Topic: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)

[CraigDS]

This needs to be an issue given full consideration before we redevelop, that's for sure.

It's not something the club can even consider without the FA, PL, and also the Govt, give it the green light in Premiership grounds. At the speed they move, it would be ridiculous to hold off redevelopment until then.

[Nessy76]

It's not something the club can even consider without the FA, PL, and also the Govt, give it the green light in Premiership grounds. At the speed they move, it would be ridiculous to hold off redevelopment until then.

All true. Also, if it was ever going to happen at Anfield, it would have to be in the Kop end, anywhere else really doesn't make sense.

[۩ Imperator ۩]

It's not something the club can even consider without the FA, PL, and also the Govt, give it the green light in Premiership grounds. At the speed they move, it would be ridiculous to hold off redevelopment until then.

All true. Also, if it was ever going to happen at Anfield, it would have to be in the Kop end, anywhere else really doesn't make sense.

I understand that, but if the Kop and/or Anfield Road Lower are to be part of the redevelopment, then we should certainly be looking at 'future-proofing' those builds in this regard (i.e. designing the stands with a rake and step depth that would allow for the replacement of conventional seating with safe-standing railed seating).

[CraigDS]

I understand that, but if the Kop and/or Anfield Road Lower are to be part of the redevelopment, then we should certainly be looking at 'future-proofing' those builds in this regard (i.e. designing the stands with a rake and step depth that would allow for the replacement of conventional seating with safe-standing railed seating).

If we were rebuilding the Kop now then I'd at least see the reason to look at it, however we aren't so that doesn't really matter.

Not sure why we would even give it a consideration for the lower Anny. If it's every introduced back it'll only be done so in the Kop and I doubt we'd do it anywhere else, even for away fans in the Anny Rd. Going to the hassle and expense of trying to apply to some yet unknown safe-standing regulations now, and possibly making it worse for the seating crowd which could be there for the next 10yrs+, doesn't make much sense.

[Adamski LFC]

Update on where the overall game is, the football league has agreed to lobby the the Government to allow 'safe' or 'rail standing'.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/championship/10623219/Football-League-to-lobby-Government-in-major-move-for-safe-standing-areas.html

The first official moves to bring back standing at all-seat stadiums in English football were being made on Thursday night after the Football League agreed to lobby the Government to allow its clubs to introduce so-called “safe standing” at grounds.
Telegraph Sport has learnt that the league’s executives were given an overwhelming mandate to challenge ground regulations implemented in the wake of the Hillsborough disaster, following a survey of all 72 of its members.
The league revealed the findings of the survey at its clubs’ meeting in Derby, with around 70 per cent of those who responded backing chief executive Shaun Harvey to begin lobbying Sports Minister Helen Grant, something he vowed to do.
It is the first time one of the English game’s governing bodies has been prepared to ask the Government to legitimise standing areas at all-seat stadiums since they were effectively outlawed almost 20 years ago.
The league had previously resisted pressure from its clubs to agitate for change but there has been a rethink since the appointment of Harvey, with Thursday’s decision a major breakthrough by campaigners for safe-standing areas.

The Football Supporters’ Federation has spearheaded moves for what is known as “rail seating” to be permitted at all-seat grounds. Implemented successfully on the continent, it involves seats being installed within protective rails at the back of a given row, allowing spectators the option of sitting or standing.

Advocates claim that it not only boosts capacity but promotes lower ticket prices and improves the atmosphere at matches, as well as being safer than the increasing trend of clubs turning a blind eye to persistent standing by many spectators.
Welcoming the news, the FSF’s safe-standing coordinator Peter Daykin told Telegraph Sport: “This sounds really encouraging and backs up the FSF’s position – a significant proportion of football supporters want to stand and many football clubs are happy to give them that choice.

“In arriving at this decision, we’re sure the clubs will have considered the arguments for and against, the opportunities standing affords, and the concerns the issue throws up."
“It’s quite right that the football family, the government and the police continue to engage in an open, honest, evidence-led debate on the subject."
“The FSF believe that a small number of controlled trials of safe standing areas is an excellent means of facilitating this debate.
“The 72 clubs of the Football League deserve great credit for the way they have approached this issue, as do the organisation’s staff and board, and we would particularly like to thank the many supporters who lobbied their clubs to say ’yes’ to safe standing.
“It’s crucial that individual fans continue to make their voices heard on this issue.”

The Sports Grounds Safety Authority, which decides whether a given stadium is fit to stage sporting events, has refused to recognise rail seating as conforming with its regulations for football matches in England, insisting that any change to that policy would require governmental intervention.

