Safe standing consultation (1 Viewer)

[MalcSB]

Why do they insist on treating a game like it’s 1983 when it’s actually 2023 ?

It’s a different world now, we didn’t need woke viewer discretionary warnings that we may see scenes of violence before episodes of the likes of Midsomer Murders in those days (isn’t the clue in the programme title?)

 

---

[chiefdave]

Safety group is the council isn't it? Fairly sure without them we wouldn't be able to have a crowd sadly

The council website seems to imply the SAG are responsible for if events get the go ahead:

Safety at Sports Grounds Enforcement Policy – Coventry City Council

Safety at Sports Grounds Enforcement Policy

www.coventry.gov.uk

however the health and safety executive seem to take a different view

SAGs provide a forum for discussing and advising on public safety at an event. They aim to help organisers with the planning, and management of an event and to encourage cooperation and coordination between all relevant agencies. They are non-statutory bodies and so do not have legal powers or responsibilities, and are not empowered to approve or prohibit events from taking place. Event organisers and others involved in the running of an event, retain the principal legal duties for ensuring public safety.

 

[MalcSB]

The council website seems to imply the SAG are responsible for if events get the go ahead:

Safety at Sports Grounds Enforcement Policy – Coventry City Council

Safety at Sports Grounds Enforcement Policy

www.coventry.gov.uk

however the health and safety executive seem to take a different view

I’m sure someone said that the council had delegated its powers to the SAG. In any event, if SAGs advice is ignored and it all goes pear shape the club wouldn’t have a leg to stand on.

 

[Brylowes]

I’m sure someone said that the council had delegated its powers to the SAG. In any event, if SAGs advice is ignored and it all goes pear shape the club wouldn’t have a leg to stand on.

So do all clubs have an SAG ?

 

[chiefdave]

So do all clubs have an SAG ?

its seems not

Event organisers should determine whether there is a SAG, or similar arrangements, in the relevant area and if appropriate, submit their event proposal for discussion and advice. Attendance of the event organiser at SAG meetings may be voluntary

 

[MalcSB]

its seems not

May apply where council haven’t delegated powers. Also, the whole guidance needs to be read to get the context and at the moment I can’t be arsed to do it. The main thing is there is a SAG in Coventry overseeing CBS and Butts Park.

NB The use of the word “may” in terms of attendance.

 

[Brylowes]

its seems not

So why do we ?

 

[MalcSB]

So why do we ?

See above

 

[WestEndAgro]

Advisory group, can and should be overruled if they are using draconian opinions.

 

[Gynnsthetonic]

I agree, but until Doug kicks this ridiculous safety group into touch ‘we’re unlikely to make any meaningful progress regarding segregation & other associated issues.
Where have this safety group come from ?
Who appointed them ?
Are we compelled to adhere to their advice ?
Why do they insist on treating a game like it’s 1983 when it’s actually 2023 ?
Leicester v Spurs last week had a ‘no man’s land’ that equated to 2 empty seats across with a line of stewards, which seems to be the norm at all grounds.
We insist on having entire empty blocks separating fans why ffs

Because we don't sell out, if we were getting another 5k on top of now something would have to be done yes, at the moment though they can afford to have a big no-mans land between fans

 

[Brylowes]

Because we don't sell out, if we were getting another 5k on top of now something would have to be done yes, at the moment though they can afford to have a big no-mans land between fans

If they made all the seats we are actually allowed to sit in available for sale we would increase our gates imho, but even now we are averaging 25000 which is only about 1500 below capacity ‘so that argument doesn’t really stack up.

 

[chiefdave]

May apply where council haven’t delegated powers.

Surely if the council have delegated their powers and the people they have delegated the powers to can be shown to be clueless and enforcing conditions on us that no other club in the country has to deal with then those delegated powers should be removed

At the very least we need some reasoning behind the decisions that stands up to basic scruitnity. Just one example but at the moment we have things like the SAG saying it's impossible to have the away fans setup in a configuration we know has been used multiple times before. It shouldn't be a case of them stating that and everyone having to accept it as fact when we can all clearly see it isn't true

 

[Brylowes]

See above

That’s not really an answer to the question tho is it.

 

[MalcSB]

Advisory group, can and should be overruled if they are using draconian opinions.

Not advisory if council have delegated authority to them.

As I have said before, overrule or ignore them and things go pear shaped, you are in deep shit.

 

[MalcSB]

If they made all the seats we are actually allowed to sit in available for sale we would increase our gates imho, but even now we are averaging 25000 which is only about 1500 below capacity ‘so that argument doesn’t really stack up.

Capacity with current segregation is about 30,000 so we are about 5k of that. Stadium certainly doesn’t seem anywhere near “full” in the home arwas.

 

[MalcSB]

That’s not really an answer to the question tho is it.

OK, why do we have a SAG? Because the responsible authority decided that’s what they were going to have and how they were going to manage things. If you don’t like it, write to the council with a reasoned argument proposing an alternative.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Safety group is the council isn't it? Fairly sure without them we wouldn't be able to have a crowd sadly

My understanding is this:

The council issue the safety license which states that the ground is able to accommodate 32500 spectators.

Along with this the club/ground have an obligation to ensure spectator safety is as safe as possible.

So long as spectator safety is not compromised, the club can always has 32500 in there.

SAG advises on how to keep crowd safe. They aren’t interested in seeing the ground full, or about club revenues. They will always advise the most extreme levels of safety.

The club is free to ignore this advice if it chooses.

However if that advice is ignored, and something did happen to spectators, the council could hit the club with a penalty.


