Safe standing incoming

[Brogue]

C1871

[RG30]

It will have to go in the away end as well then.

[tidus_mi2]

How does safe standing work these days? Can they increase the attendance in 1871 or will there still be a seat per ticket and therefore no change really

[RG30]

No change in capacity.

[MR. CYNICAL]

No change in capacity.

So what's the point, everyone stands there anyway?

[Clyde1998]

Is this allowed under the current Green Guide rules? Seem to recall the slope of the stand being too steep for safe standing.

[Green]

No change in capacity.

So what's the point, everyone stands there anyway?

Presumably this will safer.

[Millsy]

A step in the right direction. Much more power can be projected chanting.

But not if it also applies to away end as will defeat the purpose.

Still won't emulate the good old Southbank, where goal ---> f**king mayhem ---> completely lost standing next to randomers spending the next 5mins trying to get back to your original spot

Surely that's worth the risk of the odd fatal injury?

[Crusader Royal]

It will have to go in the away end as well then.

Why ?

[Dirk Gently]

Is this allowed under the current Green Guide rules? Seem to recall the slope of the stand being too steep for safe standing.

From what I remember when I looked at this many years ago, I think the problem was the depth of each step needed to accommodate a seat, so the answer would be to put an intermediate step in, half height the height and half the depth of the existing step. This then raises a question of whether the additional weight of all those extra steps would cause a structural problem.

I also do seem to remember that the rake of the slope changes above concourse level and that might cause a different problem.

Having said that, I did all my work on safe standing long before it became legal, so there may well have been developments and technological solutions since then that make the above problems irrelevant these days.

[Clyde1998]

Is this allowed under the current Green Guide rules? Seem to recall the slope of the stand being too steep for safe standing.

From what I remember when I looked at this many years ago, I think the problem was the depth of each step needed to accommodate a seat, so the answer would be to put an intermediate step in, half height the height and half the depth of the existing step. This then raises a question of whether the additional weight of all those extra steps would cause a structural problem.

I also do seem to remember that the rake of the slope changes above concourse level and that might cause a different problem.

Having said that, I did all my work on safe standing long before it became legal, so there may well have been developments and technological solutions since then that make the above problems irrelevant these days.

Managed to find a PDF of 'Supplementary Guidance' for safe standing: https://sgsa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/ ... y-2022.pdf

Seems the slope issue doesn't relate to safe standing (directly), but there's a minimum sightline requirement (Page 14). I imagine we won't have issues with that.

Can't see anything about step depth, but there's a point about row depths. Seems the row depths relates to the space required in each row and how barriers can reduce that.

Something which stands out to me relates to seat widths (Page 17-18):

[...] The Green Guide recommends that for existing construction a minimum seat width of 460mm, measured between seat centres, be provided, and that for new construction this be increased to 500mm. Both these recommendations assume the spectators will be seated.

[...] Standing spectators occupy more lateral space. A seated person typically occupies 460mm of lateral space (hence the recommended minimum cited above), whereas the same person standing will occupy 550mm of lateral space [...], increasing to 600mm in cold temperatures, when spectators are likely to wear bulkier clothes.

It therefore follows that if the seating row consists of seats with seat centres of 460mm or 500mm, and is fully occupied, there is an increased risk that spectators who are standing will encroach onto the radial gangways [...].

This runs contrary to one of the basic principles of safety management at sports grounds and other places of public assembly; that all radial and lateral gangways be kept clear at all times during an event [...].

If the spectators in that row are able to make the necessary adjustments (as they tend to on standing terraces, where there is more scope to shift positions), and there is no encroachment onto radial gangways, management will still need to demonstrate that the minimum space for each spectator is being achieved (see next Section).

If the spectators in that row do not make the necessary adjustments, and there is encroachment onto gangways, management will need to consider the following options:

1. Remove seats from the seating row: for example, a seating row of 28 seats, each with a seat width of 500mm, measures approximately 14.0m in length. However, 28 x 550mm = 15.4m. Therefore in order to allow 550mm per person and prevent encroachment onto the gangways, three seats should be removed. To allow 600mm per person, at least five seats should be removed.
2. Reduce the ticket allocation in line with the calculations in (i) above.
3. Realign each seat so that the seat centres increase.