The Government in turn says it will not act unless football’s governing bodies and the police convince it safe standing poses no risk to spectators.

A recent survey found Liverpool, who endured the loss of 96 -supporters in Britain’s worst sporting disaster, were the only Premier League club actively opposed to safe standing, out of respect for the Hillsborough families.
Only one of 22 Championship clubs which attended a meeting a year ago was against safe standing trials.
The Football League could now attempt to join forces with the Football Association and Premier League, which has been opposed to change in apparent defiance of the will of an increasing number of its clubs.
The consultation document sent out to Football League clubs included the following four questions:

Should the Football League approach the Minister for Sport to request that the all-seat stadiums requirement for Championship clubs be reviewed with a view to the reintroduction of standing accommodation?
Should the Football League approach the Sports Grounds Safety Authority to request that rail seating products be licensed in Football League grounds?
Should clubs be permitted to accommodate supporters in rail seating in the Football League Championship?
Should clubs be permitted to revert from seating to standing accommodation in League One and League Two following relegation from the Football League Championship?
The final question covered the loophole that exempts grounds below the Championship from being all-seater until they are promoted to it, after which they must retain that status.
Speaking in December after revealing details of the survey to Telegraph Sport, Harvey said: “I’ve never been able to rationalise the argument in my own mind as to why a terrace is perfectly safe in League One, yet, if a club gets promoted, it’s no longer safe. Because if it’s not safe in League One, it shouldn’t be getting used.”

[LiverpoolKopKings]

The families of the 96 are openly against it as expected

http://news.sky.com/story/1208284/hillsborough-families-oppose-terraces-return

Hillsborough Families Oppose Terraces Return
Relatives of those killed in the Hillsborough disaster say Football League clubs' plans to reintroduce standing are a "disgrace".7:05pm UK, Friday 07 February 2014
Hillsborough Liverpool fans
Video: Stadiums were made all-seater after 92 people died at Hillsborough in 1989
Enlarge



Email
By Paul Kelso, Sports Correspondent
The families of the 96 Liverpool supporters killed in the Hillsborough disaster will write to Football League clubs asking them to reconsider their support for standing in the top divisions.

Football League clubs voted on Thursday to lobby Government for a change in the law that would allow clubs in the Championship to install "safe standing" areas in their grounds.

Margaret Aspinall, chairman of the Hillsborough Family Support Group, told Sky News she remains totally opposed to any form of standing.

Under current laws introduced following the disaster, clubs in the Championship and Premier League have to play in all-seater stadiums. Clubs in League One and Two are allowed terraces.

Borussia Dortmund's supporters wave flags ahead
Borussia Dortmund is among the European clubs which allow fans to stand
Now Football League clubs want to explore the use of "rail seats", widely used in Europe, to allow fans to stand in safety.

The seats convert into a standing area, with a hand rail behind every seat to prevent crowd surges or crushing. They are used in the Bundesliga, where Borussia Dortmund's Westfalenstadium has a single stand that holds 20,000 people in standing configuration.

But Ms Aspinall said that any return to standing would be a step backwards.

"I think it is a disgrace and I will be writing to many of those Football League clubs to reconsider what they are thinking of doing," she said.

"We have seen at Hillsborough what can happen when things go wrong.

"We have come 10 steps forward since then and I do not know why anyone would want to go backwards.

"I will never change my mind about standing and we will always be opposed."

Thatcher
Margaret Aspinall said a return to terraces would be a backward step
The Football League confirmed the clubs had asked the executive to begin discussions with the sports minister and the Sports Grounds Safety Authority over introducing rail seating in the Championship.

Chief executive Shaun Harvey said: "The consultation has given us a better understanding of the wide range of views held by clubs on this issue and we will take our cue from the prevailing opinion.

"We recognise this is both a complicated and sensitive matter that will need significant debate.

"Therefore, no-one should assume it will lead to overnight change."

[ghost1359]

I have all the respect in the world for Margaret Aspinall but in this instance her and the HFSG are wrong. The current system is much more likely to cause a serious accident than safe standing would. Frankly it's a miracle there hasn't been a major incident already.

[Jonny5]

ive no doubt this will happen one day, even at Anfield.

[cornishscouser92]

Respectfully disagree with Ms Aspinall. Look at Borussia Dortmund, excellently managed in the stadium sense. 

[Maggie May]

Respectfully disagree with Ms Aspinall. Look at Borussia Dortmund, excellently managed in the stadium sense. 

