Author Topic: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)  (Read 493289 times)

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,462
  • YNWA
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #160 on: February 16, 2013, 07:13:12 pm »
My point would be that whatever the system, we all have a responsibility.

Totally agree.

It does prove it is just as likely to happen in a seated area as it will a standing though, which makes half these arguments one of stewarding/personal responsibility than it does a seating/standing one.

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #161 on: February 16, 2013, 07:18:24 pm »
The point is to give more people access to the game at a price they can afford and still have the income to get the players needed to compete.

Having the same numbers standing at the same price isn't going to help people get to the match. And charging a lesser price isn't going to help the team.

Safe standing is the safest possible arrangement. Safer than what we do now. Standing or sitting (or standing in sitting areas).



to me the point is to give people a choice of how they want to watch the match

we need a larger stadium to get more people in, if a safe standing area is included thden well and good. the club will be able to decide whether they lower prices for standing. personally under 16's, family tickets and female tickets would be lowered before standing tickets. i agree tickets are scandalous but at the moment this is the conditions we work under.

i think safe standing is safer but it has to be handled thoughtfully

Offline CraigDS

  • Lite. Smelt it and dealt it. Worrawhopper.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 61,462
  • YNWA
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #162 on: February 16, 2013, 07:26:52 pm »
to me the point is to give people a choice of how they want to watch the match

we need a larger stadium to get more people in, if a safe standing area is included thden well and good. the club will be able to decide whether they lower prices for standing. personally under 16's, family tickets and female tickets would be lowered before standing tickets. i agree tickets are scandalous but at the moment this is the conditions we work under.

i think safe standing is safer but it has to be handled thoughtfully

Why would female tickets be lower?  :o

And under 16's, family and older are cheaper already.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #163 on: February 16, 2013, 07:28:05 pm »
to me the point is to give people a choice of how they want to watch the match

we need a larger stadium to get more people in, if a safe standing area is included thden well and good. the club will be able to decide whether they lower prices for standing. personally under 16's, family tickets and female tickets would be lowered before standing tickets. i agree tickets are scandalous but at the moment this is the conditions we work under.

i think safe standing is safer but it has to be handled thoughtfully

There's a natural progression from standing to sitting. You're young, you can't afford to sit - you stand. You're older, your knees have gone - you want to sit.

Family tickets? In the kop? No. Not many would dream of taking family into the kop. 

Something for everyone yes. Family tickets in cheaper corners, yes - but cheaper female tickets?
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 07:36:43 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline redgriffin73

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,493
  • Thanks for everything Rafa. Nunca Caminarás Solo.
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #164 on: February 16, 2013, 07:33:35 pm »
to me the point is to give people a choice of how they want to watch the match

we need a larger stadium to get more people in, if a safe standing area is included thden well and good. the club will be able to decide whether they lower prices for standing. personally under 16's, family tickets and female tickets would be lowered before standing tickets. i agree tickets are scandalous but at the moment this is the conditions we work under.

i think safe standing is safer but it has to be handled thoughtfully

A bizarre but brilliant idea, bring it on! :P
Rafa Benitez: "I'll always keep in my heart the good times I've had here, the strong and loyal support of the fans in the tough times and the love from Liverpool. I have no words to thank you enough for all these years and I am very proud to say that I was your manager. Thank you so much once more and always remember: You'll never walk alone."

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #165 on: February 16, 2013, 07:54:00 pm »
There's a natural progression from standing to sitting. You're young, you can't afford to sit - you stand. You're older, your knees have gone - you want to sit.

Family tickets? In the kop? No. Not many would dream of taking family into the kop. 

Something for everyone yes. Family tickets in cheaper corners, yes - but cheaper female tickets?

at the minute there is no standing so there is no progression.

you wanted cheaper tickets for standing, i said that standing would be your choice and not a reason to get cheaper tickets.
i agree about the need for cheaper tickets but not because you are standing. i then gave my opinion that the club would be more likely IMO to give families, under 16's and female fans a discount in order to attract more of these groups to the stadium. i did not say where these tickets would be, the kop would not be top of the list but i believe there was a "boys pen" before so if they wanted to they could have what ever sections they wanted.
safe standing if it is introduced would be over 18's only IMO

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #166 on: February 16, 2013, 08:03:02 pm »
...i then gave my opinion that the club would be more likely IMO to give families, under 16's and female fans a discount in order to attract more of these groups to the stadium....

