You mean like they do already?
I think he was answering my question about if the metal seats are 'down' during a European game when you're standing anyway, might you not get that metal seat in your back from celebrating a goal.
Back? You'd have to be about 3ft tall for that to happen!Are they actually locked down, or just unlocked?
I have the impression the seats are higher on rail seating than current ones, do know why or where that's come from maybe it's just how they look.
They'll be at standard seating height. Certainly not much, if any, higher than that.
How high is the rail on the back of your seat/in front of you. Surely waist height or just under to stop people falling forward? If it's waist height it will be in many people's eye line when seated.
Fair view here of both side-by-side:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOvX8Si9uvM
Look similar height. Worth noting the pivot point for the standard seat is in the middle of the base, and the standing seat lowers as it opens.
I wouldn't say they are isolated on the issue Andy. They'll be aware of the debate and listening to it's developments, considering things and forming opinions along the way. Don't take that listening, gathering info and consideration process as being isolated - I myself initially opposed safe standing and although I'm more open to it now that's only come from sitting back, listening & learning to the debate unfold, mainly via RAWK (without passing comment or posting until recently). HFSG are currently silent on the matter, yes. Isolated they will never be. (PS - don't forget, HFSG have been watching closely to recent developments of a certain SYP chief appealing against his dismissal from the force - see todays news feeds for the outcome of that appeal & I'm sure we'll all agree that although safe standing is an important issue the HFSG have far more important matters to engage with at present)
Hi, I am doing a sketchup model of ARE, does anyone know about dimensions of the rail seats? Link to some pdf file or sketchup model of them would be helpful so I can fit them in to see how would that go.http://i.imgur.com/xny5iSd.png
Posted by Mig on RAOTL"A week on Saturday is the SOS AGMUp until now the SOS have not took a view on safe standing. Some members will be for it and some against. The SOS have said they will let members decide what stance we take. My own feeling is the majority of our membership will be in favour. The HFSG committee are 100 % against Some none HFSG families including possibly some HJC are against. Other leading HJC members are in favour. Regardless the debate needs to be sensible, and respectful. Some of the stuff said the last few days on social media is in my opinion out of order, calling people who lost kids at Hillsborough c*nts and slags should not be the level we debate at. If the SOS take a stance to support safe standing, then it could be open season, and we need to act in a way that befits the union.Things to talk about is why we want it. Atmosphere Capacity Prices (would the club even lower them)Safer than standing in front of seats. Etc Etc Etc If people have an opposite view, then we need to listen, and debate that, and if need be educate. It is going to open a big can of worms and the stuff over Gerry might be the tip of the iceberg. 24th September, the Sandon. Before hull."
I'm not vaccinated against covid and ... I don't wear masks.
http://www.spiritofshankly.com/news/agm-voting-results
Strongly in favour of "rail seating" myself but somewhat surprised how many are in favour from SOS vote. Probably a case of dissenting voices being the loudest.
Why do people quote other people for the sigs? What' the point?
Not a question of dissenting voices being loudest, it's a reflection of the sensitivity of the issue in relation to our past.
Unless I have read it wrong it isn't a case of them being in favour of safe standing but being in favour of discussing it, investigating it, speaking to other organisations and THEN making a stance on whether they are in favour or not.
I'm fully aware of the sensitivity surrounding the subject but many of the comments I've read on the issue on social media are from people who are wholly against the idea.
Bristol Rovers plan to install safe standing at their new stadium, Brighton are consulting to change some of their new stadium to safe standing.Maybe it is best of the ARE redevelopment is left for a while, and others will do the work for us.
Bristol Rovers are in the 3rd division, they can install standing sections without any issues.
and then get rid of them again if they get promoted. It's all nonsense.
It's not really directed to you, but in general, when did it become sensitive?It certainly wasn't sensitive between 1989 and 1994, when every week the Kop would chant 'No Seats' and sing 'You'll never seat the Kop'.
The HFSG are vehemently against 'safe standing' and always will be, so what do LSU think consultation will achieve? Had it been called rail seating from the start it might have been okay.
If you're suggesting the issue is/was all in the name then discussions could well go some way to correcting that.
I'm suggesting that, but the HFSG position on the matter is too entrenched now. They went to a demonstration over rail seating I think with the FSF and they basically said they don't support standing. They're not going to listen to reason, so i'm not sure why the LSU are getting involved.
