i think its you who needs to take a step back on ill advised comments. what i said about Hillsborough has since been proven and mentioned in official reports. anyway, its all in the past now and nobody can change what happened on that very sad day. as for the Terrace, they will be back - its just a case of when and how.
We've moved light years on in the safety of spectators at football matches. Safe standing may well be shown to be just that - safe - but it will take a brave politician to advocate standing again after so many lost their lives at Hillsborough in 1989.
My limited understanding of the Taylor report was that it didn't attribute any blame or contributing factors to the tragedy for it not being a seated area. In fact I think it comments that injuries could have been worse had it been seated. The bit about seats came in a further comment about socially engineering the crowd. It was felt that the mainly male demographic encouraged raucous behaviour. Adding seats could encourage women and children to be sat amongst the males and produce a calmer environment. Unfortunately lazy journos and public, encouraged for various reasons by football authorities and police have embellished the myth that the Hillsborough tragedy was about seats.
They've decided to test it out in the SPL because it's cold up in Scotland and the small crowds will be able to huddle in a corner to keep warm.
May not have been a terracing or seating issue that lead to the tragedy but a vast overcrowding of a standing terrace was a main contributory factor.
Which would have been worse had it had seats in. It was the overcrowding of the area. The fact it was a stand is a red herring and as far as I know, not a contributing factor according to the conclusion of the Taylor report.
Wouldn't have been worse with seating because the seating 'density' would not allow that number of spectators to cram in as they did at Hillsborough. The Taylor report had the effcet of increasing the square metreage of space per spectator and reducing capacities . My first City game against Chelsea in the 6th Round Replay in 1966 illustrated the vast overcrowing of terracing to the extent that such was the crush they had to bring in forms from local schools for us young uns that were being crushed to death to sit on on the cinder track around the pitch. After that BP capacity was immediately reduced from 45000 to 42000. Been at BP a number of times when my young feet left the floor on exiting the ground - scary stuff. Hillsborough was a tragedy waiting to happen in dilapidated English Grounds.
I think you need to look at what safe standing is, it's not terracing, it's absolutely no different to being all seater, it will happen sooner or later(later probably, with the clowns in charge of the FA).
OLM - agree the German model seems intrinsically safe. Don't remember though any German or Scottish tragedies akin to Hillsborough. Ibrox became one of the first all seater stadium in the UK in 1971 when 66 people lost therir lives on the exit staircase towards the end of an Old Firm game (when Rangers scored a late equaliser and many tried to get back in) Irrespective of the gerry manderings of the FA it will take a brave man to vote for their return in England.
A standing area terrace is a good thing to bring back, and it should happen I believe. Limited to one end or a third of a stand. There are plenty of safeguards that can be devised. The days of the major part of a side terrace given to standing are long over though.
Wasnt the fencing and barriers an issue at Hillsboro too?..I was crushed unable to breathe against barrier in BPs south stand after Johnny Eyres goal in plyoff v Orient and i thought i was a gonna for 30secs.No fencing and some weird plastic barriers surely the answer.
This is safe standing, you still get a seat, it just comes with a barrier and you're allowed to stand at it... please log in to view this image
Don't they have something similar in Holland? I can't see terracing ever coming back to English football unfortunately.
If there had been seats in there, there would STILL have been too many people and they would have had the added obstacle of seats. The seats are a red herring for the Hillsborough tragedy and the Taylor report. The seating is more an issue of social engineering to improve safety by minimising the size of groups of males. It was felt children and women being nearby caused these smaller groups to be more restrained. That was what Taylor suggested.
First time seen pic of safe standing.....i cant work out any poss dangers with it!.Would it reduce the capacity in anyway?
They tend to be slightly narrower than normal seating, so can increase capacity in new stadiums build to accommodate it, but as far as I know, in an existing stadium it makes little difference to the capacity.
I would suggest the present seated lower shelf at Leppings Lane is a fraction of the then capacity of the standing terrace. The likelihood of a seated Leppings Lane giving rise to a similar tragedy is remote to say the least. The fact that Leppings Lane (which was a bit like BP South Stand - i.e you have to go up a level to come down so to speak) had only one centre tunnel to the lower shelf (unlike BP which had four or five) meant that the crowd that were let in en-masse by the police outside, all rushed down the only tunnel available and supporters already crammed in the centre of the lower shelf were crushed to death even though there was space at both sides.
Do u get idiots standing on seats making everyone else stand on the seats to see?.Health n safety wouldnt have that!
There were too many people in too small an area. I don't see how reducing the area by adding seats improves things. Controlling the crowds, fencing and access points, improved stewarding and Policing I can see having an effect, the seats, as I keep saying are a red herring.