I imagine you expect FSG to pick up the tab

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #167 on: February 16, 2013, 08:06:14 pm »
Why would female tickets be lower?  :o

And under 16's, family and older are cheaper already.

I said that before lowering tickets for safer standing areas that these other groups would be my chioce to get lower prices. i think ticket prices are expensive and everyone needs help

safe standing is not a reason to get lower ticket prices. build/rebuild a stadium that you can fill or nearly fill and hopefully then you lower prices across the board

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #168 on: February 16, 2013, 08:10:15 pm »
I imagine you expect FSG to pick up the tab

what exactly do you want out of safe standing? cheaper ticket prices?
are FSG picking up the tab for that?


Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #169 on: February 16, 2013, 08:14:27 pm »
...build/rebuild a stadium that you can fill or nearly fill and hopefully then you lower prices across the board

I think we've nailed that argument over the last few years. It doesn't stack up.


what exactly do you want out of safe standing? cheaper ticket prices?
are FSG picking up the tab for that?

No they are not.

Putting double the number in at half the price is an entirely different proposition than precisely the same number at discounted prices.

There has to be a model that pays - for the benefit of the club.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 08:19:39 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline Hij

  • Literally Custom-titlely neglected for literally over a decade, Ruud.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 17,023
  • Justice for Anne Williams. Justice for the 97.
    • Grime Forum
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #170 on: February 16, 2013, 08:19:36 pm »
And that's a good thing?



Well no, it's something I probably wouldn't do again, and correct it probably wasn't the best of things to bring up in this particular thread- so I apologise for that, but I was honest and my point is that people moving around happens everywhere, even on a seated occasion or whether a Euro home or away game where some move to stand with their mates- how do we go about making sure people are in the right areas when standing is possible at home? The loophole exists and thus must be explored in order to be closed right?

I think it's harder than it sounds to enforce, and easier than you think for people to move away from their allocated stand position. Now of course it's a matter of all of us having a responsibility, but you must be prepared for all potential movements- which is why I said safety must be a key feature- how can it be policed, enforced without sacrificing safety? I was fortunate enough to find a gap between seats that night against Barcelona, but one of the things about seating is that generally, when everyone is made to sit down, it becomes a lot easier to weed out the areas where there is over crowding, as they simply don't have a seat to sit on. Standing is a little more difficult to work out as you have to judge based on how many you believe to be standing in a particular area, or if there is more than there should be.

And put it this way, everyone knows on a big European night, the Kop is over capacity due to the method I used a few years previous. So personal responsibility does come into it, but with all safety oriented debate, surely comes the analysis of human nature, and one person thinking it's not a problem to move as he is the only one, escalates more when several do, and more when it reaches hundreds and then it becomes a big problem with bunches, which can prevent movement. Knowing that this is likely to happen, allows to prepare for the eventuality of it happening.

Now my point is no matter what we want, or no matter how much each of us would be willing to stay in a particular area if it meant standing coming back (I would be)- some are going to be willing to move from their designated area to elsewhere,  as it is a facet of human nature I think this element needs more thought- be it making it easier to get tickets near friends/family when booking - or having a solid system for weeding out people who have moved and giving them a final warning to go to their original and designated space- quite how I'm not sure, but it remains a possibility.

Essentially I'm just being honest, as I've been and seen, and done things at games and have experience of them so am just raising the points here. I've moved from the front of the Kop, to stand right at the back with my mate on European nights- it's not really for me any more but when I first started going at 17/18 I did move around. I'm just saying essentially, we would be naive to think this doesn't go on, and would need to consider it carefully when pushing forward for safe standing.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 08:22:24 pm by Hij »
Justice for Anne Williams. Justice for the 97. Justice for the Survivors.

Istanbul 2005. Athens 2007. Basel 2016. Kiev 2018. Madrid 2019. Paris 2022.

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #171 on: February 16, 2013, 08:25:43 pm »
I think we've nailed that argument over the last few years. It doesn't stack up.


No they are not.

