For any of you not aware of this group and support a return to safe terraces, I'd urge you to go to the web site www.safestanding.com and log your support (by subscribing to the newsletter or whatever). Copy below of recent press release.

SAFE (Standing Areas For England) www.SafeStanding.com

MPs BLOCKED FROM DEBATING SAFE-STANDING PRESS NOTICE: For immediate release, 02.30pm Friday January 11th 2002

The Football Spectators Bill, a Private Members Bill by Roger Godsiff MP, was due for its Second Reading in the House of Commons today, but co-ordinated efforts were deployed to ensure the issue wasn't debated. It will be presented to the House again on Friday 12th April 2002.

Gary Hewitt of the Safe-Standing Campaign said:

"We didn't expect to win today. But, as any football fan will tell you, it's about a whole season, not just one game. We've already come a lot further than many people thought we could and we're not going to give up until the Government sees sense.

"We're not talking about a return to the old-style, huge, open terraces of yesteryear, but new, small, specially-designed areas using the latest engineering technology.

"All we're asking for is an open public debate. The Sports Minister knows we won't be ignored, misled, sidelined or fobbed off any longer. Support for our national campaign is growing rapidly: in Parliament, in the media and at football clubs throughout the land.

"Richard Caborn has said that he is "prepared to engage in rational debate on the issue" and that he "does not regard the matter as closed." Why then is he so hell bent on preventing the matter being debated in Parliament? What on earth is he so afraid of?

"When Kate Hoey was Minister, at first she was against it too. But then she actually saw the facts for herself. Caborn should approach this with an open mind rather than allowing himself to be deflected by civil servants and advisers or bullied by the Premier League."

Kate Hoey MP, former Minister for Sport, said today:

"I hope this issue is given serious consideration. When I looked at it as Sports Minister I was convinced that Safe-Standing should be allowed."

Roger Godsiff, Labour MP for Birmingham, Sparkbrook and Small Heath, said:

"Safe-Standing is about freedom of choice. Every week tens of thousands of people stand at rugby, horseracing and pop concerts. And in Germany, modern stadia such as Hamburg and Bremen allow supporters to stand both safely and legitimately.

"In fact, it would be far safer to stand in purpose-built Safe-Standing areas than to stand in a seated area, which many fans currently do. Designated separate Safe-Standing areas would also remove the tension between those who prefer to stand and those who wish to sit but whose view is often obstructed by standers.

// cont.

"The aim of the Football Spectators Bill is to remove from the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport the power to designate Premier League and First Division football stadia as all-seater, delegating that decision to clubs, supporters and local authorities. The construction of Safe-Standing areas would therefore be allowed, but would not be mandatory.

"Back in 1995 a prominent politician said: 'While safety must always be the number one criterion, there is no reason to ignore technological improvements made since Lord Justice Taylor reported, which might now allow for safe standing.'

"That politician was Tony Blair. I agreed with him then, and I agree with him now - as do the overwhelming majority of football supporters throughout the country.

"The Government hiding behind the important issue of 'crowd safety' is erroneous. It's now accepted that incompetent policing, indignant stewardship, and the immovable fences were the contributing factors to the Hillsborough tragedy rather than "standing" per se. Recent disasters at grounds in South Africa and Ghana occurred in all-seater stadiums and the tragedy at Bradford occurred in a seating stand."

- EDM (Early Day Motion) 239 in support of the Bill has already attracted 74 signatures, which include the likes of Gerald Kaufman, Chair of the DCMS Select Committee, Boris Johnson, Editor of The Spectator and Bob Russell, LibDem spokesman for Sport.

- The Safe-Standing Campaign is backed by the Football Supporters' Association (FSA), the National Federation of Football Supporters Clubs (NatFed) and many clubs' Independent Supporters' Associations and fanzines.

SAFE (Standing Areas For England) www.SafeStanding.com

-- Anonymous, January 11, 2002

Answers

Sorry LT, but I think this is a sadly misguided move. I suspect it's part of the unwritten law of nature that says the Brits never, ever learn.

IMHO, the words "terraces" and "safety" are oxymorons: terracing is inherently unsafe. At enormous expense, we have established excellent all-seater stadia: why we would ever consider taking the retrograde step of going back to terracing is beyond rational comprehension.

