Safe-Standing Area Debate

[LoyalRoyalFan]

I feel the club, local authorities, STAR and fans need to discuss the issue of safe standing.

Other clubs seem to allow fans to stand but it seems to be a real issue at this club.

Understand that the local authorities may have different views on this issue from place to place, but surely the situation could be reviewed. Surely the club should be communicating with the fans to debate this rather than ignoring it.

A safe-standing area would allow anyone who wishes to stand to be able to in a safe area.

If rules are rules then fair enough, but at the moment it seems to be one rule for one club and one for another.
The majority of fans in Y25/26 want to stand, so why don't we allow them to without the hassle. Choice.

[Svlad Cjelli]

FFS! How many times must this ground be covered?

The club has no choice or option about this whatsoever. The rules are laid out in section 11 of the Football Spectators Act 1989 - all clubs in the top 2 tiers of football in ENgland must convert to all-seater after 2 years at that level. This is enforced by the local licensing authority (Reading Borough Council) acting under guidance from the FLA (Football Licensing Authority).

There is a vigorous campaign to allow safe standing areas being run by the FSF, and this is largely working at a political level, because that is the only way things can change - the club simply do not have the option to allow safe standing.

Oh, and other clubs do not "allow fans to stand" - there is a recognition that if the vast majority of people in a specific area want to stand then it is virtually impossible to stop them. But that is not them "being allowed" - it is a club being unable to stop them standing.

In those cases, FLA/club tactics are different, and threats of individual bans and/or reduced allocations have been tried. Neither tactic has changed the end result that there is demand for standing and the current law is unworkable and a major cause of conflict between supporters and ground staff, but the only way things can change currently is by a change to the law.

[RG30]

Since the formation of the coalition government, has there been any change in stance or any indications? Especially as the Lib Dems were in favour.

[Svlad Cjelli]

As you say, the Lib Dem policy is to support safe standing so it's a real possibility.

The two major developments are that there was a well-orchestrated movement to ensure that the removal of safe-standing was high on the list of "unnecessary laws" and we know that the Government has been talking to the PL and the FL, presumably about this.

Also, the FLA is on the list published of Quangoes to be abolished. Whether they will be abolished remains to be seen, but if they are you can be sure their powers and responsibilities will be sent to a different department, instead of just going away. No-one knows when/where yet, though.

[biscuitman]

David Cameron also stated that when the Tories got into power (present), there will be a full investigation whether safe standing area's are feasible for the top two leagues. He said it on his webcameron thing.

[Rex]

A true man of the people. Keeping it real!!

[Svlad Cjelli]

David Cameron also stated that when the Tories got into power (present), there will be a full investigation whether safe standing area's are feasible for the top two leagues. He said it on his webcameron thing.

With respect, the things politicians say a couple of years before an election are not the most reliable things in the world.

[LoyalRoyalFan]

Even so.

Shouldn't the club organised discussions with the council over the issue?

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

Even so.

Shouldn't the club organised discussions with the council over the issue?

And what would be the point of that??

[LoyalRoyalFan]

Even so.

Shouldn't the club organised discussions with the council over the issue?

And what would be the point of that??

To re-line or change the boundaries.

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

Would that be boundaries that are not the Councils ro realign?

[66DD]

Would that be boundaries that are not the Councils ro realign?

No I suspect it's the boundaries of Reading Local Authority so that the football club can be in Wokingham.

[Svlad Cjelli]

Even so.

Shouldn't the club organised discussions with the council over the issue?

There are discussions between the club and the local council, in the form of the Safety Advisory Group which meets at regular intervals.

But neither body has the power to allow safe-standing areas - that can only be done after an act of parliament.

However, things are happening, politically - this week there is a 10 minute debate in the HoC on Wednesday and a Westminster Debate on Thursday. Although these can't change things in themselves, they're all important steps in making politicians understand the issues and the strength of feeling involved.

Also, no-one outside individual, uninformed safety officers at individual football clubs is actually saying that standing is "unsafe" any more - that argument has now been thoroughly debunked, so definite progress is being made.

[Svlad Cjelli]

Here's the report of the first of these debates : http://www.sportinglife.com/football/ne ... MHD=soccer

[LoyalRoyalFan]

You could turn the North Stand and Y25/26 in terracing.

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

You could turn the North Stand and Y25/26 in terracing.

Nope you could not, they have been designed as seated areas, so the stress on the supports would not necesarily take standing, the best safe standing areas are behind the goals, lower than ground level which have compacted soil under the concrete sections, so really lower than the disabled sections, the club would be daft to allow any of the East stand as safe standing, due to the premium price that pitchside stands create.

[SLAMMED]

Turn the West stand into a library.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

the club would be daft to allow any of the East stand as safe standing, due to the premium price that pitchside stands create.

???

What premium? It cost exactly the same in the east as the north stand.

Converting anything above the disabled areas, as said, is probably impossible due to the stresses that allowing 50% more spectators in would cause. It would also be far too steep for terracing. Safe-standing would be fine though.

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

the club would be daft to allow any of the East stand as safe standing, due to the premium price that pitchside stands create.

???

What premium? It cost exactly the same in the east as the north stand.

Converting anything above the disabled areas, as said, is probably impossible due to the stresses that allowing 50% more spectators in would cause. It would also be far too steep for terracing. Safe-standing would be fine though.

AT almost all grounds there is a Premium for the stands along the pitch rather than behind it, move the standers/singers to the Lower North and it could well be possible to increase the prices in the East and West if the club thought it would take it, and with the current suggestions there would be hand barriers in front of the seats, so no extra capacity.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

the club would be daft to allow any of the East stand as safe standing, due to the premium price that pitchside stands create.

???

What premium? It cost exactly the same in the east as the north stand.

Converting anything above the disabled areas, as said, is probably impossible due to the stresses that allowing 50% more spectators in would cause. It would also be far too steep for terracing. Safe-standing would be fine though.

AT almost all grounds there is a Premium for the stands along the pitch rather than behind it, move the standers/singers to the Lower North and it could well be possible to increase the prices in the East and West if the club thought it would take it, and with the current suggestions there would be hand barriers in front of the seats, so no extra capacity.

At many grounds, yes, but not ours for some reason. In fact other countries take it further and have a number of price bands depending on where the seats are located.

Take Hamburg for example.



11 price bands and four categories of fixture...imagine that with our ticket office staff.



The position of the disabled areas makes designating the lower part of the north as standing (as terracing or safe standing) difficult, but making the upper part of the North into a safe standing area is more feasible.

It wouldn't be cheap though, and would fans be willing to accept selling a player to pay for it? I doubt converting 3000 North Stand seats would come in at less than half a million.