Safe Standing

[cdbearsfan]

Good work Amfy.

[amfy]

I've been invited to attend a Parliamentary Round Table in London on this next Wednesday by the shadow MP for Sport!

Excitng times!

[Ad@m]

Well done amfy!

Hopefully it's not just a cynical bit of political point scoring and something might actually change off the back of it.

[SoccerHQ]

It's a start (again) but can only get excited when Tracey Crouch is inviting you around for a cuppa.

It's just opposition politics atm I think, rally around a popular cause without any chance of it being implemented in the near future in the top two divisions.

[Des Little]

Be careful, Amfy - the last time I attended a Round Table do I came away £50 worse off having sponsored a float in the Solihull Carnival

[oldtimernow]

I took Mrs Oldtimernow to Wembley for her first visit to the play off final and she loved it......right up to kick-off.

Not for the atmosphere or the  performance which she was reasonably happy with in the second half , but being just about 5'4" tall she was forced to stand by people around and in front of her standing up for the whole of the match.

She was upset that having paid for a seat she had to stand and I must agree with her , had we taken our granddaughter for her first visit as a six year old she would have seen very little.

I think that about 90-95% of our supporters were in a similar position, unsafely standing in a seated area. Safe standing for those who wish to stand would be a far better solution  because  those that want to sit would be able to do so. Those breaking the rules would be dealt with far more effectively whilst the standing areas would also be able to release their emotions.

Win Win all round!

[amfy]

There is a survey out on Twitter from the shadow minister which is a really intelligent set of questions which give the opportunity for points like oldtimernow's to be put forward.

I think the point that it's for people who want to sit as well is a really important one to get heard loud and clear.

Tracey Crouch made an argument that lots of people want a mix of sitting and standing. Well that isn't available in the current situation either, unless you count the vaguely defined 'moments of high excitement' ruling. At the same time, I pointed out that my 82 year old dad doesn't mind if he is sitting or standing - he just doesn't want to have to keep getting up and down!

I don't know how to transfer the link - I can't seem to carry anything across to H&V on my iPad, but I am sure someone can do it.

Like with the petition, we have done a lot of surveys before - but we are now into 'real deal' territory. It's about to be debated in parliament later this month - let's make sure our representatives know what the arguments are.

[PeterWithesShin]

Beeb

A large majority of fans want the choice of safe standing in football stadiums and almost half say they would go to more matches as a result, according to an English Football League survey of more than 33,000 people.

In total, 94% of respondents want to choose between sitting and standing in safe, licensed areas.

Safe standing was most popular with those aged between 18 and 34.

The EFL says the survey will "inform" this month's debate in Parliament.

After 110,000 people signed a petition on safe standing in the Premier League and Championship, a debate at Westminster on the subject in England's top two divisions was triggered for 25 June.

Overall, the EFL's survey - said to have received the highest response of any of their campaigns - showed that 69% of the 33,000 would prefer to stand, while 22% would rather be seated.

Standing in English football's top two divisions was outlawed by the Football Spectators' Act in 1989.

It came following recommendations made in the Taylor Report into the Hillsborough disaster, which claimed the lives of 96 Liverpool fans.

Earlier this year, the government said there were no plans to change the all-seater policy after West Brom had a safe standing proposal rejected.

In April, the Premier League asked for more evidence before it could be allowed at top-flight stadiums.

The EFL survey was undertaken in conjunction with the Football Supporters' Federation and is said to have been "specifically designed to fully understand the views of fans of EFL clubs".

The Football Supporters' Federation recently said that sports minister Tracey Crouch was "declaring war on fans" by turning down safe standing.

EFL chief executive Shaun Harvey said the findings of their survey showed that a change in legislation could also help clubs "increase revenue from gate receipts".

"We stated at the outset that we wanted this survey to provide government with a clear indication of the strength of feeling amongst those supporters who attend matches every season," said Harvey.

"The response could not be clearer.

"With nearly half of all fans claiming they would attend more games if licensed standing was available, this campaign demonstrates how standing could play a significant role in boosting attendances, particularly with the under-35s demographic - a group of supporters that have a significant number of other options to consider when determining whether they will or will not attend a match."

Sports minister Crouch has previously said she was "grateful" for fans "expressing their views on this issue".

[PeterWithesShin]

Is this the survey you mean Amfy?

http://www.drrosena.co.uk/safestanding.html

[PeterWithesShin]

Or it could be this one that produced these results?

https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/stand-up-for-choice-results-2018.pdf

[amfy]

Is this the survey you mean Amfy?

http://www.drrosena.co.uk/safestanding.html

This one - Dr Rosena is the shadow minister - it's her survey.

Thank you!

[oldtimernow]

 From my twitter feed
Rumours are that Ministers are considering postponing the Safe Standing review - this can't happen. The Government needs to listen to Labour's @DrRosena and back #SafeStanding.
pic.twitter.com/xTBUNoizHH

[PeterWithesShin]

Beeb

The Football Association has lent its support to safe standing at football grounds in England if there is "clear evidence that satisfies authorities".

The Premier League and EFL have also said they would support clubs' choice to install safe standing in the top two tiers of English football.

A government review is ongoing with a conclusion expected by the end of 2018.

Standing in English football's top two divisions was outlawed by the Football Spectators' Act in 1989.

It came following recommendations made in the Taylor Report into the Hillsborough disaster, which claimed the lives of 96 Liverpool fans.

An FA spokesperson said: "The FA supported the announcement from Sports Minister Tracey Crouch in June to conduct an external analysis of evidence in relation to the all-seater policy".

The statement added that the FA "supports clubs and leagues in having the option to choose whether they wish to provide standing options for supporters should there be clear evidence that satisfies the authorities over safety and security".

Support from fans has been growing for safe standing in recent years, with Celtic already adopting rail seating at their Celtic Park stadium.

In a recent survey run by the EFL, 94% of the 33,000 respondents said fans should be allowed to choose whether they wanted to stand or sit at games.

And in a Premier League survey, 70% of fans who attended games agreed in principle that standing should be offered as a choice.

Sports Minister Tracey Crouch said her "mind was open" to safe standing during a parliamentary debate in June after apologising for saying only a "vocal minority" wanted standing areas.

The Football Supporters' Federation (FSF), which has been campaigning for the introduction of safe standing to combat the problem of people standing up in seats and potentially causing injury, said the FA's support was "hugely encouraging".

But FSF's Peter Daykin said the FA's stance was "not surprising" as fans at Wembley often stood during games. "The FA understands the issues all too well," he added.

"The government said it wouldn't move until all the football authorities spoke with one voice, which is understandable, but now they are, all eyes are on the review.

"We are happy for the government to take its time with the review. We want a thorough understanding of all the arguments and it's too important an issue to rush."