I don't know how wide our seating currently is, but it seems fairly typical for a modern football stadium (so I'll guess it's 500mm). I think we have twenty-six seats per row per block.

To do some rough calculations. If the South Stand was safe standing, they'd probably have to remove three seats per row per block. There's about fifty rows and six blocks, which is 900 seats. The figure will be lower, as there are shorter rows which won't be impacted (as much). Call it 500 seats or ~11% being lost.

Interesting point to consider.

[Green]

Dirk is often not as ITK as he likes to make out.

[Snowflake Royal]

No change in capacity.

That's not really the case if it's done the way all the proposals were. Which is no increase in capacity where the seats are lowered, but definitely one where they're fixed back for standing games. Something like 20-40% increase I think.

Standing areas can also safely accommodate more fans then seated ones. In Germany, where standing areas are popular and exist in all leagues, the ratio varies from 1:1.2 to 1:1.8, meaning a club could increase a stand’s capacity by 50% by converting from seats to standing.

[RG30]

There is not a single club in the country who has introduced safe standing that has seen an increase in spectators.

[Crusader Royal]

No change in capacity.

That's not really the case if it's done the way all the proposals were. Which is no increase in capacity where the seats are lowered, but definitely one where they're fixed back for standing games. Something like 20-40% increase I think.

Standing areas can also safely accommodate more fans then seated ones. In Germany, where standing areas are popular and exist in all leagues, the ratio varies from 1:1.2 to 1:1.8, meaning a club could increase a stand’s capacity by 50% by converting from seats to standing.

That depends on other factors as well though. If you increase capacity by 50% you have to be able to evacuate 50% more people in the same time. You’ve also got to be able to get 50% more people through the turnstiles in a reasonable time. Your concourses need to be able to fit more people in and your services need to cope.
All that might mean we would be at the lower end of that theoretical increase.
I’m not sure what the impact is on ticket prices. Do you charge the same for a safe standing spot as you do for Seat ?If you charge less to stand up the unless your capacity increases you are on to a loser.

I’ve stood on safe standing terraces a few times. At Brentford it led to 3 of us standing in 2 spaces as the gentleman next to me was very large and using walking sticks, he took up the width of 2 seats.

[RoyalBlue]

No change in capacity.

That's not really the case if it's done the way all the proposals were. Which is no increase in capacity where the seats are lowered, but definitely one where they're fixed back for standing games. Something like 20-40% increase I think.

Standing areas can also safely accommodate more fans then seated ones. In Germany, where standing areas are popular and exist in all leagues, the ratio varies from 1:1.2 to 1:1.8, meaning a club could increase a stand’s capacity by 50% by converting from seats to standing.

That depends on other factors as well though. If you increase capacity by 50% you have to be able to evacuate 50% more people in the same time. You’ve also got to be able to get 50% more people through the turnstiles in a reasonable time. Your concourses need to be able to fit more people in and your services need to cope.
All that might mean we would be at the lower end of that theoretical increase.
I’m not sure what the impact is on ticket prices. Do you charge the same for a safe standing spot as you do for Seat ?If you charge less to stand up the unless your capacity increases you are on to a loser.

I hope that they would charge the same - 'you pays your money and you takes your choice', People in that area already pay for a seat and spend most of the time standing anyway!

[Dirk Gently]

Dirk is often not as ITK as he likes to make out.

Really???

I massively caveated that I was wildly out-of-date on the technical details :

Having said that, I did all my work on safe standing long before it became legal, so there may well have been developments and technological solutions since then that make the above problems irrelevant these days.

so I'm utterly unconcerned that my recollections from well over a decade ago are contradicted by a document issued less than four year ago.

That's some seriously weak attempted ebeef shite you have there...

[Brogue]

Announced

https://x.com/readingfc/status/2038305184938389706?s=46

In brogue we trust

[MR. CYNICAL]

Announced

https://x.com/readingfc/status/2038305184938389706?s=46

In brogue we trust

Just bin it off and carry on as we are, can't see the point in putting the club through the extra expense. Everyone in C1871 are standing anyway so what's the point?

[Brogue]

Announced

https://x.com/readingfc/status/2038305184938389706?s=46

In brogue we trust

Just bin it off and carry on as we are, can't see the point in putting the club through the extra expense. Everyone in C1871 are standing anyway so what's the point?

Because it makes it legal and safe