I'm afraid there is no talking to Margaret Aspinall about this.  She will not and never has even for a moment listened to reason or proof of the case for safe standing.  Waste of time frankly. 

[Nessy76]

Respectfully disagree with Ms Aspinall. Look at Borussia Dortmund, excellently managed in the stadium sense.

The crux of the issue for Liverpool FC, though, is that the club can't really just ignore the wishes of the families. Whether you or I agree with their assessment of the safe seating issue - and it does seem very clear that rail seats are far safer than old fashioned terraces and possibly even safer than standing in modern seating areas - for the club to take a stand on that issue that was at odds with the publicly stated views of the families and support groups would be appalling to most match-going fans.

I think the way forwards is for it to take root elsewhere, for it to become normalised at grounds around the country. For travelling fans to experience it themselves on a regular basis. Then, we can look at whether it would be right for Anfield.

Anyone who reads RAWK is well aware that there are people who seem to actively delight in criticising every aspect of the way the club is run. Giving them the ammunition that the club is prepared to run roughshod over the feelings of grieving mothers to rake in more money (and have no doubt, that's how it would be told) would be a massive mistake for the club and could divide the support horribly.

[Maggie May]

I'm not criticising the club.  The club is in an extremely difficult position with regard to this matter.  I do hope you are right and it will  take root elsewhere.  I don't feel safe with the present system at all.  I'd be very happy with the German model.

[Easy]

If she really wants to focus on safety, she should now (theoretically) be campaigning for people to remain seating during games. It won't happen because people like to stand. It's a behavioural issue rather than seats vs safe standing. If people are going to stand whether or not you give them a seat then it makes more sense to deal with that reality than the theory (i.e. that people will remain seated during a game.)

[Maggie May]

If she really wants to focus on safety, she should now (theoretically) be campaigning for people to remain seating during games. It won't happen because people like to stand. It's a behavioural issue rather than seats vs safe standing. If people are going to stand whether or not you give them a seat then it makes more sense to deal with that reality than the theory (i.e. that people will remain seated during a game.)

I agree with you entirely.  People will always stand.  Either entirely or will rise when play is near the goalmouth.  I hate seating. I find it difficult to sing.  I always seem to come away with bruises and the seats are uncomfortable and don't have enough leg room or decent width.   I worry about overbalancing or people toppling onto me.   

[Peter McGurk]

If she really wants to focus on safety, she should now (theoretically) be campaigning for people to remain seating during games. It won't happen because people like to stand. It's a behavioural issue rather than seats vs safe standing. If people are going to stand whether or not you give them a seat then it makes more sense to deal with that reality than the theory (i.e. that people will remain seated during a game.)

There are two Taylor Reports. One about Hillsborough and the second about Hooliganism. The second has the recommendation for all-seater stadia to control Hooliganism.

[oojason]

Bristol City are to install rail seats this Summer...

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/feb/12/bristol-city-standing-areas

http://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/20140212-safestanding-1354602.aspx

^ they'll be hosting rugby games next season too - but should be interesting to see how this goes.

[ghost1359]

The crux of the issue for Liverpool FC, though, is that the club can't really just ignore the wishes of the families.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with this, it's the club's responsibility to do just that if the wishes of the families are potentially putting the safety of spectators at risk which I believe they are by opposing safe standing.

The facts of the matter are that on most match days you have large numbers of people standing in areas that are not designed for people to stand safely, en masse. If the club aren't willing to ban people for standing then the discussion regarding safe standing is one that needs to be had, regardless as to how the families feel about it.

[Nessy76]

I'm sorry but I don't agree with this, it's the club's responsibility to do just that if the wishes of the families are potentially putting the safety of spectators at risk which I believe they are by opposing safe standing.

The facts of the matter are that on most match days you have large numbers of people standing in areas that are not designed for people to stand safely, en masse. If the club aren't willing to ban people for standing then the discussion regarding safe standing is one that needs to be had, regardless as to how the families feel about it.

Come off it. The biggest problem with standing in a seating area is the view of other fans. The suggestion that seats themselves are dangerous is never going to fly.

[ghost1359]

Come off it. The biggest problem with standing in a seating area is the view of other fans. The suggestion that seats themselves are dangerous is never going to fly.

Plenty of people have been bundled over during celebrations, I'm sure there are plenty on this forum that could attest to that. No one's life is in danger by any means but with rail seating you remove that problem entirely while allowing people the option to stand.