Putting double the number in at half the price is an entirely different proposition than precisely the same number at discounted prices.

There has to be a model that pays - for the benefit of the club.

my problem with what you have said is how do you convince the Hillsborough families to accept "putting double the number in at half the price" really sounds safer to me. regardless of what studies have been done and how much safer it is on paper the quote "putting double the numder in" is going to make that a really hard sell

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #172 on: February 16, 2013, 08:26:22 pm »
...The loophole exists and thus must be explored in order to be closed right?

I think it's harder than it sounds to enforce, and easier than you think for people to move away from their allocated stand position...

The problem is effectively no worse for standing than for sitting. It's not as if it's an old style terrace. There would be 56 people in a row between aisles and each set of exits serves a section. Getting from section to section is not impossible but it is readily spot-able. And not just by stewards. Everyone is on camera these days. Card technology will only get better.

« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 08:35:26 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #173 on: February 16, 2013, 08:31:04 pm »
my problem with what you have said is how do you convince the Hillsborough families to accept "putting double the number in at half the price" really sounds safer to me. regardless of what studies have been done and how much safer it is on paper the quote "putting double the numder in" is going to make that a really hard sell

Nobody's selling anything to anyone.

Safe standing is safer than what we have now. That's reason enough to have it.

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #174 on: February 16, 2013, 08:33:27 pm »
The problem is effectively no worse for standing than for sitting. It's not as if it's an old style terrace. There would be 56 people in a row between aisles and each set of exits serves a section. Getting from section to section is not impossible but it is readily spot-able. And not just by stewards. Everyone is on camera these days.



systems will become available to make it harder to do this sort of thing and that is the thing the club would have to focus on. tickets could be used to get in sections, stewards check random fans for the proper ticket/seat.
UEFA could not do it in 2007 but we can't afford to let it happen at Anfield with our history

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #175 on: February 16, 2013, 08:35:06 pm »
Nobody's selling anything to anyone.

Safe standing is safer than what we have now. That's reason enough to have it.

have the Hillsborough families agreed to safer standing then?

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #176 on: February 16, 2013, 08:44:34 pm »
have the Hillsborough families agreed to safer standing then?

You are saying that the Hillsborough families do not want it and that is reason enough not to have it.  The families believe that standing (as we used to stand on the terraces we used to stand on) was a contributory factor in the causes of Hillsborough.

The Taylor Report recommendation for all-seating had very much more to do with the control of hooliganism than the causes of Hillsborough. You can read it for yourself. I've no need to sell it to you.

Taylor recommended a whole system of control including better access and egress, better stewarding and identification of ticket holders. When Taylor wrote his report, safe standing (which also does all those things) was unheard of. Taylor made no kind of argument or rather, offered no substantiation, that sitting was intrinsically safer (again, read it yourself).

The views of the families are what they are and entirely understandable to anyone with a shred of compassion for all that. Any reasonable person would have to say that they are right to say that (old-style) standing was a contributory factor. Nevertheless, safe standing and standing like the standing at Hillsborough are as chalk is to cheese.

Everyone else would have to agree that all-seater stadia or rather the degree of control that comes with them, have been an overwhelming success in the control of hooliganism and an unmitigated disaster for the 'ordinary' football fan. Putting aside the issue of atmosphere, Taylor himself said that prices need not rise and that the cost could absorbed. How very wrong he was.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 09:04:53 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #177 on: February 16, 2013, 09:02:38 pm »
You are saying that the Hillsborough families do not want it and that is reason enough not to have it.  The families believe that standing (as we used to stand on the terraces we used to stand on) was a contributory factor in the causes of Hillsborough.

The Taylor Report recommendation for all-seating had very much more to do with the control of hooliganism than the causes of Hillsborough. You can read it for yourself. I've no need to sell it to you.

