South Stand

[hoofer2]

I thought the etiquette of football is you only moan about off pitch stuff when the quality of football on it was dire!!

I personally am enjoying the sabbatical and using my half season ticket!

[Ajtheone04]

Wonder if theres been no correspondence because the SA are pushing the club about safe standing? Last thing I heard was that the club said they could implement it but the SA saw no reason as to why the excuse they were given was valid.

[beew]

We look forward to the beginning of the end...

That's very clever.

[Tuesds]

It would be such a retrograde step to put a new stand in behind the goal without any safe standing provision. Not only is it rolling out now at numerous clubs in the Premier League and Championship, we are also seeing clubs with new stadium and redevelopment projects making safe standing a key feature and indeed a real selling point for their projects, such as Luton (https://www.lutontown.co.uk/news/2022/m ... ng-survey/) and Wrexham (https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest ... 4-11-2022/). Meanwhile Peterborough have converted their entire old London Road terrace to safe standing.

If we neglect to put any safe standing in, it’s a sure fire way to make our ‘new’ stadium start to look dated before its time, as well as to disappoint and even alienate a chunk of our own fan base, including those in the currently encouragingly buoyant Amber Battalion and those who would rather not stand and would benefit from knowing where the designated standing area is in order to avoid it.

[Anthony]

It would be such a retrograde step to put a new stand in behind the goal without any safe standing provision. Not only is it rolling out now at numerous clubs in the Premier League and Championship, we are also seeing clubs with new stadium and redevelopment projects making safe standing a key feature and indeed a real selling point for their projects, such as Luton (https://www.lutontown.co.uk/news/2022/m ... ng-survey/) and Wrexham (https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest ... 4-11-2022/). Meanwhile Peterborough have converted their entire old London Road terrace to safe standing.

If we neglect to put any safe standing in, it’s a sure fire way to make our ‘new’ stadium start to look dated before its time, as well as to disappoint and even alienate a chunk of our own fan base, including those in the currently encouragingly buoyant Amber Battalion and those who would rather not stand and would benefit from knowing where the designated standing area is in order to avoid it.

At the moment, fans can safely stand at the back of the west stand, which they do.

Fans will be able to do so behind the goal even without this provision.

There has been two games in ten years where we have sold out where standing in the stand may not be possible.

I would say it’s likely that we won’t be selling our ground out often in the next ten years either.

If we put safe standing in we will have to pay for it as we won’t be able to access grant money.

So to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds to allow supporters to safely stand for one game every five years doesn’t seem value for money.

I’d rather the money be spent elsewhere.

If we sell out the ground of a regular basis and then need safe standing, let’s fit it in then.

[CrawleyBee]

It would be such a retrograde step to put a new stand in behind the goal without any safe standing provision. Not only is it rolling out now at numerous clubs in the Premier League and Championship, we are also seeing clubs with new stadium and redevelopment projects making safe standing a key feature and indeed a real selling point for their projects, such as Luton (https://www.lutontown.co.uk/news/2022/m ... ng-survey/) and Wrexham (https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest ... 4-11-2022/). Meanwhile Peterborough have converted their entire old London Road terrace to safe standing.

If we neglect to put any safe standing in, it’s a sure fire way to make our ‘new’ stadium start to look dated before its time, as well as to disappoint and even alienate a chunk of our own fan base, including those in the currently encouragingly buoyant Amber Battalion and those who would rather not stand and would benefit from knowing where the designated standing area is in order to avoid it.

At the moment, fans can safely stand at the back of the west stand, which they do.

Fans will be able to do so behind the goal even without this provision.

There has been two games in ten years where we have sold out where standing in the stand may not be possible.

I would say it’s likely that we won’t be selling our ground out often in the next ten years either.

If we put safe standing in we will have to pay for it as we won’t be able to access grant money.

So to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds to allow supporters to safely stand for one game every five years doesn’t seem value for money.

I’d rather the money be spent elsewhere.

If we sell out the ground of a regular basis and then need safe standing, let’s fit it in then.

Do agree with this, realistically how many fans will want to safe stand ? 500 max?

[Tuesds]

…realistically how many fans will want to safe stand ? 500 max?

If it’s 500 that’s a very significant minority of our home support!

[CrawleyBee]

…realistically how many fans will want to safe stand ? 500 max?

If it’s 500 that’s a very significant minority of our home support!

Fair point, a poll would be interesting to see if it’s worth the hassle.

[Anthony]

…realistically how many fans will want to safe stand ? 500 max?

If it’s 500 that’s a very significant minority of our home support!

Fair point, a poll would be interesting to see if it’s worth the hassle.

The supporters coach survey demonstrates that polls often don't reflect what people actually do. As the only option at the moment is to sit, then it’s pretty likely that an unrepresentative number of people will vote for an option that allows sitting and standing.

Cant we just dig out the terrace figures? That surely would give us the most reliable indication of who actually wants to stand. From what I remember, the numbers were quite small. Im sure that they could be accommodated safely in a normal stand. Again, it seems like an extravagant luxury. Can anyone actually claim its good value for money?