[CraigDS]

Premier League not planning changes to rules over standing in grounds

The Premier League is not planning to lobby for a change to current rules which ban standing areas in top-flight grounds.

Some clubs are keen to introduce 'safe standing' areas which use rail-seats, with Bristol City set to trial them at upcoming rugby matches and Aston Villa interested in furthering the campaign.

The Ashton Gate side unveiled a small section of rail seats on Wednesday but under current regulations they are only able to be used by Bristol Rugby, who share their stadium.

Standing at grounds in England's top two divisions has been banned since all-seater stadiums were ordered in the wake of the 1989 Hillsborough disaster and the Taylor Report which followed.

Several clubs are believed to be open-minded about allowing rail seating, which can be locked upright to allow standing with barriers between each row, but they are opposed by the Hillsborough Family Support Group.

A Premier League spokesman said: "We support the current legislation and see no reason to change it."

Aston Villa's football operations manager Lee Preece said his club would be interested in a further trial if the league's position does change.

He said: "We at Aston Villa have said we are quite happy to use an area of Villa Park as a trial so the Premier League, the authorities and the government can see a safe standing area in practice."

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11677/9164186/premier-league-not-planning-changes-to-rules-over-standing-in-grounds

[Nessy76]

Plenty of people have been bundled over during celebrations, I'm sure there are plenty on this forum that could attest to that. No one's life is in danger by any means but with rail seating you remove that problem entirely while allowing people the option to stand.

No-one is going to buy that as a valid reason. It will be seen (and definitely portrayed, let's not kid ourselves) as the club trying to make a fast buck at the expense of the safety of fans and the feelings of the bereaved. It would be a PR disaster of astonishing proportions. The club really doesn't need another one of those for the next decade, thanks all the same.

[gregor]

The families of the 96 are openly against it as expected

As people have said above, that's not strictly true. The HFSG are against it. They don't represent or speak for everyone affected by Hillsborough. The HJC have, as far as I'm aware, always been a lot more open minded about safe standing. Shame the club don't recognise or involve them.

[Maggie May]

Come off it. The biggest problem with standing in a seating area is the view of other fans. The suggestion that seats themselves are dangerous is never going to fly.

Sorry Nessy.  I've got to take issue with you on that.  The back of the seat below me comes about half way up my shin.  If someone bundles into my back during a celebration and knocks me off my balance (which has happened) then I'm as likely as not going to flail my arms about before I fall on the person below.  Its not a stretch of the imagination to suggest that we could all go down like dominoes. 

[Nessy76]

Sorry Nessy.  I've got to take issue with you on that.  The back of the seat below me comes about half way up my shin.  If someone bundles into my back during a celebration and knocks me off my balance (which has happened) then I'm as likely as not going to flail my arms about before I fall on the person below.  Its not a stretch of the imagination to suggest that we could all go down like dominoes.

I think you need to read the rest of my post.

Look, it's not complicated. We can't convince some people about global warming even when half the country is under water. We can't convince some people about evolution even when they are digging up new dinosaur species every week. We can't convince people that immigration supports the economy even though the figures speak for themselves. We can't convince people that the welfare budget is a vital lifeline when the majority persists in believing that the level of fraud is massively greater than it is.

The case for all those things is far more compelling than safe standing. You are not going to get that message through easily. Choose your fights.

That's really all there is to say, so far as I can see. If I can't convince you, then you've proved my point for me.

[LiverpoolKopKings]

we can forget about safe standing being implemented at anfield of lfc lobbying for it. Other pl clubs will have to lobby for it with the pl and when it is finally approved and implemented at other clubs we can revist. When it is implemented and operational without problems elsewhere especially since our away support will probably use it themselves then it wouldn't really make sense to continue to oppose.

We'll have to limit ourselves to be followers by choice on this one.

[Adamski LFC]

Safe standing as a means of delivering cheaper ticket prices could be the driving force behind it with safety as a bona fide argument.  Commercial benefits are often the driving force behind many a change, hence if the football league campaign gains force for increasing revenue then in the Championship more and more clubs will take it up, as will the lower leagues.

Assuming several years of safe standing in all the leagues below us, will see more clubs in the prem talking to the prem league about allowing it to happen for monetary reasons.   I can see us being the very last to do this bearing in mind everything involved but with us potentially falling behind on revenue from games, with other teams moving ahead of us commercially because of this, i can see this being addressed.

This is always bearing in mind the lower leagues can afford the monitoring of safe standing with people watching out for trouble from elevated and on hand positions, as they do in the bundesleague i think.

