please don't take offence to this, but i find your views on terracing massively out-dated. football has moved on and so has terracing. if you saw it with your own eyes, you'd be instantly converted - i'm convinced of that.
I have seen it with my own eyes at 2 different stadia and was not instantly converted - in fact I felt sorry for the small groups of people crammed in between metal barriers like sheep. Incidentally, if they are safe and hooligan proof why did one stadium have netting across the front of the enclosure and the other fencing? Yes football has moved on and a lot of it is down to seating. With allocated seating it is easier to spot and identify any trouble makers than ever it is with terracing and problems are less likely in an all seater stadium. If you seriously believe that the hooligan element has gone away then I think you are seriously mistaken especially bearing in mind what has happened in the last 2 years and they would rub their hands in glee at the return of terracing. There are so many arguements against terracing that I am surprised the debate continues and if anybody thinks that terracing would lead to lower prices then think again - no club is going to spend money ripping out seats and building new barriers etc unless they make more money out of it and even the manufacturers/installers of the new terracing concede that, at the best, it only marginally increases ground capacity because of the extra barriers and gangways required. Why oh why does football always want to go backwards. In every other entertainment we want better facilities, more comfort, better refreshments etc etc - with football it is go back to standing on a concrete slab, go back to the heavy leather ball, go back to the old rules etc etc. What is wrong with progress? Terracing served a purpose years ago, outlived its usefulness, caused disasters, risked lives and was replaced with seating which is far more comfortable and enjoyable. It also has, to a large extent, kept out the element to whom a football match was a chance to ' get at the enemy ' and cause trouble. Seating has meant that more females and families go to football simply because it is now a far more comfortable and safe environment - why even consider jeopardising that? The Premier League clubs don't want it, the football authorities don't want it and Parliament won't allow it - end of story!!
netting in german stadia is to prevent the ball going into the crowd! i have never seen fencing, only in italy where the stadia are old and decrepit. you've totally missed the point of why so many people like myself would love to see isolated areas of standing zones, and instead reverted back to 'old concrete slabs' of yesteryear. your argument is poor and when you start bringing up 'heavy leather balls' and what-not... well, you're struggling to be honest. nobody is calling for a return to the dark ages, just a sensible middle-ground which it is proven works. there are so many arguments FOR terracing - that is why it continues and why tests and trials will happen in this country. football has moved on and so has modern terracing. it is possible to take elements from the past and make them better you know! and for the last time, why do people against terracing always seem to think the whole bloody ground will revert to standing?!?! it is only going to be a small part of a stadium used like this - if you want a seat, and many will, there will still be seated areas. it really is the best of both worlds. why is it so difficult to comprehend??? 13 out of 92 clubs not only want it but want to trial it - i know for a fact that our own club have had detailed discussions about this and although they have sided against trialling, are keen to see the results.
The most obvious argument for terracing is that folk in certain sections of grounds, stand throughout the match. The idea of being able to have a terrace/seating, converted as and when necessary seems like a great idea. It may only minmally increase capacity and may only slighlty reduce admission prices, but the vlaue to the folk that want to stand in what is a fraction of a ground is huge. It is not going to make a blind bit of difference to those people that want a seat and i think that if people want to be pissed on, that is their choice, the majority of the stadium will be piss free! No worries
With respect, modern terracing is nothing like the deathtrap terracing of the olden days. please log in to view this image The capacity wouldn't increase as each section of terrace has its own allocated number, so no chance of a Hillsborough-style disaster whereby the police let too many in.
I respect your views as always but if I am so hideously wrong and the arguement in favour of these trials is so clear cut why did only 1 Premier League club vote in favour of a trial and why are the football authorities, Parliament and every journalist I have read against it? Is the standing section going to be for home fans only discriminating against away supporters? If the trial is a success will more seats be ripped out and so on and so on? Incidentally, if the nets are to prevent the ball going into the crowd why, in one Stadium I visited, were the nets only in front of the standing areas?
actually, capacity does slightly increase, as each seat has slightly less leg room, therefore you can have a few extra rows. its not a vast difference. for example, if a stand currently holds 5k in an all-seater and was converted to safe standing, it would increase capacity to maybe 5.5k*. *these are rough figures - it could be slightly more or less.
because these are purely trials. a lot of clubs are interested from what i hear but didn't want to trial it themselves - they just want to see the results - that's not unusual. as for home/away divides - i don't know the answer to that. so much will be down to policing and crowd control - games in the top flight will remain all-ticket - you won't be able to pay on the gate from what i hear - so that means control is still taken over how many are inside the ground. honestly, this is a step in the right direction. as for the nets, let me guess... the standing areas were behind the goals? the grounds i've been to, that's been the case.
it might be, i honestly can't remember the figures, but i'm sure i was told capacity increases by 10%. could be different in different scenarios edit. racking my brain - on second thoughts i think its a 13% increase. 10%, 13%, god knows - my memory is fading fast, but i'm certain its not 33%
You have less rows because of the increase in barriers and you have more gangways for safety reasons. The report I read yesterday suggested that, depending upon the size of existing flooring, the increase in capacity in any enclosure converted to standing would be 3% at worst and 12% at best. In my humble opinion, in order to cover the conversion cost you would pay the same to stand as you do to sit
Perhaps I deliberately went to a stadium in Germany to spike your arguement but where I went it was not behind the goal. The seats were in the middle by the half way line with standing areas either side by the corner flags ( might be a clue there ) and the netting was only in front of the standing areas.
well the netting is not necessary anywhere. we are obviously going to continue to disagree on the terracing front but all the signs point to a return to some kind of standing zones. its what a large number of fans want and the clubs are starting to realise they could make extra revenue from it, so naturally they are interested. some clubs may never have it - liverpool for one - but many will want it. its good to have the choice and the german system has done wonders for their league and attendances.