[Tuesds]

It would be such a retrograde step to put a new stand in behind the goal without any safe standing provision. Not only is it rolling out now at numerous clubs in the Premier League and Championship, we are also seeing clubs with new stadium and redevelopment projects making safe standing a key feature and indeed a real selling point for their projects, such as Luton (https://www.lutontown.co.uk/news/2022/m ... ng-survey/) and Wrexham (https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest ... 4-11-2022/). Meanwhile Peterborough have converted their entire old London Road terrace to safe standing.

If we neglect to put any safe standing in, it’s a sure fire way to make our ‘new’ stadium start to look dated before its time, as well as to disappoint and even alienate a chunk of our own fan base, including those in the currently encouragingly buoyant Amber Battalion and those who would rather not stand and would benefit from knowing where the designated standing area is in order to avoid it.

At the moment, fans can safely stand at the back of the west stand, which they do.

Fans will be able to do so behind the goal even without this provision.

There has been two games in ten years where we have sold out where standing in the stand may not be possible.

I would say it’s likely that we won’t be selling our ground out often in the next ten years either.

If we put safe standing in we will have to pay for it as we won’t be able to access grant money.

So to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds to allow supporters to safely stand for one game every five years doesn’t seem value for money.

I’d rather the money be spent elsewhere.

If we sell out the ground of a regular basis and then need safe standing, let’s fit it in then.

I’ve never heard that there’s grant money available for a seated stand that wouldn’t be available for a stand with safe standing. That issue did apply in the past for us as a Football League club when it was a question of seating vs a traditional terrace, but I’ve not seen or heard anything about the Premier League Stadium Fund (formerly Football Foundation) or any other grants precluding safe standing. It would be bizarre if they did when it’s been newly approved by the government.

Information about the current eligibility criteria for National League clubs under the Premier League Stadium Fund is available here, and shows that it’s available for seating or terracing, at the same level: https://premierleaguestadiumfund.co.uk/national-league

I would be amazed if the difference between installing some safe standing and not doing so is anything significant financially, if in fact it costs any more at all.

As for saving money by not putting it in at the start and then putting it in in future if needed, this sort of approach would likely end up costing a lot more. Designing in some safe-standing from the start would ‘future-proof’ the stand by including the growing feature that will increasingly be expected by fans, and will avoid expensive retrofitting.

The fact is it’s not really safe for crowds to stand in a normal seated stand. They are not designed for it, especially goal celebrations etc. due to the likelihood of tumbling over seats. I’m happy to stand in a seated area and people obviously make their own choices to, but while there’s no safe standing it only takes one more zealous/cautious safety officer or police officer to decide that people really oughtn’t be standing and then that’s that for the Amber Battalion and everyone else.

[Anthony]

Thanks, if that’s the case then fair enough. I don't think that is the clubs current understanding of the requirements - I would hope they would have a more intimate knowledge of what’s possible than anyone on this forum!

And if its really not safe to have a small group of people standing at the back of the stand, then the supporters association should raise it with the club.

[MCB]

I've sat rightbehind the safe standing area at Spurs new stadium (free ticket) which is/was the bottom rows leading to the pitch ((https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/2 ... r-stadium/)

At the moment it's the same capacity - 1 standing person per seat and everyone has a rail in front / behind them. Couldn't be safer and does create the better atmosphere right behind the goal. But with the same capacity as seats it doesn't allow bigger crowds or reduce costs for the club Vs building seats so there is little incentive for clubs to either build them or reduce the cost for them.

I assume therefore that 'supporters wishes' alone don't make a compelling enough reason for the club to build them. Does anyone know if the intention is that eventually standing will be allowed in higher capacity Vs seats?

[DerekRocholl]

Thanks, if that’s the case then fair enough. I don't think that is the clubs current understanding of the requirements - I would hope they would have a more intimate knowledge of what’s possible than anyone on this forum!
.

I doubt it, the reason why safe standing areas are now allowed is because of a long term campaign by supporters who have done the research and know the subject inside out. The rules around grants don’t prevent them from being used to fund rail seating required for safe standing.

The bigger problem is likely to be the expectation that standing will be cheaper than sitting despite it having no impact on capacity. Personally I would be happy to pay the same price because I prefer to stand at games, I’m not sure that would apply to many.

[amberforever]

After all said and done, after standing and supporting the Bees for some 50 years, I just feel sad I can’t stand anymore apart from along the back of a stand.

[Roy57]

Thanks, if that’s the case then fair enough. I don't think that is the clubs current understanding of the requirements - I would hope they would have a more intimate knowledge of what’s possible than anyone on this forum!
.

I doubt it, the reason why safe standing areas are now allowed is because of a long term campaign by supporters who have done the research and know the subject inside out. The rules around grants don’t prevent them from being used to fund rail seating required for safe standing.

The bigger problem is likely to be the expectation that standing will be cheaper than sitting despite it having no impact on capacity. Personally I would be happy to pay the same price because I prefer to stand at games, I’m not sure that would apply to many.

I cannot remember if it was Bromley away, but there terrace prices were the same as seating, £22
And pretty sure this is the case in a few other clubs, but as stated the cost would not be overly important, but would be nice for supporters to stand if wished, don't believe supporters who are in favour of safe standing are saying so just they believe they might save a couple of quid on admittance.