When Taylor wrote his report, safe standing was unheard of. Safe standing and standing like the standing at Hillsborough are as chalk is to cheese.

there have been several relatives who lost people at Hillsborough who have said they never want to see standing. this will carry a lot of sympathy with a lot of fans.
as you or me are not making the decision it is irrelevant but i suspect the club would not move forward with this without some sort of approval.
i have no quarrell with you on safe standing being safer. how it is implemented at our ground is the issue. not for cheaper tickets but a choice of how to watch the match and providing the safest possible environment within reason.
Hillsboroughs' mistakes would be very hard to be repeated today. stadiums,policing,fans and football authorities have moved on.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #178 on: February 16, 2013, 09:09:44 pm »
there have been several relatives who lost people at Hillsborough who have said they never want to see standing. this will carry a lot of sympathy with a lot of fans.
as you or me are not making the decision it is irrelevant but i suspect the club would not move forward with this without some sort of approval.
i have no quarrell with you on safe standing being safer. how it is implemented at our ground is the issue. not for cheaper tickets but a choice of how to watch the match and providing the safest possible environment within reason.
Hillsboroughs' mistakes would be very hard to be repeated today. stadiums,policing,fans and football authorities have moved on.

You are saying that the Hillsborough families do not want it and that is reason enough not to have it.  The families believe that standing (as we used to stand on the terraces we used to stand on) was a contributory factor in the causes of Hillsborough.

The Taylor Report recommendation for all-seating had very much more to do with the control of hooliganism than the causes of Hillsborough. You can read it for yourself. I've no need to sell it to you.

Taylor recommended a whole system of control including better access and egress, better stewarding and identification of ticket holders. When Taylor wrote his report, safe standing (which also does all those things) was unheard of. Taylor made no kind of argument or rather, offered no substantiation, that sitting was intrinsically safer (again, read it yourself).

The views of the families are what they are and entirely understandable to anyone with a shred of compassion for all that. Any reasonable person would have to say that they are right to say that (old-style) standing was a contributory factor. Nevertheless, safe standing and standing like the standing at Hillsborough are as chalk is to cheese.

Everyone else would have to agree that all-seater stadia or rather the degree of control that comes with them, have been an overwhelming success in the control of hooliganism and an unmitigated disaster for the 'ordinary' football fan. Putting aside the issue of atmosphere, Taylor himself said that prices need not rise and that the cost could absorbed. How very wrong he was.

As I added above, anyone with any understanding and compassion would agree with the families. All-seater stadia were introduced for good reasons and at least in part but by no means entirely as a consequence of Hillsborough.

For other good reasons, not least of which would be cheaper tickets for the purpose of greater access for ordinary fans, the completely different and safer system of safe standing should be introduced.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 09:13:16 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #179 on: February 16, 2013, 09:12:50 pm »
As I added above, anyone with any understanding and compassion would agree with the families. All-seater stadia were introduced for good reasons and at least in part but by no means entirely as a consequence of Hillsborough.

For other good reasons, the completely different and safer system of safe standing should be introduced.

do you believe this will happen without some sort of endorsement from the families

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #180 on: February 16, 2013, 09:15:46 pm »
do you believe this will happen without some sort of endorsement from the families

I could not imagine any Liverpool fan wishing to persuade them.

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #181 on: February 16, 2013, 09:23:48 pm »
I could not imagine any Liverpool fan wishing to persuade them.

i can not see it happening without someone putting forward the safer points that this system brings. i can't see more people in the same space working in this discussion that's why i stick to 1 seat 1 standing. down the line "smaller seats" could be brought in if no incidents happen.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #182 on: February 16, 2013, 09:29:04 pm »
i can not see it happening without someone putting forward the safer points that this system brings. i can't see more people in the same space working in this discussion that's why i stick to 1 seat 1 standing. down the line "smaller seats" could be brought in if no incidents happen.

I don't know what you're looking at but what is talked about here (http://www.fsf.org.uk/campaigns/view/safe-standing-campaign) is one fold down seat where otherwise two people would stand (one behind the other).

It is safe. It is safer than standing in a seated area and it safer than the standing currently allowed in all other sports and all other divisions outside the top two in football in the UK. It's as safe as safe gets.

There is no reason to say that 1 seat, 1 standing is any safer.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 09:34:49 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #183 on: February 16, 2013, 09:31:20 pm »
I don't know what you're looking at but what is talked about here is one fold down seat where otherwise two people would stand (one behind the other).

It is safe. It is safer than standing in a seated area and it safer than the standing currently allowed in all other sports and all other divisions outside the top two in football in the UK. It's as safe as safe gets.

