Kermit the Frog Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kermit the Frog Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marina's Rolls Royce Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 A rail seat is not suitable for stadiums but a shit piece of MDF bolted to a frame in the Williams is perfectly fine I believe you'll find the original embedded in a gashead following last season's JPT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richwwtk Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 The bold bit is the flaw in your cunning plan! At that point the relevant bodies would consider whether to allow it. That would not be quick. Even if they were minded to allow it, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport would then get involved and consider whether rail seating serves the intended purpose of the Football Spectators Act. Why there is the need for this to be done for rail seats when it is not for any other design of seat, you may well wonder. But that, unfortunately, is the procedure. So, I'm afraid the rail seats will be out of bounds for the Oldham game! It really does make me wonder! Who has decreed that a rail seat is not a seat? It is undeniably a seat and the default position should be that if we were to install it and call it a seat, use it as a seat and not allow standing ****il laws say otherwise) then it would be up to an official somewhere to try and argue that it wasn't a seat and they would just end up looking ridiculous. It's a seat, there isn't any more to it. Stop calling it a rail seat and just call it a seat. Problem solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kermit the Frog Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 It really does make me wonder! Who has decreed that a rail seat is not a seat? It is undeniably a seat and the default position should be that if we were to install it and call it a seat, use it as a seat and not allow standing ****il laws say otherwise) then it would be up to an official somewhere to try and argue that it wasn't a seat and they would just end up looking ridiculous. It's a seat, there isn't any more to it. Stop calling it a rail seat and just call it a seat. Problem solved. 'It's a seat with a high back, I don't know what the hell you are complaining about' I agree with your point, how the hell can you not call it a seat. It is such a joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welcome To The Jungle Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 So if we install them anyway we just carry on giving the bird to the authorities. When it goes to court you just show the judge how much safer they are and he/she agrees Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 I believe you'll find the original embedded in a gashead following last season's JPT There are more than one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTMS Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 In the new stadium survey that the Trust did in 2008, a majority of City fans and 81% of East End regulars called for the inclusion of safe standing (see Q12 here). I think from the popularity of the East End over recent years and the packed rear corner of the Williams this season, it is clear that a percentage of City fans like to stand - even when technically it is not allowed. The survey done back in 2008 and all other surveys done around the country at other clubs and on a national scale give every reason to believe that the appetite for standing would be even greater if fans knew that they would not be breaking any rules, would not therefore get any grief from stewards and would instead be valued and appreciated by their club for the contribution that they make to the stadium atmosphere. . That survey in 2008 clearly identifies that Bristol City fans are supportive of safe standing, not a desire to actually inhabit it. Other dynamics also should be considered why fans gather in stands and then choose to sit, or stand. The Williams is occupied E-F now due to A/ Price B/ A unique set of circumstances that meant there was no other alternative to use for fans as groups. E-F is not universally popular amongst those using it. It formerly lay universally unpopular = Nearly empty for an extended period. Now safe standing is not part of BS - BCFC's short term future do the Supporters Trust have any strategy regarding gauging Fans support for unreserved seating areas, location of unreserved areas, pricing etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Makes you wonder how the great Eastend backless chair, (a stool?) was waved through so easily. Would the club get permission now if it wasn't on the back (no pun intended) of Hillsborough and all that followed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC&T Board Members Blagdon red Posted October 29, 2014 Author SC&T Board Members Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Blagdon can clear it up, What you posted is correct for germany but I was under the impression in this country, we were aiming for 1 seat 1 fan regardless of which postion the seat in question was in, anyway we can all agree the law is an arse, as for standing I'm sure once all the works are done there will be a section where the stewards will look the other way while we stand, but the club can't be seen to be letting it happen, (much like the east end and upper williams now) Current regulations, i.e. 'The Green Guide', call for a maximum of 47 fans per 10 square metres on a conventional terrace. If you translate that to an area fitted with rail seats (where the seat is 460mm wide and the row 800mm deep) it works out at just under 1.8 fans per seat space. That's where the ratio of 1:1.8 that is often quoted comes from. However, that is, of course, merely applying the current regulations for an open terrace to a theoretical situation with rail seats. There are currently no rules for the latter. Even though you can use this ratio of 1:1.8 as a guide to the physical space that there might be for standing spectators in a rail seating area, the sums don't end there. You also have to bear in mind evacuation times, what number of fans the concourses are able to handle, how many loos there are, etc., etc. All of those things might bring the figure down below 1:1.8. On top of that comes the law. For as long as it requires a ground to provide "only seated accommodation", clearly that ground can't admit more spectators than it has seats, as otherwise not every spectator would be provided with "seated accommodation". So in that scenario the ratio has to be 1:1. Add to that political sensitity about overcrowding in football stadia and 1:1 is clearly the least contentious ratio to propose. In summary, then: theoretically 1:1.8 would be in line with current capacity calculations for traditional terracing, but in practice - for all the reasons outlined above - 1:1 is likely to be the ratio at any ground introducing rail seating in the near future, for the first few years at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Can a none football league club who wants to move to a new ground install safe standing seats? Just thinking about our northern brothers. If we took away the barrier to the safe standing seats, to the eyes of the authorities these suddenly become seats again. This is becoming bonkers again. We need to go to the European court of justice, find out if they are seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kermit the Frog Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Current regulations, i.e. 