All it is is giving people a choice of either sitting or standing.

Clubs are viewing fans as customers but can they not see that by not giving people a choice the customer is getting a worse experience? If you give people two options no-one's going to be complaining that they can't see or that someone's stood and they want to sit. Why put your customers in that predicament? Look a Peterborough as an away game: sit or stand, everyone chooses, everyone's happy.

The only saving grace is that fans are making their choices anyway in most stadiums. Everyone knows that at the King Power if you want to stand you go in L1 and there's never any bother and we're left alone. The same happens across the country at other stadiums. As long as that doesn't change then safe-standing isn't of great urgency to me, but yes it would be nice to have the choice.

You would have thought that a club which has been through as much as Brighton would maybe have a bit of a better bond with all of those (well 6,000/7,000 ) fans that fought so hard and so long for a new stadium. Poor form there.

[BHAFC Braders]

Heard you're charging £37 for Newcastle to visit in the FA Cup. That's outrageously high!

Yep , for a game on the telly as well ... it's looking like it'll be easy to spot me as I'll be the only one there !!

but I totally agree with the above post - it's supposed to be a community stadium , a large selection of our fans have longed to stand at games , we've had areas before where there's been blind eyes turned but recently the stewards have been more heavy handed on this leading to good people , people who have been supporting the club long before I was even born , being turned into outcasts.

The sad thing is all the time people are happy with the current setup nothing will change.

[purpleronnie]

Yep , for a game on the telly as well ... it's looking like it'll be easy to spot me as I'll be the only one there !!

but I totally agree with the above post - it's supposed to be a community stadium , a large selection of our fans have longed to stand at games , we've had areas before where there's been blind eyes turned but recently the stewards have been more heavy handed on this leading to good people , people who have been supporting the club long before I was even born , being turned into outcasts.

The sad thing is all the time people are happy with the current setup nothing will change.

I remember reading about a certain section of the ground being dedicated to the fans who want to stand and that stewarding would be more relaxed....so I take it the club have gone back on their word?

I'm still amazed that we remain the only country in the world who seem intent on having no atmopshere, its really bizarre.

[C-man]

Urgh, this sort of blinkered and short-sighted hot air from clubs makes me feel so angry and embarrassed, and knowing City could make a similar statement at any stage is more than enough to turn the stomach.

I feel we need to force a meaningful statement out of City at some stage, rather than the usual tripe that 'the law doesn't permit standing.' At least then we could try to educate the club.

[Haydos]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20679867

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/20679867

Some absolute drivel in that.

[Carl the Llama]

But guys! Think of the 96 people who died when the safe capacity of a stadium was entirely disregarded!

[BHAFC Braders]

http://www.northstandchat.com/showthread.php?266164-Meeting-with-Paul-Barber-Martrin-Perry-Paul-Camillin-last-night-re-safe-standing

A few fans had a meeting with Barber , Camlin and Perry last night

Interesting it was too. Mark (Ian Baird's Fist) was there as well. Previous to our meeting he'd been up lobbying Parliament - the most important aspect of the campaign of course, since for anything to happen changes have to be made in legislation.

Arguments against were the obvious ones, top of the list from both PB and MP seemed to me to be the 'identifiable individual in identifiable seat' line

and the allied 'more potential trouble in standing area' one. MP did actually say something along the lines of 'it's a sad fact that the majority has to suffer because of the actions of a minority'

I did of course point out that town centres aren't shut down on Friday and Saturday night because a few people cause trouble, the troublemakers are dealt with, that safe standing

works fine in Germany with full support from the German FA (and in most other European countries) and that - as I'm sure you know - thirteen English clubs are now backing the idea, with Aston Villa leading the way in the PL.

We've been through the debate on here, I think everyone knows where they stand (or sit) now, the same debate happened last night with the club so no need to go much further on the arguments back and forth.

One interesting variation was that Paul Barber said 'it's people who make an atmosphere, regardless of whether they are standing or sitting' and when I mentioned the colour and noise in Germany and elsewhere 'you can't compare it, it's a different culture' (not to me it's not, it's a part of fan culture, regardless of where you live..but there you go)

Very friendly meeting, the channels are still well and truly open, respect for us and the part we played in what we've got now is absolutely still there, PB seems a nice bloke who can handle being energetically argued with

Conclusion as I see it is this:

- Club NOT prepared to back it in principle, but not opposed to other clubs backing it in principle. Everything being discussed as per the situation now, nothing dismissed out of hand, if/when the situation changes and other clubs start implementing it then it's a different discussion and that is accepted. (We are obviously in a pretty unique position in this debate having just nearly completed a beautiful state of the art stadium, it's a weird time to start talking about alterations...)

- Incidentally NO increased revenue through increased North Stand capacity since loads of other factors including size and number of exits, number of toilets and various other safety issues mean accomodation would remain the same as a standing area (hence decreased prices would mean lower revenue)

I brought up the subject of the ticket exchange as well. Reasons are:

- maximising revenue - ie until we are completely sold out the club should be selling tickets not individual fans (I can see their argument, not sure it's entirely fair but it's a valid one)

- that 'identifiable individual in identifiable seat' business again

I did mention the whole issue of ticket prices, the fact that some people, including some who played a big part in the battle for our club, simply can't afford to go as much as they would like, and how that squared with 'inclusivity'. Outside of the staggered payments provision, to be honest, there didn't seem to be much interest in addressing that. But the ridiculously high ticket prices here affect everyone, not just us, I guess....

[Freeman's Wharfer]

'Standing Up To Be Counted' - a blog on safe-standing:

http://www.theposthorngallop.blogspot.co.uk/

[foxile5]

If they don't want it, **** them. Let them have an all-seater stadium.

