Even without the capacity increase I'd still be in favour of dedicating a small section of the ground to safe standing. I think it would offer a cheaper ticket - although as Cym has pointed out it might increase ticket prices elsewhere in the ground - more than this though I think it would generate a really good atmosphere
So there has been further development on this. http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/dec/28/safe-standing-football-league-hillsborough
When Polled nine of out ten Arsenal supporters supported safe standing being introduced at the Emirates and encouragingly Wenger and Gazidis are "100%" behind the idea.
Debate about all of this on five live now I've been a long term advocate of safe standing since the idea was first mooted by the FSF. It's gathered pace now to the point where we can have a realistic opportunity of introducing into our stadiums, instead of the debate being stuck in the old emotional absolutes about Hillborough.
Apparently Islington council have put a limit on Emirates capacity never exceeding Sixty thousand, so any adaption for safe standing would only replicate what we already have, but would allow those who want to stand the opportunity to do so. For other clubs though, it could certainly increase capacity and prevent the need for the to build new, expensive stadiums, so it makes a lot of sense.
The limit imposed by Islington council is to protect residents from game day invasion, Arsenal could in theory buil a 100k stadium and the extra people will put extreme pressure on local services, transport, policing, stewarding etc. That said, Arsenal are a huge employer for the borough and obviously a huge attraction, a large number of local businesses rely on the trade generated by match days and I'm sure the council will happily support a modest increase in capacity. As for the additional income, I doubt the club can/will charge the same for standing so the increase in income will be nominal, though if there is no additional income then I don't see Arsenal considering the move just to give fans the option...
Most of the fans near the away fans section at the lower east stand already stand, also in the lower corner of the North Bank they also stand.
The people who died 24 years ago didn't die due to terracing, they died due to poor stewarding and bad policing, even the Taylor report highlighted that. That said, I've stood on terraces the length and breadth of this country and back the some of them were dangerous. That coupled with poor policing meant that Hillborough was an accident waiting to happen. But times and technology have changed. If you think that terracing is still dangerous I urge you to check out the rail seating system that is used in the Bundasliga, it is completely safe and as mentioned, much safer still than people standing in seated areas.
It's not that I don't think they're safe, it's that you said that fans should be given the choice. And that's silly, because it's nothing to do with the fans. It's either safe, or it isn't. Whether or not it is safe is not a decision for fans. If you were backing it on the basis of 'it should be the fans' choice', that would be silly. It's not up to the fans to make the decision whether they should be allowed something that could potentially be dangerous for other fans.
What I meant was that fans should be given the choice whether they want to sit or stand, not whether they should take the decision on whether standing is safe or not, that has already been proven safe by the modern terracing in Germany. If both traditional seated areas and modern rail seats were available it would give fans the choice they deserve. I think you'd also find that it would mean that people would be able to sit/stand with more like minded fans instead of being forced to sit next to somebody who either stands up and shouts and swears or somebody who wants to sit down and doesn't like shouting / swearing etc.