There is no reason to say that 1 seat, 1 standing is any safer.

there is if it is the only way to get the families to endorse it

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #184 on: February 16, 2013, 09:42:35 pm »
there is if it is the only way to get the families to endorse it

From what we've all heard of the families' views, standing is standing and there is no distinction between 'old-style' standing and any other kind of standing. No-one can expect anything more or anything else. I would not ask them to set aside their grief to look at it, let alone take the responsibility or give the acceptance of endorsing it.

And you really must be as careful as you suggest. I'm not ready to tell anyone that 1 for 1 is safer just to get them to say yes.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 09:47:54 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline fatlip13

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #185 on: February 16, 2013, 09:47:32 pm »
From what we've all heard of the families' views, standing is standing and there is no distinction between 'old-style' standing and any other kind of standing. No-one can expect anything more or anything else. I would not ask them to set aside their grief to look at it, let alone take the responsibility or give the acceptance of endorsing it.

And you really must be as careful as you suggest. I'm not ready to lie to anyone that 1 for 1 is safer just to get them to say yes.

that really ends the debate then, because i don't see it happening without some sort of endorsement by the families

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #186 on: February 17, 2013, 12:39:21 pm »
that really ends the debate then, because i don't see it happening without some sort of endorsement by the families

For you, possibly. The most anyone could ever reasonably expect is the absolute confirmation that the failings of the standing of old will never return and an acknowledgement that stadiums in the future must be and will be safer than they are now and as safe as safe can be whether sitting or standing.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2013, 12:44:42 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline PaulD

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Main Stander
  • ******
  • Posts: 192
  • Some things are more important .......
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #187 on: February 18, 2013, 04:14:34 am »

There is no question this is a tough subject.

To say that those closest to Hillsborough should not be put in a position where they have to decide is a 'close out'.
By not engaging with them or referencing them as being  the reason why safe standing will not be considered means they are, in effect making the decision.

Offline The Las

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 315
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #188 on: February 18, 2013, 09:11:52 am »
Obviously this is an emotive subject. But a distinction has to be made, and a concensus formed. As a survivor of hillsborough myself I have an emotional attachment.

I am in favour of safe standing, standing at football matches is something I used to love doing. I loved the banter, I loved the unity, I loved the atmosphere.

Metal fences and a disasterous policing operation caused the hillsborough disaster.

Without metal fences, the hillsborough disaster would not have happened.

The world is a very different place, health and saftey is 100 percent improved.

The current safe standing proposals have been proven to be safe.

To be against these proposals is showing ignorance, whether that is justified through pain and suffering or whether its just a plain refusal to acknowledge.

Of course standing in its old form was a death trap waiting to happen, but even then without fences it was safer due to space to overflow. But it could never return.

This is a moving force, and I can see it being brought back in this form.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2013, 05:53:01 pm by The Las »

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #189 on: February 18, 2013, 10:16:34 am »
There is no question this is a tough subject.

To say that those closest to Hillsborough should not be put in a position where they have to decide is a 'close out'.
By not engaging with them or referencing them as being  the reason why safe standing will not be considered means they are, in effect making the decision.

The families will not engage on the issue of standing other than ‘no standing here’. An entirely understandable position.

Thank God, I don’t know and I can’t say but I can imagine that there has to be a veil of grief between the families and the issue and there is a wall of empathy with those who lost someone that does not allow a lot of people to even look at safe standing.

A return to the standing of old are the terms of the current public debate because the public do not on the whole see the detail of the distinction between standing and safe standing in real terms.

So standing and safe standing is seen as the same. In those terms such a question is effectively asking the families to sanction a system that had a contribution to the death of their loved ones. Hence the FSF campaign to publicise the difference.

No-one can engage with the families on those terms but those terms are a false premise. We are not talking about the re-introduction of the system that had a contributory effect to the deaths at Hillsborough. We are talking about something entirely different.

The moral position is clear. We must be able to go to watch football in conditions as safe as safe can be.

There is a practical judgement of whether safe standing is safer or safer than what we have now or indeed is as safe as safe can be. Given our refusal to actually sit in seats - for that reason alone, that judgement is pretty clear. Safe standing is not only safe but safer. I don't think anyone who is able to look at it would disagree.