I'm sure the official party line will be tweaked when other clubs start posting better crowds and profits as a result.

As a motion it's necessary to accept that not all and everyone will be behind the cause, Brighton is just one club and a small, inconsequential one at that. I'd be far more concerned about getting support from the Leeds, Middlesbroughs and Derbys of this division.

[Dan LCFC]

All clubs with smaller average attendances than Brighton.

I'm envious when I see clubs like Cardiff, Derby & Hull on that list, all clubs in modern grounds like ours that weren't built with any intention of having safe standing to start off with.

Yet Leicester won't even publicly look into it. What an embarrassment.

[foxile5]

All clubs with smaller average attendances than Brighton.

So what? As recently as 1990 they were in the 4th tier and have only ever spent 4/5 seasons in the top flight.A shiny new stadium and they're filling it for a little while, thats all. Two years ago their average was 7,315....thats not even that close to the capacity of the Withdean (stadium at the time) I'd be more concerned with getting clubs with clout onside. Whilst Derby, Leeds and M'boro aren't raking in the numbers THIS term they're still far more successful clubs historically both in terms of achievement and attendance. Also, their supporters have gone without the option of standing longer than bleeding Brighton's. In summary, **** them, they're getting big for their boots and I can't wait til they're back in League 2 or wherever.I do agree tho, tres embarrassing that city haven't thrown their support behind it.

[The Year Of The Fox]

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=21372

The club does not support any move for “safe standing†in football stadia and is not considering such a move for the American Express Community Stadium. We have just spent over £100 million developing a state of the art all-seated football stadium, recently named best new venue in the world. One of our main aims was to make the stadium fully inclusive for anyone who wishes to watch and enjoy football, regardless of their age, sex, height, or physical condition, and for them to do so in an atmosphere that is conducive to comfort, great views, and good behaviour. This is in stark contrast to standing areas where a large percentage of the general football watching population are excluded because they would be unable to actually see the pitch. In turn, standing areas create the potential for poor behaviour to go undetected and unresolved. As a club that is doing all it can to promote a family event atmosphere within the stadium and on its approaches, this would be a backward step.

Extremely disappointing stuff.

Thats gay

[foxile5]

Thats gay

Bet they all take packed lunches down there, too.

[The People's Hero]

Why would changing it to standing mean they need more toilets? That Brighton response makes no sense.

[The Year Of The Fox]

Why would changing it to standing mean they need more toilets? That Brighton response makes no sense.

For all their hirachy shitting themselves that it'll all kick off probably

[Kitchandro]

Why would changing it to standing mean they need more toilets? That Brighton response makes no sense.

That's what I thought, not sure what they're on about myself:

Incidentally NO increased revenue through increased North Stand capacity since loads of other factors including size and number of exits, number of toilets and various other safety issues mean accomodation would remain the same as a standing area (hence decreased prices would mean lower revenue)

Can anyone shed any light on this jibberish?

[BrummieFOX]

That's what I thought, not sure what they're on about myself:

Can anyone shed any light on this jibberish?

I think it's a response to the argument that having a standing area would increase the capacity and revenue. Their response is that they can't legally increase the capacity in that area because of the capacity of toilets, concourse areas etc. Though they were ****ing massive when I went.

[Finnegan]

Obviously you'll need to have a certain amount of toilets, exits, policing etc per X number of people in the ground as per building and HSE regs.

They're just saying it's more than a simple case of ripping out some seats to double capacity.

[Matt]

I guess it's not this simple but the way I see it, is you keep the same capacity, you rip the seats out, paint 'plots' on the concrete (Where the seat previously was), you sell the 'plots', that way you cannot oversell, you won't need more toilets, exits, you might need slightly more policing/stewarding maybe.

I suppose the clubs need some incentive for creating standing areas and I suppose increasing capacity with the potential of selling more tickets and making more money is the incentive but for me it's as simple as riping the seats out and selling where the seats previously were as standing plots.

Another idea, rip the seats out, put railing in (To lean on, e.t.c) on these railing you could put the perching seat type things you get in bus stations in - The only thing against that idea is that it could be dangerous should a crush/too many people in the areas happen - But the railings were there (And still are where there is still terracing) before.

Like I said there is always something standing in the way and although my idea is simple in reality people will prevent it from being that simple.

[The Year Of The Fox]

I guess it's not this simple but the way I see it, is you keep the same capacity, you rip the seats out, paint 'plots' on the concrete (Where the seat previously was), you sell the 'plots', that way you cannot oversell, you won't need more toilets, exits, you might need slightly more policing/stewarding maybe.

I suppose the clubs need some incentive for creating standing areas and I suppose increasing capacity with the potential of selling more tickets and making more money is the incentive but for me it's as simple as riping the seats out and selling where the seats previously were as standing plots.

Another idea, rip the seats out, put railing in (To lean on, e.t.c) on these railing you could put the perching seat type things you get in bus stations in - The only thing against that idea is that it could be dangerous should a crush/too many people in the areas happen - But the railings were there (And still are where there is still terracing) before.

Like I said there is always something standing in the way and although my idea is simple in reality people will prevent it from being that simple.

What you say is mainly the intention of the proposal. It is possible to have two fans in on seat space, one on the upper step and one on the lower. Still just as safe as with on person.

[purpleronnie]

Just when you think things couldnt get worse.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/10112523.Standing_fans_facing_Amex_ban____for_years___/

[Mack]

Most of the interesting stuff goes on in the bogs at the Amex

[Leicesterpool]

I'm against the standing at stadiums, I'm glad we have all seater stadiums. If you wanna stand and watch football then i suggest you go and watch a non league side for example there's Hinckley, Barwell & Nuneaton Boro not to far away.

Don't people learn from Hillsborough? 96 people died!