EST Safe Standing Survey Results

[The Cowboy]

Well they could always choose to exempt Liverpool at the beginning (And we'd also refuse it as a show of unity)

Villa and Man United both want it, let them trial it and if all goes well, which all the evidence suggests it will, go back to Hilsborough families at that point for further consultations

Well, no-one is forcing anyone to do anything.

The RS have an emotional monopoly on this matter. And the FA will never go near it until the RS change their stance.

The show of unity started and ended with the enquiry. That was about the good name of the city. It had nothing to do with football.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

Well, no-one is forcing anyone to do anything.

The RS have an emotional monopoly on this matter. And the FA will never go near it until the RS change their stance.

The show of unity started and ended with the enquiry. That was about the good name of the city. It had nothing to do with football.

I think that's incredibly unfair to Liverpool to be honest

Of course it's going to be a sensitive issue for them, 96 of their fans died and a large percentage of the families of those fans think standing was a major cause of their loved ones death. It's only natural that those families would be against the idea of standing in any form and only reasonable that Liverpool wouldn't want to upset those people in turn by adopting a scheme like rail seating which allows people to stand without first gaining their support for the scheme

The key here is not to berate Liverpool for supporting the families wishes, but instead work with them to try and show the families that rail seating is indeed safe and that their fears of it are unfounded. Caring and understanding are what's needed here, as well as solid evidence that rail seating is indeed safe, not nastiness and spite

 

[The Cowboy]

I think that's incredibly unfair to Liverpool to be honest

Of course it's going to be a sensitive issue for them, 96 of their fans died and a large percentage of the families of those fans think standing was a major cause of their loved ones death. It's only natural that those families would be against the idea of standing in any form and only reasonable that Liverpool wouldn't want to upset those people in turn by adopting a scheme like rail seating which allows people to stand without first gaining their support for the scheme

The key here is not to berate Liverpool for supporting the families wishes, but instead work with them to try and show the families that rail seating is indeed safe and that their fears of it are unfounded. Caring and understanding are what's needed here, as well as solid evidence that rail seating is indeed safe, not nastiness and spite

I don't see what link there is between the Hillsborough family groups, and other clubs wanting to look into a system that's already in place in various other clubs across Europe. It's really not their place to veto it.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

I don't see what link there is between the Hillsborough family groups, and other clubs wanting to look into a system that's already in place in various other clubs across Europe. It's really not their place to veto it.

Well they can't actually veto it can they? But they can oppose it, and whilst they oppose it Liverpool won't do it, and whilst Liverpool aren't doing it we certainly won't do it either, and the government aren't exactly going to want to have them protesting against it will they?

It makes the whole situation less volatile if the families can be brought round to the idea and remove their objection of it. This is why I think the government should say they are trialling it at Villa and United. Of course the families will protest that, but if after the trial period the rail seating has been proven to be a success, the government then has grounds to introduce it and Liverpool can go back to the families with some actual evidence of the scheme's safety. I think Liverpool would really want to have rail seating, as would probably a majority of their fan base, but at the same time they quite reasonably don't want to upset the families

 

[Andy G]

I don't see what link there is between the Hillsborough family groups, and other clubs wanting to look into a system that's already in place in various other clubs across Europe. It's really not their place to veto it.

If standing at the football match is what they say was a major cause of the tragedy then falling walls are another huge cause for concern, do they want an end to walls at stadiums?

 

[Mountfield1985]

If standing at the football match is what they say was a major cause of the tragedy then falling walls are another huge cause for concern, do they want an end to walls at stadiums?

Idiot.

 

[micknick]

If standing at the football match is what they say was a major cause of the tragedy then falling walls are another huge cause for concern, do they want an end to walls at stadiums?

What a stupid comment. if you dont want to take part in the discussion dont post- its simple.

 

[micknick]

Idiot.

use the report function.

 

[micknick]

Please, please please stop with your badly informed nonsense.

Just stop it.

It isn't badly informed nonsense though, although you probably want it to be for some weird reason, but it isn't. If there had been allocated seating in the lower tier at Hillsborough then you would not have had everyone crowding in to the same two pens. They would have sought to find their allocated seats and there would have been ample seats available. And it's just a simple fact that standing at major football grounds was banned in England as a safety measure in response to the disaster.

Guys lets leave the Hillsborough debate out of this- very emotive subject and can lead to people being upset.

 

[The Cowboy]

Guys lets leave the Hillsborough debate out of this- very emotive subject and can lead to people being upset.

It's kinda intrinsic to the whole debate though.

 

[stanleypark]

It isn't badly informed nonsense though, although you probably want it to be for some weird reason, but it isn't. If there had been allocated seating in the lower tier at Hillsborough then you would not have had everyone crowding in to the same two pens. They would have sought to find their allocated seats and there would have been ample seats available. And it's just a simple fact that standing at major football grounds was banned in England as a safety measure in response to the disaster.

Liverpool's support stands at aways in seated areas though? So they would have went to their allocated seat and then stood in it?

 

[Dymak]

Liverpool's support stands at aways in seated areas though? So they would have went to their allocated seat and then stood in it?

Yes. I've been asked to leave it and I've made my position clear already tbh, so I'll leave it there.

 

[stanleypark]

Yes. I've been asked to leave it and I've made my position clear already tbh, so I'll leave it there.

I've said that I have no problem with 1:1 seat to person ratios. I've even said this would have prevented the Hillsborough disaster

That's fine no worries Dymak. I think the first post I replied to was unintentionally misleading when you mix it with everything else you put.

 

[micknick]

It's kinda intrinsic to the whole debate though.

Not when people are debating what caused it, it isnt.

 

[EveBlue]

So many things led to Hillsborough, fences, poorly maintained stands, policing, stadium turnstiles and also fan culture which was prevalent everywhere of trying to get into games without tickets. Although that last point can't be said for sure at Hillsborough on that sad day.

All this is hopefully in the past.

Absolutely no reason why standing at football will cause any sort of repetition. The city of Liverpool would be the perfect place to see the rise of standing again as certainly it would get the extra scrutiny the no to standing camp wish for, while hopefully proving all is safe, and infact safer than the mess we have today.