As I said... The most anyone could ever reasonably expect is the absolute confirmation that the failings of the standing of old will never return and an acknowledgement that stadiums in the future must be and will be safer than they are now and as safe as safe can be, whether sitting or standing.

« Last Edit: February 18, 2013, 11:29:00 am by Peter McGurk »

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #190 on: February 18, 2013, 10:37:31 am »
Obviously this is an immotive subject. But a distinction has to be made, and a concensus formed. As a survivor of hillsborough myself I have an emotional attachment.

I am in favour of safe standing, standing at football matches is something I used to love doing. I loved the banter, I loved the unity, I loved the atmosphere.

Metal fences and a disasterous policing operation caused the hillsborough disaster.

Without metal fences, the hillsborough disaster would not have happened.

The world is a very different place, health and saftey is 100 percent improved.

The current safe standing proposals have been proven to be safe.

To be against these proposals is showing ignorance, whether that is justified through pain and suffering or whether its just a plain refusal to acknowledge.

Of course standing in its old form was a death trap waiting to happen, but even then without fences it was safer due to space to overflow. But it could never return.

This is a moving force, and I can see it being brought back in this form.

I would agree with that. Most of us of a certain age have stood on the Kop at one time or another and as a mate of mine, who was also at Hillsborough said, no-one died.

I went ‘over the back’ just once in all that time and remember touching literally one step in ten on the way down to Walton Breck Road. It was another Ibrox waiting to happen just two years after 1971. Those steps were taken away.

But then the Kop had no fences, or pens ever. It also had 50 years of practice and familiarity and passing down the standards of behaviour and looking after each other - a kind of self-regulation; never so full or half-empty, there was always someone to catch you if you fell.

Nostalgia ain’t what it used to be but it’s worth remembering that largely that form of standing is still legal in the UK. It is still considered to be safe (for anyone outside the top two divisions in football - or any other sport and any level) by the guides and regulations strengthened after Hillsborough.

With barriers every two rows (instead of twenty), ticketing and more and better access and escapes, safe standing is another world again.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2013, 10:40:49 am by Peter McGurk »

Offline Big Red Richie

  • Thread killer extraordinaire. For future reference the order is T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,535
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #191 on: February 19, 2013, 12:18:23 pm »

This sums up a lot of what I feel.

As a Hillsborough survivor myself, I'd like to think my opinion counts for something, but as a defacto position, the Hillsborough families get to choose for everyone.


Personally, I'd like to see safe standing trialled.   then I'd make a judgement on whether it should be introduced.

I'm slightly in favour of it now, but I'd have to see the pro's and con's of it before I said yay or ney.


The Hillsborough families will never ever endorse it. Full stop.   As soon as the word 'standing' is mentioned, then people's minds are closed to even the possibilities  that it could be better and safer than what we have at present.

What I do find disapointing though is LFC's stance on the issue.

The Hillsborough families have their stance, and I'm not knocking that. They are justified in having the opinion they have, and nothing will change that.

LFC though have missed a huge opportunity to enter a discourse with it's fan base, either directly or indirectly. By in essence letting a small number of supporters dictate the pollicy of the majority, and the club.

Again, I've got no beef with the families. Their stance is their stance, but I feel Liverpools stance of not even entertaining a discussion is extremely closed minded.

We know the club would never go for it or endorse it if the families wouldn't, but the mere fact that it won't even be discussed as somehow showing disrespect, is what I find most disapointing.


Even if it's not the thing for LFC and the families. How do you move forward if it can't even be mentioned.

Offline Nessy76

  • Shits alone and doesn't condone public self-molestation. Literally Goldenballs' biggest fan
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 17,993
  • We All Live In A Red And White Klopp
    • Andrew Ness Photographer
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #192 on: February 19, 2013, 04:50:31 pm »
that really ends the debate then, because i don't see it happening without some sort of endorsement by the families

FSG would be idiotic to try and introduce this that way. It would alienate them from a huge chunk of the fanbase in an instant. It would be seen as either an unbelievably cynical money-making scheme or as a total failure to understand the values and culture of the club. Insulting the Hillsborough families is simply unthinkable.
Fuck the Daily Mail.
Abolish FIFA

Offline Always_A_Red

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,469
  • The reds are coming up the hill boys
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #193 on: February 19, 2013, 08:44:14 pm »
Obviously this is an emotive subject. But a distinction has to be made, and a concensus formed. As a survivor of hillsborough myself I have an emotional attachment.