Most of it comes back to the club having no confidence in its own ability to control a large crowd

 

[bigfatronssba]

Capacity with current segregation is about 30,000 so we are about 5k of that. Stadium certainly doesn’t seem anywhere near “full” in the home arwas.

Non corporate home areas have been about 95% full over the last few games.

Non corporate home capacity is only about 22,500.
It needs to be increased.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Not advisory if council have delegated authority to them.

As I have said before, overrule or ignore them and things go pear shaped, you are in deep shit.

This has been gone through before.

The Safety Advisory Group is advice only. Clue is in the name.
They have no power of enforcement.
Only CCC can enforce safety regulations, and they can only do that when spectator safety has been compromised.

We still just about live in a democracy. And as such local authorities do not have the power to decide on spectator numbers for individual sporting events. They can only issue, amend, or revoke the venue’s safety certificate.
And even then every decision can be legally challenged

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Not advisory if council have delegated authority to them.

As I have said before, overrule or ignore them and things go pear shaped, you are in deep shit.

OK, why do we have a SAG? Because the responsible authority decided that’s what they were going to have and how they were going to manage things. If you don’t like it, write to the council with a reasoned argument proposing an alternative.

I will take 'SAG member posing undercover on SBT' for £10 please.

You've been ramming this very strange agenda and watching this thread like a hawk. You've jumped on any suggestions of moving the away fans and aren't keen on safe standing either. These latest posts seem a bit too revealing. I am deeply suspicious!

 

[Gynnsthetonic]

If they made all the seats we are actually allowed to sit in available for sale we would increase our gates imho, but even now we are averaging 25000 which is only about 1500 below capacity ‘so that argument doesn’t really stack up.

The stadium holds just under 33k so your argument doesn't really stack up,

 

[Brylowes]

The stadium holds just under 33k so your argument doesn't really stack up,

When was the last time ‘just under 33k tickets were available to purchase ?
the actual stadium capacity is irrelevant in this instance.

 

[Brylowes]

Capacity with current segregation is about 30,000 so we are about 5k of that. Stadium certainly doesn’t seem anywhere near “full” in the home arwas.

There must be very close to 4000 empty seats in the South Stand + the always empty balcony at a guess 1500. Which would leave us with a match day capacity of around 26,600

 

[shmmeee]

What’s the crack with the balcony? Is that all unsold corporate?

 

[Brylowes]

What’s the crack with the balcony? Is that all unsold corporate?

Not sure but it’s a waste, I’d love to sit up there for a game.

 

[M&B Stand]

I thought it was all being sorted during summer, issues with doors and maintenance and stuff plus the sell outs caught the club and stadium team on the hop last term.
I guess until we sell out again it’s not an issue. The SAG do seem a bit like they’re desperate to prove the need for their existence, overplaying any possible dangers etc. it’s a wonder its members aren’t still hiding behind the settee from Covid.

 

[AOM]

Not sure but it’s a waste, I’d love to sit up there for a game.

Always looks rubbish on TV as well considering the opposite stand is usually where most of our fans are

 

[Brylowes]

I thought it was all being sorted during summer, issues with doors and maintenance and stuff plus the sell outs caught the club and stadium team on the hop last term.
I guess until we sell out again it’s not an issue. The SAG do seem a bit like they’re desperate to prove the need for their existence, overplaying any possible dangers etc. it’s a wonder its members aren’t still hiding behind the settee from Covid.

We are pretty close to selling out now, an unexpected large walk up would really put them in trouble.

 

[bigfatronssba]

What’s the crack with the balcony? Is that all unsold corporate?

Yes. It’s the £25k boxes

 

[bigfatronssba]

We are pretty close to selling out now, an unexpected large walk up would really put them in trouble.

I was sat there wondering what they would do in that situation when I was at the Sunderland game.
It was clear that they had saved block 27 for walk up, it must’ve been within 200 seats of selling out.

If a couple of hundred extra had turned up, would they have refused them entry?

 

[mmttww]

At the very least we need some reasoning behind the decisions that stands up to basic scruitnity. Just one example but at the moment we have things like the SAG saying it's impossible to have the away fans setup in a configuration we know has been used multiple times before. It shouldn't be a case of them stating that and everyone having to accept it as fact when we can all clearly see it isn't true

This is the thing that undermines it all.

"You can't physically do that"

"Here's evidence of it being done"

 

[Sick Boy]

Why tho? The segregation is about the number of fans safely possible in the concourse I thought? Wouldn't we have that issue wherever we put them?

Apparently it’s to do with safely leaving the stadium. Weirdly it only seems to apply to us.

 

[shmmeee]

Apparently it’s to do with safely leaving the stadium. Weirdly it only seems to apply to us.

You can’t tell me a ground like St Andrews or Luton’s ground if fine but ours isn’t. It’s ridiculous.

 

[Sick Boy]

You can’t tell me a ground like St Andrews or Luton’s ground if fine but ours isn’t. It’s ridiculous.

Yeah, it’s just bullshit.

 

[MalcSB]

I will take 'SAG member posing undercover on SBT' for £10 please.

You've been ramming this very strange agenda and watching this thread like a hawk. You've jumped on any suggestions of moving the away fans and aren't keen on safe standing either. These latest posts seem a bit too revealing. I am deeply suspicious!

I can assure you I’m not a SAG member, related to one, a councillor etc.

I’m not in the least bit bothered about safe standing in blocks 13 to 16, row U upwards as per the proposal. If consulted on what is currently a fantasy proposal to move away supporters to the North Stand, I would object.

Edit - I am not ramming an agenda, I am opposing one.