Safe Standing Survey Email from CCFC (10 Viewers)

Alan Dugdales Moustache

Well-Known Member
Agree. Feel like this just makes my point for me. Don't want to stand? Don't buy a ticket in the safe standing blocks.
Absolutely. People just need to be able to move to areas that accommodate one or the other. I do hope, however, that having safe standing doesn't encourage more standing in those areas that are still for the majority of supporters who wish to sit. Will the stewards clamp down on it should it happen ?
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
People are standing at games. That's not how all-seater stadium were designed to function safely.

Safe standing solves that problem. Spaces where people stand all game are designed with that in mind.

I'm really struggling to see the argument against removing some risks and giving fans what they want.
Giving some fans what they want.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
Absolutely. People just need to be able to move to areas that accommodate one or the other. I do hope, however, that having safe standing doesn't encourage more standing in those areas that are still for the majority of supporters who wish to sit. Will the stewards clamp down on it should it happen ?
I would have thought they will have to.
 

WestEndAgro

Well-Known Member

Interesting way of Doubling capacity, whether we have room at the CBS for this method is debatable.
 

pusbccfc

Well-Known Member

Interesting way of Doubling capacity, whether we have room at the CBS for this method is debatable.

Too expensive. It will be a simple metal rail we see at other standing sections in England.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
If the safe standing blocks are 14-16, then the amount of people that want to stand will outnumber the amount of "safe standing" seats available significantly. One of my concerns is that this will lead to militant stewarding/policing against the people choosing to stand outside of the safe standing area, thereby causing more problems than it supposedly solves.
If people are standing in a no standing area in front of people who want to - or need to - sit, then I’m all for militant stewarding.
 

mmttww

Well-Known Member
And I'll ask you again. What are the risks that rail seats removes vs persistent standing in front of a normal seat?

Read the reports and articles I posted. Some risks mitigated and from the trials, some bonus benefits they didn't plan for.
 

northstander

Active Member
I voted north stand even though im in singers , reason being I’ve never sat down in singers so there’s no change really. It has to be behind the goal
I voted the opposite. Surely it'd make sense to implement the safe standing in an area where the majority already stand?
 

mmttww

Well-Known Member
If the safe standing blocks are 14-16, then the amount of people that want to stand will outnumber the amount of "safe standing" seats available significantly. One of my concerns is that this will lead to militant stewarding/policing against the people choosing to stand outside of the safe standing area, thereby causing more problems than it supposedly solves.

If that happens, expand the section. Sorted. If they crack down on standing elsewhere, doesn't mean it wasn't a good idea to have a safe standing section.
 
Last edited:

COVKIDSNEVERQUIT

Well-Known Member
Completed it and went for Singers corner,should be behind the goal tho .


Why not have it behind both goals and the corner, give people the choice.
 

AJB1983

Well-Known Member
Nature says there will always be the older the older generation and even younger who stand at work all day?
Did you mean back rows?
No I was just thinking more akin to how the west terrace used to be, and how it is at St Andrews.

But I suppose there’s no natural break in the seating (like a walkway or anything) so you’d end up losing seats for it to work, so those immediately behind it could see.
Maybe where the vomitories are from there down to the front?
Just throwing out ideas.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
I voted the opposite. Surely it'd make sense to implement the safe standing in an area where the majority already stand?
But that can change.

people stand in that area because it has been the closes t they could get to the away fans.

If part of the South Stand is opened up to home supporters the standing area would migrate around behind the goal to once again be as close to the away fans as possible. I'm sure they'd like to be more behind the goal if they could be.
 

Alan Dugdales Moustache

Well-Known Member
If I'm in the rail seat area and at half time I sit down but the bloke behind me is standing up, leaning on his rail eating chips, drinking a pint and swearing a lot because we're losing am I going to end up with chips and beer all over my head ?
 

MTK

Well-Known Member
No, they're not FOR people to stand but many in those blocks DO stand. I don't and neither do a lot of others. We are on the periphery on 16, so we might be OK, if that area is chosen. I've sat there for years, so I don't really want to move.
Same here. In block 16 for years and just inside the area that will become safe standing if they proceed as they said they would. I support safe standing coming in but I will have to move seat. I can’t stand all game these days. I’ll be sad to move seats but getting older is a one way journey :)
 

northstander

Active Member
But that can change.

people stand in that area because it has been the closes t they could get to the away fans.

If part of the South Stand is opened up to home supporters the standing area would migrate around behind the goal to once again be as close to the away fans as possible. I'm sure they'd like to be more behind the goal if they could be.

I get your point. It feels like they're undecided on how to sort the South Stand at present, hence the trial tonight and reconfiguring away fans a few times this season. Once a decision is made there, things might become clearer.

Safe standing could probably be implemented in stages too, so the corner first and then some into the stand behind the goal and the away end as needed, depending on how they decide to go forward with the South Stand.

Ultimately I reckon wherever it goes, the people who want to stand will move there.
 

skybluericoh

Well-Known Member
We have a generation of fans that unless they have been to a few away games, friendlies or perhaps also been to none league when we don’t have a game on, have never experienced it. When all seaters came out I hated them, but now would struggle to stand.
I think it will improve the atmosphere, yes where ever it is put in it will inconvenience some but, football should be for all, those who want to stand should have a safe place.
I did the survey and also put singers corner.
 

David O'Day

Well-Known Member
Does anyone know the actual EFL rules as KI am pretty sure that in the PL if you have safe standing you also have to have it available for away fans as well?
 

pusbccfc

Well-Known Member
Does anyone know the actual EFL rules as KI am pretty sure that in the PL if you have safe standing you also have to have it available for away fans as well?

Believe so. Can't find any actual rule but from my reckoning , all clubs with safe standing currently have it in the away end too. Birmingham had to install it into their away end recently as they added it to the home end.

There will be rail seating added to the South Stand. They'll need to install it in a position that they are certain will be the away blocks next season. It's another reason why they are trialling different configurations in the away end.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top