I am in favour of safe standing, standing at football matches is something I used to love doing. I loved the banter, I loved the unity, I loved the atmosphere.

Metal fences and a disasterous policing operation caused the hillsborough disaster.

Without metal fences, the hillsborough disaster would not have happened.

The world is a very different place, health and saftey is 100 percent improved.

The current safe standing proposals have been proven to be safe.

To be against these proposals is showing ignorance, whether that is justified through pain and suffering or whether its just a plain refusal to acknowledge.

Of course standing in its old form was a death trap waiting to happen, but even then without fences it was safer due to space to overflow. But it could never return.

This is a moving force, and I can see it being brought back in this form.

Nail on the head. I cant begin to imagine what its like for the Hillsborough families however I do find it incredibly frustrating that such a minority is able to dictate a world wide fanbase and the actions of a world wide football club. To not even entertain the idea and listen to the facts of how safe it is and see how it differs from the 70/80's is ignorant and narrow minded.

There are many things that caused Hillsborough....metal fences, crowd control, opening the gates, poor policing, lack of medical care, poor maintenance of the stand etc. Safe standing is not terracing. Its completely different.Anyone saying no to it because of Hillborough doesnt understand it or is not willing to understand it and therefore their opinion is invalid.

If someone can prove to me that safe standing if more dangerous than what we have now then im all ears,otherwise, i think we'd be morons not to seriously consider it.

It has my backing 100%
We’ll still finish in top four - and they won’t. You can quote me on this in May.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #194 on: February 19, 2013, 09:21:27 pm »
Let's not forget that the families are 100 per cent correct when they say that (old-style) form of standing at Hillsborough was a contributory factor to the deaths of their loved ones.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2013, 09:25:34 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline Always_A_Red

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,469
  • The reds are coming up the hill boys
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #195 on: February 19, 2013, 10:03:22 pm »
Let's not forget that the families are 100 per cent correct when they say that (old-style) form of standing at Hillsborough was a contributory factor to the deaths of their loved ones.

Absolutely right Peter. Nobody would ever deny that. What I cannot understand and get my head around is why anyone would be against safe standing because of what happened at Hillsborough.
We’ll still finish in top four - and they won’t. You can quote me on this in May.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #196 on: February 19, 2013, 10:26:10 pm »
Absolutely right Peter. Nobody would ever deny that. What I cannot understand and get my head around is why anyone would be against safe standing because of what happened at Hillsborough.

Well yes, just as much as justice and hooliganism were confused by the Taylor Report, so the families' views and it seems everyone else's shared views of the standing at Hillsborough should not be confused with a system that is safe and the adoption of which is no disrespect to the memory of those that died.

But it's not ignorance or narrow-mindedness.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2013, 10:30:14 pm by Peter McGurk »

Offline sowellred

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 338
  • Brainwashing the kids with Anfield delight
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #197 on: February 28, 2013, 10:31:38 am »
Family tickets? In the kop? No. Not many would dream of taking family into the kop. 


I have been going with the my family to games for 8 years now. Apart from my daughter's very first game in 2005/6 (when the kop had a family block) we have spent every game in the Anfield upper. Whilst my kids were very young (under 6) this was suitable as sitting children get a great view.

Last week we went to the Zenit game and I treated the whole family to kop tickets. This was by far the best game we have been to as a family, the atmosphere was electric and the performance was 'so close' to delivering one of those 'I was there' moments.

Following the Zenit game a sense of disappointment returns in me as I realise that we will be back to the Anfield upper for the West Ham game. Yeah, they will be comfortable, and they will get an unobstructed view, but it won't be like the Zenit game.

The whole kop stood for the entire 90 mins of the Zenit game and safety wise the kids had to stand on their seats, grabbing onto Mum and Dad. I know there is a risk of them falling behind the flipping seat but to date this has never happened (my kids always have to stand on seats at away games). The thing is, the kop atmosphere compares to that at away games, and it is the atmosphere that we travel to be part of. The language is obviously an issue but no more extreme than the latest X men movie!