-- Anonymous, January 12, 2002

There are loads of issues here, not least of which is the natural tendency of supporters to stand up, particularly away from home. If people are standing and there are seats in the way, then this has to be more dangerous than terraces. Most of us have been at away grounds where a Newcastle goal is a cast-iron guarantee of an injury (usually minor) as everyone leaps around, falls over seats and bangs legs against the seat in front. I think it was Niall and Biffa who pointed out that now kids stand on seats and questioned whether this was inherently safer than being carried over heads to the front. Of course, if people would sit down but since they won't, I think the question of limited safe standing has to be considered. Kate Hoey went to look at some of the German stadia with great safety records and standing and concluded that safety and standing weren't mutually exclusive. I'm not sure whether she was right but people standing in seated areas IS dangerous.

-- Anonymous, January 12, 2002

....agreed dougal - and that (ie. people creating more safety problems by standing in seating areas) is the problem that should be addressed. I can't believe any other country would seriously consider addressing this particular problem by considering a return to terracing. Obtuse to the point of being absurd.

I would suspect the terracing in Germany is still there because the game couldn't afford to impose all-seater.

-- Anonymous, January 12, 2002

Fine if you pay a price which reflects how much less room you take up and how much less you can see. Short-arses unite!

-- Anonymous, January 12, 2002

Frankly, I'm rather surprised no one has come up with the obvious and affordable answer to the problems of our UK railway system yet - a man should walk in front of each train with a red flag!

-- Anonymous, January 12, 2002

With respect, Clarky, I would dispute that standing is inherently unsafe. If you can tell me of any distaster that has been caused simply by standing on terraces I will withdraw my comments but imho the problems we had on football grounds were to do with issues like overcrowding, fencing, inadequate policing rather than standing.

The moment at which I usually feel least safe at SJP is when the final whistle blows and we have the ridiculous crush trying to get down those narrow aisles between the seats with folk jumping over seats to avoid the queues!

Personally I would never stand by choice. At my height it would be totally pointless. I cannot see, however, why those who wish to do so should not be allowed to make that choice. It would also allow certain areas of the grounds in this country to have affordable ticket prices. You could quite safely, get at least a third as many extra people in an area were they standing rather than sitting and the tickets could be priced accordingly. I also suspect it would considerably improve the atmosphere in some of our over-sanitised stadiums.

-- Anonymous, January 12, 2002

I've just got home from a match where I was standing on terracing with about 4,000 others. It was just like being on the Leazes 20 year ago (although there is a roof and it was about 25 degrees C)

People were jumping and singing etc, a couple of lads fell down, the crowed parted and helped them to their feet. I could not get close enough to kick the one in the manure shirt though!

-- Anonymous, January 12, 2002

got to disagree Smiler.....been to Fulham recently?

-- Anonymous, January 12, 2002

LR, no I haven't, tell all please do. My gut (yes all of it) reaction is that I find that standing if policed properly can be perfectly safe. I am open to argument on this but merely saying sit down at away matches is pathetic for a solution, use a bit of creative thought at least....

-- Anonymous, January 13, 2002

I don't really understand your argument Rog, but I would actually eject those standing in seating areas, home or away, unless they sat down - because it ain't safe.

I feel this is mainly an emotional argument based on rediscovering our fondly-remembered youth, and based on selective amnesia for the problems caused on the terraces of the 70's.

If we were starting with a blank sheet of paper, you could perhaps construct a coherent, even if flawed, commercial argument for retaining terracing. The reality is we have invested massively in all-seater stadia that have made the game infinitely safer than previously, and importantly re-invented the game as family entertainment. From this fortunate position, to go back to recreating inherently unsafe terracing, and an environment into which no sane person would consider taking his wife and children would IMHO be tantamount to crass stupidity. Try remembering the negative aspects of the game in the 70's, and not just the cameraderie/atmosphere.

While I would argue there are other important factors, the key to this argument is probably the safety issue. For those who believe terracing can be made safe this is difficult to prove in a mere post on a bbs. However, for somone who worked all his professional life in the chemical industry where safety was as they say "Job 1", ie. our top priority, one became very familiar with disregarding the view that just because something hasn't gone wrong so far then it will never go wrong. Statistically this is a discredited argument. One is required to consider all probable causes of failure/accident and ensure the chance of them causing failure, either alone or in combination with all other potential causes, are effectively precluded.

