It basically says if the rake of over 25 degrees in an upper tier you need to keep keep everyone sat down (it says a lot of other things but that one's likely to be the biggest issue for the club, as they'll have a hell of a job convincing everyone that it's achievable).
It is guidance though, as opposed to hard and fast law, so there is the opportunity to offer other mitigation despite that angle provided they are able to present a robust case. A few bits in an around the ground don't match the guidance, but other factors are argued to justify them. I think the top and bottom (no pun intended) is that due to other factors, the ones with a bigger say will be against it. Ultimately, the safety officer needs to feel secure in signing his name to something that could be read out at an inquest. It'd need to be a good argument to counter Police being against it, not matter what the actual risk or their real objections are.
As far as I remember, where away fans are seated in the upper tier at the Stadium of Light seemed to be pretty steep, stewards weren't too bothered about standing
Yeah, although not many Rhinos fans choose to use it, it is after all the worst part of the ground. Away fans also use the same entrances and facilities as home fans from the North Stand.
I've stood at Newcastle, which is really steep, it just depends on how rigorously they enforce the rules. Sunderland may let you stand, but they throw you out for swearing. Swings and roundabouts. The situation here is not about whether the rules have to be rigidly met, it's can the SAG be convinced that enough of the rules will be observed for it to go ahead in the first place and the Hillsborough inquest timing will have a significant negative effect on the likelihood that they will.
An inquest into an event had nothing to do with standing in seated areas or the steepness of the stand. Good for Sunderland throwing people out for swearing. The potty mouths with such a poor command of the .English language that they can't express themselves without recourse to swearing in front of children, females and fans of a delicate disposition deserve to be ejected.
Criticism of the police, the ambulance service and the council, for failing to meet the required safety standards, is obviously going to have an effect on how rigorously those safety standards are now applied.
I don't think technically the Chair will make the 'decision' All the Chair , if agreed by the Group, will do is determine the advice that they will give the Club It's up to the club to decide what to do with that advice ... Although obviously they always follow it for fear of litigation
At one of Chester's old grounds many moons ago, quite a few went through the turnstile, where they were happy to take our cash, to find a Policeman blocking us getting through, who then threw us out for not paying.
As a matter of interest do you know the rake of the West Upper? There are plenty of stadiums around Europe where the rake of the upper tier appears steeper and the stand is higher and it hasn't resulted in any problems. Some in this country as well. Not that it makes much difference if they decide that it is an issue, which doubtless they will, of course.
I think before we go too far along arguing how the upper west can be made suitable, it's probably worth considering if it's the right place for away fans anyway, particularly as it results in the eviction and disruption of communities for more City fans.
Purely from an atmospheric point of view, it's absolutely the worst place in the stadium for away fans - the acoustics up there are excellent, the odd times when upper west has been vocal the sound is brilliant; they'll be close to the media points and sounding extra loud on TV and radio, they'll sing and chant into submission the few singers we have left. Someone recently said stick 'em in the SW lower corner, I like that idea.