So in answer to the point above my family will be vey much dreaming of our next chance to be on the kop (actually, maybe my wife is indifferent  ;) )
Yes, we are good enough.

Offline Peter McGurk

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,820
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #198 on: February 28, 2013, 11:19:44 am »
I have been going with the my family to games for 8 years now. Apart from my daughter's very first game in 2005/6 (when the kop had a family block) we have spent every game in the Anfield upper. Whilst my kids were very young (under 6) this was suitable as sitting children get a great view.

Last week we went to the Zenit game and I treated the whole family to kop tickets. This was by far the best game we have been to as a family, the atmosphere was electric and the performance was 'so close' to delivering one of those 'I was there' moments.

Following the Zenit game a sense of disappointment returns in me as I realise that we will be back to the Anfield upper for the West Ham game. Yeah, they will be comfortable, and they will get an unobstructed view, but it won't be like the Zenit game.

The whole kop stood for the entire 90 mins of the Zenit game and safety wise the kids had to stand on their seats, grabbing onto Mum and Dad. I know there is a risk of them falling behind the flipping seat but to date this has never happened (my kids always have to stand on seats at away games). The thing is, the kop atmosphere compares to that at away games, and it is the atmosphere that we travel to be part of. The language is obviously an issue but no more extreme than the latest X men movie!

So in answer to the point above my family will be vey much dreaming of our next chance to be on the kop (actually, maybe my wife is indifferent  ;) )

To be honest, I had half an eye on a standing kop when I said that. Being able to see was always an issue for children hence the boys’ pen. Even Shanks (who was short) was surprised at how little he could see when he tried it.

Nevertheless, you and I will have to differ on taking family into a sitting Kop. Every parent must make his or her own judgement but having to hold on to children standing on seats and language would be an issue for me.

The other may be a bit more traditional. Going to the match was a chance for the working man to let off steam at the end of a working week. No question that this has changed but be that as it may, I wonder if there’s a gender gap on the issue of standing.

The Kop of old was of course almost all male. The buffeting and jostling was part of the action and excitement. The few girls/women seemingly dragged along didn’t seem to enjoy it much and were often protected from the ‘worst’ of the crowd and ‘stood apart’ as a result.

The one particular concern (after safety) of women I heard at the FSF Safe Standing roadshow at The Sandon was that people ‘were [too] close together’. For the men, it wasn’t an issue. A tiny sample of opinion but the point was made.

As you say, your wife was ‘indifferent’ to the experience (was she just keeping the peace?). Maybe, and safety aside, women in general just don’t ‘get’ standing?


Offline sowellred

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 338
  • Brainwashing the kids with Anfield delight
Re: Safe Standing ( split from: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield)
« Reply #199 on: February 28, 2013, 12:32:39 pm »
The experience has certainly changed. My first visit to the kop in 1988 was incredible. It was loud, buzzing and certainly precarious. I was 16 and remember during those early years having to keep my witts about me during the aftermath of of a Liverpool goal. I would often be swept forward in a surge going down 2/3 steps or more and returning. I distinctly remember my friends and myself being split up during the celebrations following Kenny's goal at Stamford bridge in 88'. 

This was certainly not a place for kids, arguably not for the fairer sex maybe. BUT if you could bottle up that feeling..... the noise..... the throng .... the collective expectation, then why not be able to serve it up to your offspring to share the experience. I would say that maybe this is what our aspirations should be. The kids sing... the kids wave their scarves... they have unconditional support. I often look amongst the crowd and think that if only some of the olden's took a leaf from their book of attitude, then even the quieter parts of the ground would come to life. Then we would all win, even the wife who, whilst indifferent, doesn't want to miss out on watching our kids have the time of their lives.


P.S. I really enjoy reading your stadium discussion updates. As time goes by though I can't help but feel that the current owners are drip feeding  info as a PR exercise designed to cover their reluctance to commit. This is worrying and consistent with other peoples views that they are not so committed in the longer term. I really hope that I am wrong but even H&G had more stadium candy for us to chew on at this stage in their ownership.
Yes, we are good enough.