I don't care what anyone says reverting to standing will bring all the chimps and ****wits to one particular area to call there own. It will act as a magnet to drink fuelled yobs and encourage the mindless vitriol spewed at players and opposing fans. There is absolutely no reason to bring it back, no need, I can't believe there is any real financial gain, just a gamble to bring back the trouble focussed in one area.
You are obviously welcome to your view but for me it is a matter of giving people the choice. You will still be able to choose to sit and that is your right. Also, Was watching BBC Breakfast yesterday morning (Tuesday) and they had a report on Terracing systems on the continent. Basically, you buy a spot in the same way as you would a seat in an all seater stand. There is even a seat in your area (that would only be available when the stadium needed to be all seater). Basically it would be like buying a ticket in the lower Barclay but just not sitting down. Very different to 'the good old days'.
And how, short of employing stewards or Police at extra cost, do you stop individuals wandering off from their designated spot and join with others to cause trouble? With seats they have nowhere to go to do that. Why should you have a choice? Football is now played in all seater stadiums - if you don't like it don't go. I can't go to the theatre and demand a choice and be allowed to stand. I'm 100% with Carrubah on this - nothing wrong with what we have and no need to risk any return to the bad old days.Thankfully I cannot see Parliament, who have overall control, Councils, who issue licences for the Stadium or the Football Authorities agreeing to any change.
you really are nit-picking now. i know plenty of people who have swapped seats with people in the barclay so they can sit with their mates - these things will always happen. i can't remember the last time i sat down at a match to be honest - and that probably IS far more dangerous in a seated area than standing in a proper designated terrace. there is a huge ground-swell of support for testing the new safe-standing areas as used in german stadia. how this affects people against it i have no idea - i presume they will still sit in the seated areas - so why such venomous arguments against what a huge percentage of fans want? the points about 'pissing on each other' and 'being crushed' etc are so out dated they beggar belief and show a total lack of understanding about the modified system that would be used.
One final response and thats it. The problem with terracing is not just the physical aspect of it but the type of person - albeit a minority - it attracts. The freedom of movement in standing areas allows small groups of people to move together and cause trouble - that does not happen with seating. Terraces originally were not a problem - you could wander around at will even between different stands. Every problem which arose was dealt with. Over time different standing areas were fenced off to stop crowd movements at half time, barriers were put in to stop people falling forward if there was a push from the back, rival supporters were kept apart etc etc. In the end, partly because football became tribal war in the eyes of some fans the jolly, well mannered comraderie of the terraces in the 50's became the violent fenced in, dangerous terraces of the 70's and 80's. After Hillsborough the authorities said enough is enough and demanded all seater stadia which stopped in an instant the movement of small and large groups of people either trying to cause trouble or wanting to enter or leave in bulk at the same time. Has there been an Ibrox, Hillsborough or Heysell since? No!! You can well argue that the new proposals will not lead to what we had before - you might be right but who knows? The point of the trial would be to see if it worked and if, for arguements sake, it did then it would be installed permanently. If, again for arguements sake, it led to increased capacity and increased revenue for the Clubs the pressure would be on to extend it etc etc and where would that end up? When Carrow Road was built in the 30's nobody gave a second thought that it could develop the way it did - it was built with the mindset of the time with no idea that the terracing being built could eventually become a death trap. All Carrubuh and I are saying is the current system has worked in stopping the problems caused by standing areas so why start tinkering with a view to bringing standing areas back. It is the same slippery slope arguement I use against video technology in football - if you start it where does it finish? People can argue that video technology is future development and they might well be right but standing at football grounds is a step back to the past. Of course I cannot say that introduction of standing areas will inevitably lead to another blood bath on the terraces but common sense tells me that it will inevitably lead to an increased risk of hooliganism. Standing areas might well appeal to you Supers but they will also also appeal to the hooligan element who at the minute stay away. Why take the risk by changing what is working to something which might not. Good debate but we are starting to go round in circles.
my issue is that in the barclay, even though its seats, we STILL have a 'gaggle' of what i shall call 'idiots'. i see no difference between whether they are standing on a terrace or standing by their seats. the disaster aspect can be withdrawn from this argument because it is a totally different reality - a world away from the new stuff - so its easy to see why i and others who are for terracing cannot understand the 'digging of heels' from those against it, especially when you factor in that it won't affect them as they will stay seated elsewhere. and again, it strikes me from your arguments that you haven't experienced the new version because none of the stuff you suggest happens in it. interesting you are firmly in the no technology camp too. i simply cannot understand that either. do people not want to improve the game? i personally find it embarrassing that football is so slow to react to technology. stuck in its ways...
You can exercise you rights to stand at the theatre: Just go to the globe, travelling theatre companies etc If you want to lay on grass rather than sitting then you can at cricket etc etc. I have to say that I find it so disappointing when folk are unwilling to trial things. one reason it is being trialled is because of the success in Germany and clearly the incidents of violence have gone through the roof. With seats there is no where to go???? Have you forgotten football violence after the introduction of all seater stadiums; it just gave ****wits something to rip up and throw. You may not want some terracing, lots of decent folk do; Jesus take a step back and look at the bigger pictrue rather than repeatedly taking the same one dimensional view;