Using this kind of logic, my views are:

* Firstly, that it could not be guaranteed that the policing of terracing could be done as effectively as it would need to be, at all times, to ensure the safety of all participants.
* Secondly, we already have an available alternative (all-seater stadia) that I would argue can be policed significantly more effectively, and wherein the probability of a serious problem is very significantly lower.

No one will ever convince me otherwise.

-- Anonymous, January 13, 2002

Me neither Clarky. My memories of the Gallowgate end and of the East stand before it was roofed, are of being able to see hardly anything if the crowd was bigger than about 25,000, and of being hurled forward, despite the crush barriers, when those behind surged forward for whatever reason.

And with close on 60,000 crammed in on odd occasions, absolutely criminal IMHO, before any of the ground improvements had even been thought of, (remember the corrugated iron main stand ?) you definitely took your life in your hands.

So, go back to standing areas ? Not bliddy likely, thankyou very much.

-- Anonymous, January 13, 2002

My own completely unscientific opinion based on my own experience, is I really don't see the big deal with folks standing at their seats. To me it's got to be far safer than the old terracing where if you weren't lucky enough to be on a rail, there was nothing stopping you, and a countless others tumbling down a few rows. I've never attendended an event on that type of terracing, and I never would unless the crowd were sparse enough that I could be on a rail with virtually no one behind me. The thought of being in a crowd in those conditions terrifies me.

However, I've attended countless concerts and sporting events in all seater stadia where people have stood all or most of the time, and other than a couple of bruises on my legs(most of the time self- inflicted by leaning against my folded up seat for balance while jumping around ;-) ), I've not once felt terrified for my safety. The numbers of people are controlled...1 person, 1 seat and though folks can try to cram in, a simple word to the nearest steward can sort that out if anyone feels endangered. Yes, there's always the possibility that people can get overenthusiastic and fall over the seats, it does happen. But I just don't see how the chance is any worse than having 2 or 3 times the number of people crammed into the same amount of space with even less to stop a surge. FAct is people are always going to want to stand at these events so some kind of accomodation really needs to be made.

The irony for me is that they'll create safe standing areas and I'll still be in the seats cause I'm short and freak out in a crush of people. ;-))

-- Anonymous, January 13, 2002

Despite what I said above, I can see both sides of the argument here.

I have been in horrendously frightening situations through standing. The worst I can recall was when I was at university and went to a sixth round FA Cup replay between Leicester and Wolves in the early 70s. I was on that low side which was all terracing in those days. I started at the back of the terrace at the beginning of the game and ended up at the front by half-time and I swear my feet never touched the ground on the way! I also had some bloke trying to stub a cigarette out on the back of my neck. The good old days!

The problem there was not standing, however, but gross overcrowding. I remember going to a match at Crewe Alex in the early 80s and standing on the "popular" side. It was so popular you had to shout very loudly for the bloke next to you to hear - I defy anyone to have felt unsafe standing on that terrace which provided about half an acre of space per fan!

For all my claims that safe standing could still be an option I have to admit that the worst trouble we have seen at a ground this season was in the only STANDING area of Ninian Park last Sunday. Would any standing areas attract the nutters? Perhaps that is the biggest argument against having them!

-- Anonymous, January 13, 2002

ciara - while you might like to stand in the seating area, what about the people behind you who may want to sit down? Does consideration for others not come into this?

-- Anonymous, January 13, 2002

I only stand when those behind me are standing. Or when those in front stand so that I can see past them. It's never been a problem.

-- Anonymous, January 13, 2002

The thing about standing in a seating area is that it's a herd thing. If everyone is standing, I'll stand. If everyone is sitting, I'll sit.

The answer to this question may well be that a limited (say 2000 capacity max which should be relatively easily policed and kept structurally safe) standing area should be made available for those who want to stand and the rest should remain seating for those who want to sit.

I suspect that PL clubs have invested so much in seater stadia that if hell had them they wouldn't re-introduce even limited terracing.

-- Anonymous, January 13, 2002

I've been a fan of standing areas all along. I'm not talking of the type of terraces that Clarky and Pit Bill are discussing. That was over 30 years agao, and as Clarky says. the stadia have changed dramatically over that time.