[Peter McGurk]

Safe standing as a means of delivering cheaper ticket prices could be the driving force behind it with safety as a bona fide argument.  Commercial benefits are often the driving force behind many a change, hence if the football league campaign gains force for increasing revenue then in the Championship more and more clubs will take it up, as will the lower leagues.

Assuming several years of safe standing in all the leagues below us, will see more clubs in the prem talking to the prem league about allowing it to happen for monetary reasons.   I can see us being the very last to do this bearing in mind everything involved but with us potentially falling behind on revenue from games, with other teams moving ahead of us commercially because of this, i can see this being addressed.

This is always bearing in mind the lower leagues can afford the monitoring of safe standing with people watching out for trouble from elevated and on hand positions, as they do in the bundesleague i think.

Greater accessibility for more people based on significantly reduced ticket prices has made a great success of Safe Standing in Germany. The atmosphere also benefits. The monetary benefit to the club is marginal (double the number of people at half the price...)

Persistent standing in seating areas is not safe. Worse, it is downright dangerous.

All seater stadia may well have been a step forward in terms of policing but it was not introduced to be safer. It was introduce to give the police greater control of Hooliganism.

Persistent standing in seating areas is a step backwards, which no ones seems able or willing to tackle. People want to stand. Taylor said it wouldn't happen. He got it wrong.

[Maggie May]

Persistent standing in seating areas is not safe. Worse, it is downright dangerous.

All seater stadia may well have been a step forward in terms of policing but it was not introduced to be safer. It was introduce to give the police greater control of Hooliganism.

Persistent standing in seating areas is a step backwards, which no ones seems able or willing to tackle. People want to stand. Taylor said it wouldn't happen. He got it wrong.

Sorry to have chopped your post.  But God bless you Peter McGurk.  There were two matters.  Hillsborough and the control of hooliganism.  And seating had nothing to do with the former and was only introduced to control the latter.  And we were never hooligans by the way. 

And I am sick and tired of hearing that the HFSG saying they speak for the 96.   They do not and never have.  They speak only for their own members.  And their view is blinkered and stupid.  Terracing did not cause Hillsborough.  We all know what did.  And to turn the focus on terracing per se as a cause as the FHSG make out is ridicuous.  If the stadium had been right and the policing had been right then everyone would have been safe.  But it wasn't and they weren't.  But to put the blame on terracing as a cause is fucking ridiculous.

Good Christ.  I've lost count of the times when back in the day the Kop had been heaving and I've come out, perfectly safe, without a scratch.  On terracing.  As a young girl.

Ah. Bollix.   

[ghost1359]

Terracing did not cause Hillsborough.  We all know what did.  And to turn the focus on terracing per se as a cause as the FHSG make out is ridicuous.

That's the biggest mystery for me in terms of HFSG's stance. Had the fans not been penned in like animals there'd have been no issues with terracing, not to mention everything else. The idea that standing somehow caused Hillsborough is.....bizarre.

[Maggie May]

That's the biggest mystery for me in terms of HFSG's stance. Had the fans not been penned in like animals there'd have been no issues with terracing, not to mention everything else. The idea that standing somehow caused Hillsborough is.....bizarre.

Absolutely ghost.  I've always felt this attitude weakened the case.  Rotting terrace which should never in a million years have been given a safety certificate?  Of course.  Horrifically inadequate and incompetent policing?  Of course.  Terracing?  Hmmm.  Blame that then.  Nothing to do with terracing but let's stop that anyway because its easy to do and we've taken a view and can use 96 dead (a large amount of whom we don't and have never represented but never mind anyway 'cos we'll carry on as if we do) to support it. 

[mabbympb]

The club allow two blocks to stand in a seated kop at the back centre do they not? They are never sat down,  and are never asked by stewards to sit. Can anyone please explain why this is?

[G a r y]

When we get asked to sit down, we do. Then during the next attack everyone stands back up again (naturally). Stewards are fighting a losing battle

[Maggie May]

When we get asked to sit down, we do. Then during the next attack everyone stands back up again (naturally). Stewards are fighting a losing battle

Of course you do and they are.  If you sat down politely applauded and murmoured "Oh how very splendid.  Well done that chap" what would become of the famous Anfield atmosphere?  The corporate boxes would be well pissed off as would the ticket agencies (to whom our club would never dream of supplying of course) when the attraction of the Asian and Yankee market and assorted wankers and no marks dried up on account of there was nothing to photo on their mobiles.  I think they need us a helluva lot.  And we don't need them at all other than to cater for our desires.  I think they need to appreciate that.

