Certainly happened this season. I was in the safe standing about 6 rows away front of us it was seating and they made sure everyone adhered to it.
Certainly happened this season. I was in the safe standing about 6 rows away front of us it was seating and they made sure everyone adhered to it.Never happened to me the season before last. Though I was stood in the,seating because theyd allowed the safe standing to be filled up with people who werent suppose to be in there.
I couldn't get in and had a legitimate ticket!
Not sure about this season as I was in safe standing.
i agree with this. I don’t want to leave 15 and wont unless the atmosphere ends up transferring over to behind the goal, in which case may move behind the goalMeanwhile back in the real world.
It seems lots of 15 and 16 don't want to move as they likely lose the social groups they have formed over a decade or so which is likely., some people like their view, some people have lost people who they sat with and don't want to move and lose that persons seat, some like the much better facilities in the east stand.
It is strange they say in the article they have listened when people said they wanted it in "singers corner" but have only done it in half of the corner.
i agree with this. I don’t want to leave 15 and wont unless the atmosphere ends up transferring over to behind the goal, in which case may move behind the goal
if the atmosphere is better there than in 15, then yes. If not, even if there is some atmosphere there but 15 remains loud, I’ll stay putWould you move if there was an atmosphere there?
This shouldn't be like recent games. Some will move from the corner and other areas to add to the atmosphere. It won't be entirely full of matchday fans and families.
if the atmosphere is better there than in 15, then yes. If not, even if there is some atmosphere there but 15 remains loud, I’ll stay put
hopefully, the cynic in me thinks only either the corner or behind the goal will be able to have a good atmosphere but a bigger section would be classIdeally it becomes 6 blocks of atmosphere.
Block 10 isn't 'closed off'. It was on the list of blocks where STs will be sold next season, and presumably will be sold (and enforced) as seating only.Assume 10 is closed off because the safety group won't allow standing right next to the away fans but if we get a season with no trouble would assume it can be extended to that block as well.
i hope they have a plan. can't help thinking this needs some coordination.Block 10 isn't 'closed off'. It was on the list of blocks where STs will be sold next season, and presumably will be sold (and enforced) as seating only.
The superfans seem to consider standing up as being crucial to creating atmosphere.What if safe standing was the back three or four rows around the ground? Not obstructing views, stretching the noise and giving safe stand fans more choice on position in the ground
Well if these social groups haven't got facebook/twitter/phone numbers of people in that group for them to discuss exact seat they're moving to I'd suggest they're not that tight knit.Meanwhile back in the real world.
It seems lots of 15 and 16 don't want to move as they likely lose the social groups they have formed over a decade or so which is likely., some people like their view, some people have lost people who they sat with and don't want to move and lose that persons seat, some like the much better facilities in the east stand.
It is strange they say in the article they have listened when people said they wanted it in "singers corner" but have only done it in half of the corner.
There's no safe standing in 10, which is what I meant. I'm assuming that a SAG thing as it would seem odd to leave that block outBlock 10 isn't 'closed off'. It was on the list of blocks where STs will be sold next season, and presumably will be sold (and enforced) as seating only.
And similarly depending on how things go, I imagine it would be feasible to extend safe standing into 15 in future (as desired by a few on here). But it seems to me that 11 to 14 is quite a decent allocation (at least numerically) for standing.There's no safe standing in 10, which is what I meant. I'm assuming that a SAG thing as it would seem odd to leave that block out
So my theory is if people manage to behave themselves we can resist it and have the single block in that area without safe standing added at a later date
Yes they willWill they be more vigorous with telling people to sit down outside this area ?
Block 16 top to bottom just stands
they can fuck off if soYes they will
Where's AA?NEWS: Safe Standing to be introduced for 2024/25 season
Coventry City will be introducing Safe Standing from the 2024/25 season!www.ccfc.co.uk
- Block 6 – Rows AA to XX (Away Supporters)
- Block 7 – Rows AA to XX (Away Supporters)
- Block 11 – Rows AA to XX
- Block 12 – Rows AA to XX
- Block 13 – Rows AA to XX
- Block 14 – Rows AA to XX
Ok but safe standing is about safe standing and if you make safe standing available you expect those people who wish to stand all game to use itthey can fuck off if so
Where's AA?
Is it about where you come out from the concourse?
Where's AA?
Is it about where you come out from the concourse?
That may be true for viewing but the cost is significantly more to put safe standing in corners than in a straight line.And similarly depending on how things go, I imagine it would be feasible to extend safe standing into 15 in future (as desired by a few on here). But it seems to me that 11 to 14 is quite a decent allocation (at least numerically) for standing.
Safe standing is easier in the corners because there is no problem with sight lines.
They don’t actually state they have “listened“. They have reported elements of the consultation, so they have ‘heard” what supporters views are and they will probably have considered those views along with a myriad of other factors in order to come to this solution. A consultation is not a referendum.You are missing the point, the club state they have listen and did what the fans wanted and made "singers corner" safe standing but they haven't
There is a mismatch between the comms and the action
According to King on CWR this morning its the club not Frasers who are paying to have safe standing put inThat may be true for viewing but the cost is significantly more to put safe standing in corners than in a straight line.
Good point, I was thinking about this earlier.Question, will people stand anywhere in safe standing, if they do, then the stewards are going to be busy.
Question, will people stand anywhere in safe standing, if they do, then the stewards are going to be busy.
Even so, having gone to the bother of a consultation, it seems a bit strange that there hasn't been any explanation of why they decided not to go with the wishes of those who took the time to respond to the consultation. Apologies if there has been an explanation - I haven't read the whole thread, and the bits I have read make no mention of an explanation.They don’t actually state they have “listened“. They have reported elements of the consultation, so they have ‘heard” what supporters views are and they will probably have considered those views along with a myriad of other factors in order to come to this solution. A consultation is not a referendum.
There hasn’t been an explanation, which would have been helpful. It could be SAG, it could be Frasers only allowing it in certain areas, it could be that the club just thought “fuck those tossers in Singers Corner, we can really piss hem off by putting the safe standing exactly where they don’t want it”.Even so, having gone to the bother of a consultation, it seems a bit strange that there hasn't been any explanation of why they decided not to go with the wishes of those who took the time to respond to the consultation. Apologies if there has been an explanation - I haven't read the whole thread, and the bits I have read make no mention of an explanation.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?