I changed my views slightly when I was at Craven Cottage earlier this season. There was a lot of rowdiness, and fight or two and a streaker. However, I do not simply acccept this as a consequence of standing terraces per se. As we all know, Craven Cottage is from the dark ages. Those in the standing area that I could see (away section) were not segregated into "hoolis" and "non-hoolis". Yes, I know, this is difficult to guarantee, and I think I would not advocate standing areas for away supporters. That is asking too much and is likely to cause more trouble, what with long journeys fuelled by alcohol.

No, I'm looking for a solution which will allow families to populate a controlled standing area. I'm not 100% sure of the physical payout, but I'm thinking of an area in the 6-10 front rows of the Milburn Stand (sorry Steph!). My guess is that the number of folks could be doubled in that area yet it is small enough to avoid the huge crushed of the likes of the Gallowgate End, Leazes and the Kop. That type should never be allowed again. Did anybody hear of any crowd trouble of injuries in the old "paddock" at SJP?

Clarky asks why clubs should do it in this day of modern all-seater stadia. The answer Al is to open up the games for the next generation. You and I may have been fortunate enough to be able to afford to take our kids to matches. But today, even if you can get tickets, an adult ST is just under £400 and I'm guessing a juvenile is about £300. That's a lot of money for "working class" folks to lash out. Suppose my argument that you could get approximately double the number in standing areas as you can in the seated areas. With an adult and child combined cost of £700, if you half that for a pair of tickets then the revenue will be the same and you have allowed more bairns in to see their heroes, thus increasing the chance of them becomming full ST holders in the years to come - not to mention the potential increase in franchising etc. You will note that I am not advocating wholesale change, but as indicated in the original posting, limited, specially designed areas.

-- Anonymous, January 13, 2002

I prefer to stand when watching a game, but seating makes this difficult as any time you want to move (never mind jump around) you catch two bruises on yer shins. I think that seating will remain because standing areas will be considered to be a retrograde step, even if terracing were segregated to ensure small pockets of standing areas with little or no chance of wholesale crushing.

In the public's mind are the two disasters of Heysel and Hillsbrough. The first was a riot in the stands, hooliganism etc, the second was police incompetence to open the gates allowing a flood of fans into a full area. Terracing didn't help, as it's more difficult to steam into a seated area, but I don't think (with crowd control barriers and policing / stewarding) that all standing areas should be a problem to facilitate.

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

I've been reflecting on this a bit more. There are other things which worry me about crowd control than limited standing areas. IMHO, I believe the exits from the grounds leave a lot to be desired and are potentially more dangerous than limited standing areas. Often, yuo have a mass of people having to decend steep steps. Even our own grond, which has been recently re-constructed suffers this problem, particularly at the Gallowgate end. I honestly believe that this is a greater potential cause for crushing than limited, controlled terracing.

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

The problem isn't people standing, it's overcrowding. It's a miracle there weren't more disasters in the old days.

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

I was in the Milburn Paddock for the final season before SJP went all seater. It was a great crack, close to the pitch, you could stand next to your mates, short arses down the front, tall'uns at the back, plenty of room to move if you couldn't see. The numbers were controlled so there was no crush and there were only about ten steps so it was safe as houses.

These sort of controlled shalow terraces are all that is being proposed, I don't see it as a step back at all. No one is proposing rebuilding the Leazes End. Introducing terracing for kids and the less well off would be a forward step. All seaters were a knee jerk reaction and all you old fogeys with blankets on yer knees should let those more active jump about.

What is Keegan said, "Only Val Doonican sings sitting down".

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

The big disadvantage of terracing is the ability to gang up with ease and move around - wouldn't be an issue most of the time, but we all know it only takes a very small number of people to cause a problem. Being in the terraces at Craven Cottage was a reminder of those days, especially as an away supporter in the wrong area. The disadvantage of minor injuries caused by standing in seating areas is a small price to pay for the policing benefits of the natural barriers seats provide.

I can sympathise with those that prefer to sit so they have a better view, although personally I think a standing crowd is always a more commited crowd and is definitely my preferred option. Can't remember the last game i sat down at (I don't get to St James's often). Perhaps steeper terracing (for better view), numbered standing places (like seats) with a barrier at each row, might work? Although steep terracing is probably not a good idea regardless of the barriers.

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

When I was really young, down at the front of the Leazes, it was fun, but in my early teens somewhat higher in the stand,I just remember seeing half a match, being scared shitless some of the time and really wishing I was somewhere else.

I have no axe to grind either way, but if they did bring back terracing I would still want to sit in the stand.

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002