[G a r y]

Absolutely

[Stewie89]

Clearly people's feelings need to be taken into consideration, that's so important to a club like ours with our tradition. However (and I do hope I am not speaking out of turn) so many people stand up throughout the game and IMHO that isnt safe. Perhaps not as safe as having standing area's? I also love the German League and what they are doing over there. I feel it should be each club's choice as long as they can prove they can achieve it safely. Not sure i would allow away fans to stand if their home ground doesnt have standing area's though???

A redeveloped Anfield holding 70K with a safe standing Kop would IMHO be amazing, that said I fully understand the implications and why some would oppose. It's quite a tough call.

[Hij]

I am totally for a return to standing, so long as the ultimate priority is the safety of the fans and the safety of the implementation of it. Standing is not inherently unsafe, and happens at concerts and festivals. After the three Fulham goals I have large scratches and bruises down the front and back of my legs, and a couple of deep cuts at the back, from something metallic under the seat. That's not safe.

At Tottenham, when we scored, I was blissfully enjoying celebrating until at break neck speed two lads fell from above me into me, sending me careering down about 3/4 rows forwards and upside down, looking upwards, worried about hitting my head. Thankfully, a couple of people on my row who had spotted me go down dragged me up, as did the two lads who had fallen into me (who apologised, I believe they were knocked over as well). That's not safe either.

Rail standing, provides solutions to both of those issues, but keeps seats in place should there be a need for the stewards to make everyone sit down (or for UEFA competition's where standing is outlawed). The cry isn't for a recall to terracing of yesteryear but a new form of terracing, where each row is safe from the movement of the fans from in front or from behind, and presumably, hopefully, less bits to rub your legs against when a goal goes in. That will probably still be an issue but can still be lessened at least.

I can see the HFSG point of view, but it is a flawed position. Standing was not the cause of the Hillsborough disaster, several factors combined together for it to take place.

I too think that it is likely it will slowly be re-introduced, and we will be the last to implement it. Should it be introduced at other grounds and as in Germany continue to remain safe, I hope then the club would re-consider.

[Big Red Richie]

The club allow two blocks to stand in a seated kop at the back centre do they not? They are never sat down,  and are never asked by stewards to sit. Can anyone please explain why this is?

Because the club has, or had, an understanding with supporters groups a few years ago, that standing in those area's would be 'tolerated', in order to address the ever declining atmosphere, issue.

It's only tolerated down to a certain row number though, and forward of that line, the stewards still ask you to sit down.

[Big Red Richie]

 

Mags. I love you.

I can understand the stance of HFSG, all day long, but whats always worried me is that the club will only ever take their point of view as the spokespeople of our fanbase.

They don't represent all fans.

It irks me slightly that no one else ever gets a say on the matter, as as soon as the subject is approached, any rational debate is stamped on straight away, and dare I say it emotionally blackmailed into silence.

That's the HFSG's stance, and fair enough. If thats what they believe, their position is understandable.

My view on standing differs somewhat from theirs though, yet as a Hillsborough veteran myself, why is my, or other people of a similar mindset views, dismissed?

[ghost1359]

They don't represent all fans.

It irks me slightly that no one else ever gets a say on the matter, as as soon as the subject is approached, any rational debate is stamped on straight away, and dare I say it emotionally blackmailed into silence.

Couldn't have said it better myself. How can HFSG be so staunchly against safe standing when there's a standing section in The Kop already which is less safe than safe standing would be? The mind boggles.

[Peter McGurk]

Sorry to have chopped your post.  But God bless you Peter McGurk.  There were two matters.  Hillsborough and the control of hooliganism.  And seating had nothing to do with the former and was only introduced to control the latter.  And we were never hooligans by the way. 

And I am sick and tired of hearing that the HFSG saying they speak for the 96.   They do not and never have.  They speak only for their own members.  And their view is blinkered and stupid.  Terracing did not cause Hillsborough.  We all know what did.  And to turn the focus on terracing per se as a cause as the FHSG make out is ridicuous.  If the stadium had been right and the policing had been right then everyone would have been safe.  But it wasn't and they weren't.  But to put the blame on terracing as a cause is fucking ridiculous.

Good Christ.  I've lost count of the times when back in the day the Kop had been heaving and I've come out, perfectly safe, without a scratch.  On terracing.  As a young girl.

Ah. Bollix.

There's the under-current that hasn't gone away. We weren't hooligans but we'll always be branded as such if we accept that people standing and peaceably watching a football match was responsible for the deaths of 96.