'The Green Guide', call for a maximum of 47 fans per 10 square metres on a conventional terrace. If you translate that to an area fitted with rail seats (where the seat is 460mm wide and the row 800mm deep) it works out at just under 1.8 fans per seat space. That's where the ratio of 1:1.8 that is often quoted comes from. However, that is, of course, merely applying the current regulations for an open terrace to a theoretical situation with rail seats. There are currently no rules for the latter. Even though you can use this ratio of 1:1.8 as a guide to the physical space that there might be for standing spectators in a rail seating area, the sums don't end there. You also have to bear in mind evacuation times, what number of fans the concourses are able to handle, how many loos there are, etc., etc. All of those things might bring the figure down below 1:1.8. On top of that comes the law. For as long as it requires a ground to provide "only seated accommodation", clearly that ground can't admit more spectators than it has seats, as otherwise not every spectator would be provided with "seated accommodation". So in that scenario the ratio has to be 1:1. Add to that political sensitity about overcrowding in football stadia and 1:1 is clearly the least contentious ratio to propose. In summary, then: theoretically 1:1.8 would be in line with current capacity calculations for traditional terracing, but in practice - for all the reasons outlined above - 1:1 is likely to be the ratio at any ground introducing rail seating in the near future, for the first few years at least. Better than nothing I suppose. When this finally gets given the nod, alongside the ability to work to a 1:1.8 ratio, the English mathcday experience will change dramatically IMO. It's all very frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 What hacks me off about this is that these policies were based on the lies told by the South Yorkshire police and confirmed by the West Midlands police, two of the most corrupt and dishonest institutions ever to infest this country Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Blagdon Red. Do you know what are the fire regulations on football stadium seats? We still have wooden seats, thousands of plastic seats and seats with padding. Aren't these more dangerous that safe standing seats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC&T Board Members Blagdon red Posted October 29, 2014 Author SC&T Board Members Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 A few answers to queries posted above: @WTMS_BCFC: As the decision has only just been taken not to install rail seats from the outset, we've not had a chance to sit down and discuss any strategy for gauging fans' support for unreserved seating areas, pricing etc. However, in our response to Bristol Sport's request for ideas on the redevelopment a couple of months ago, we did stress, for example, on pricing that we thought that South Stand prices should be at least 10% lower than the next cheapest in the ground, that prices for any 'singing section' in that stand for 2015/16 should be no more than the price for the current 'singing section' in the Williams and that South Stand prices should then be pegged for several years, while others rose gradually, in order to create a wider spread of prices in the ground as a whole. As you will have seen recently, we have also started to do a series of short online surveys about other aspects of the stadium redevelopment (e.g. this current one sent to our e-mail database contacts) and covering the aspects you mention would seem to be a useful thing to include in a future survey. Please drop us a line with any suggestions for questions you'd like us to consider including or come along to the next Club & Trust meeting to discuss this in person over a pint.@Threshing Red: Yes a non-Football-League club can install rail seats and use them either for standing or as seats. Don't know the fire regs in detail. But clearly the wooden and plastic seats must comply. Metal is, of course, even less inflammable.@Kermit the Frog: Yes, it's very frustrating! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohbasso Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 It does seem crazy that these seats aren't allowed, they fold up and down like normal seats, the club only plan to sell one ticket per seat, the only difference is they have a rail on the back of each row which makes them safer. When the stadiums finished there's going to be at least one part of the ground where people who want to stand will gather, how will the authorities be able to say people stood behind normal seats is safer? Rail seats even seem safer in seated areas as I'm sure I'm not the only one who's fallen over the seat in front celebrating an important goal?! (not that I'm suggesting fitting the whole stadium with them) Does anyone know the rules regarding rail seating in the rugby? Could the club not fit them and say the rugby fans can stand there but they'll politely ask the football fans to sit in them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rinkadink Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Does anyone know the rules regarding rail seating in the rugby? Could the club not fit them and say the rugby fans can stand there but they'll politely ask the football fans to sit in them? I haven't heard of any rules regarding rail seating in rugby at all. Far as I'm aware there aren't any that say no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahatma Coate Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 I suppose when it's badged as a VW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC&T Board Members Blagdon red Posted October 29, 2014 Author SC&T Board Members Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 It does seem crazy that these seats aren't allowed, they fold up and down like normal seats, the club only plan to sell one ticket per seat, the only difference is they have a rail on the back of each row which makes them safer. When the stadiums finished there's going to be at least one part of the ground where people who want to stand will gather, how will the authorities be able to say people stood behind normal seats is safer? Rail seats even seem safer in seated areas as I'm sure I'm not the only one who's fallen over the seat in front celebrating an important goal?! (not that I'm suggesting fitting the whole stadium with them) Does anyone know the rules regarding rail seating in the rugby? Could the club not fit them and say the rugby fans can stand there but they'll politely ask the football fans to sit in them? That was exactly what was being proposed: use them as standing for rugby and seats for football (see document here). The authorities have no problem with the rugby element of that. However, when the ball is round instead of oval... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screech Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 That was exactly what was being proposed: use them as standing for rugby and seats for football (see document here). The authorities have no problem with the rugby element of that. However, when the ball is round instead of oval... So you can actually put them in the ground? If I had the money I would put them in and go from there, the capacity in the ground once finished would mean we can lose the top part of the South Stand while the ********* argue a moot point in the European Courts. I would bet it would be thrown out for wasting their time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambridge Batch Red Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 So you can actually put them in the ground? If I had the money I would put them in and go from there, the capacity in the ground once finished would mean we can lose the top part of the South Stand while the ********* argue a moot point in the European Courts. I would bet it would be thrown out for wasting their time. You can't go to the European courts until there has been a judicial review in this country. That hasn't happened. Yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTMS Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 A few answers to queries posted above: @WTMS_BCFC: As the decision has only just been taken not to install rail seats from the outset, we've not had a chance to sit down and discuss any strategy for gauging fans' support for unreserved seating areas, pricing etc. However, in our response to Bristol Sport's request for ideas on the redevelopment a couple of months ago, we did stress, for example, on pricing that we thought that South Stand prices should be at least 10% lower than the next cheapest in the ground, that prices for any 'singing section' in that stand for 2015/16 should be no more than the price for the current 'singing section' in the Williams and that South Stand prices should then be pegged for several years, while others rose gradually, in order to create a wider spread of prices in the ground as a whole. As you will have seen recently, we have also started to do a series of short online surveys about other aspects of the stadium redevelopment (e.g. this current one sent to our e-mail database contacts) and covering the aspects you mention would seem to be a useful thing to include in a future survey. Please drop us a line with any suggestions for questions you'd like us to consider including or come along to the next Club & Trust meeting to discuss this in person over a pint.@Threshing Red: Yes a non-Football-League club can install rail seats and use them either for standing or as seats. Don't know the fire regs in detail. But clearly the wooden and plastic seats must comply. Metal is, of course, even less inflammable.@Kermit the Frog: Yes, it's very frustrating! What is the position of the ST regarding the clubs failure and refusal to release images of the South Stand design? Would it not make sense to make decisions regarding price etc in unison with fans being able to see the design? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC&T Board Members Blagdon red Posted October 30, 2014 Author SC&T Board Members Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I can't speak on behalf of the SC&T, but personally I find the delay disappointing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixtyseconds Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Blagdon Red this UNSEEN South stand. Is it really going to be the right terrain for chaps shouting and standing/ cheap tickets, right between the Community trust kids parties and Corporate boxes left/right side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Can't we ask our German cousins if their authorities recognise their rail seats as seats? If they do can't we pass this information to our authorities? Why do I get the feeling that someone in the football authority are pulling strings for this not to happen. I think the club should just put them in for the rugby anyway. Then see what will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC&T Board Members Blagdon red Posted October 30, 2014 Author SC&T Board Members Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Can't we ask our German cousins if their authorities recognise their rail seats as seats? If they do can't we pass this information to our authorities? Why do I get the feeling that someone in the football authority are pulling strings for this not to happen. I think the club should just put them in for the rugby anyway. Then see what will happen. UEFA and FIFA both recognise them as seats. The UK authorities are well aware of this. If you'd like to underwrite the costs of fighting the legal challenge that would be the undoubted consequence of following your suggestion, I'd sure the club would be happy to hear from you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screech Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 UEFA and FIFA both recognise them as seats. The UK authorities are well aware of this. If you'd like to underwrite the costs of fighting the legal challenge that would be the undoubted consequence of following your suggestion, I'd sure the club would be happy to hear from you. If it's installed for Rugby why would there be any legal cost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTMS Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I can't speak on behalf of the SC&T, but personally I find the delay disappointing. The lack of promised open engagement and consultation regarding the South stand has also been very disappointing. Doesn't it make more sense now there will be no safe standing in the South stand for the SC&T to ask the club again to finally release images of the design so fans can be fully informed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohbasso Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 If they did get installed for the rugby but that area was closed for football matches surely anyone would have a hard job to argue that they are only safe depending on the shape of the ball on the pitch... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.