The Hillsborough Family Support Group Against Safe Standing.

[jrb]

I'm sorry, but who the f*** do they think they are?

One can sympathise with their on-going plight, but that shouldn't mean they can 'still force' their outdated agenda on those football fans that want safe standing introduced.

Our football clubs should remain all-seater stadiums.
"People always say they have standing areas in Germany but we don't play any part over what happens in that country - we just believe there's no such thing as safe standing in this country.

Premier League chief spokesman Dan Johnson told Press Association Sport: "Our view is that the benefits of all-seater stadia far outweigh the return of standing areas.
"They have led to more women and more children attending the games and no matter how safe standing can be made, seating is always safer.
"We will not be encouraging the Government to change the law."

Hallo Dan. So it's safer to currently stand in seated areas, which is happening at almost every ground, every week, up and down the country, is it? Also. We are talking about one stand or one section in one stand to be given over to safe standing, not the whole stadium. Talk about burying your head in the sand.

Full article.

Proposals to bring back standing areas at football grounds have been blasted by the Hillsborough Family Support Group (HFSG).
The Football Supporters' Federation (FSF) have launched an online petition calling for the return of standing areas in the top two divisions of English football.
The campaign already looks to be foundering however, with the HFSG and Premier League opposing the move, and the Government saying there has been no compelling case to bring back terraces.
Standing at matches in the top two divisions was banned following the Hillsborough disaster in 1989, and HFSG chairman Margaret Aspinall said: "The Hillsborough Family Support Group are totally against any form of standing whatsoever. We are absolutely against it and always will be.
"Our football clubs should remain all-seater stadiums.
"People always say they have standing areas in Germany but we don't play any part over what happens in that country - we just believe there's no such thing as safe standing in this country.
"We will not be encouraging the Government to change the law."
The issue of allowing some standing areas has been revisited a number of times since all-seater stadiums became compulsory in 1994. Kate Hoey tried to back a scheme when she was sports minister in 2001 but the then Government blocked it.
The FSF held a meeting on Monday with representatives from the police, Government and football authorities.
FSF chairman Malcolm Clarke argued that many fans already stand all match despite having seats, which is viewed as a safety risk.
Clarke said: "Fans do believe they have lost something in the move to all-seating. We will be doing further research to respond to the concerns of those who are not yet convinced."
Sports minister Hugh Robertson said he would examine the evidence for safe standing but played down any likelihood of a change to the law.
The first time that a significant accident or crowd trouble took place on a terrace would have major repercussions. Robertson told the meeting: "The minister's head would be on a spike on Tower Bridge before he could draft a resignation letter."
The FSF say safe standing areas can be convertible to and from seating to allow Champions League matches to be played in all-seater grounds.
They also argue that ticket prices for standing areas are lower than in seated areas.
The Premier League insist that all-seater stadia are safe and better for fans.
Premier League chief spokesman Dan Johnson told Press Association Sport: "Our view is that the benefits of all-seater stadia far outweigh the return of standing areas.
"They have led to more women and more children attending the games and no matter how safe standing can be made, seating is always safer.
"We will not be encouraging the Government to change the law."

 

[Anonymous]

Must have been an awful. I couldn't even begin to imagine so it's easy to understand their opposition.

That said, if you look at the events of that day, if there had been no fencing at the front of the stand, the crowd would have just spilled onto the pitch rather than the horrendous crush that followed.

Interesting that it is being revisited, but I cannot ever envisage it changing.

 

[Sheriff Fatman]

Standing per se was not dangerous.

Standing in caged paddocks was unsafe.

Standing in open ends like The Kop, The Kippax, stretford end, North Bank etc was safe. (unless you were sussed as an away fan!!).

 

[im_still_here]

Standing per se was not dangerous.

Standing in caged paddocks was unsafe.

Standing in open ends like The Kop, The Kippax, stretford end, North Bank etc was safe. (unless you were sussed as an away fan!!).

 

[Squatter]

What do you mean "who the fuck do they think they are"?

They've just given their opinion on the situation, which is fully understandable considering they lost close relatives. Get a grip pal

 

[marco]

Standing per se was not dangerous.

Standing in caged paddocks was unsafe.

Standing in open ends like The Kop, The Kippax, stretford end, North Bank etc was safe. (unless you were sussed as an away fan!!).

correct, whoever came up with the hidious idea of puting people in cages,i know violence wasnt good in those days but it was nothing more than treating people like animals

 

[fulhamroad22]

SInce when have the PL cared about children attending games? I don't think it's standing or seating that dictates how many children go, it's the outrageous prices at various grounds.

The ideal scenario for me would be one safe standing stand (where the atmosphere is centred i.e The Kop, Kippax, Matthew Harding Stand, Stretford End, Holte End) and three fully seated stands.

 

[gio's side step]

I'm sorry, but who the f*** do they think they are?

One can sympathise with their on-going plight, but that shouldn't mean they can 'still force' their outdated agenda on those football fans that want safe standing introduced.

Our football clubs should remain all-seater stadiums.
"People always say they have standing areas in Germany but we don't play any part over what happens in that country - we just believe there's no such thing as safe standing in this country.

Premier League chief spokesman Dan Johnson told Press Association Sport: "Our view is that the benefits of all-seater stadia far outweigh the return of standing areas.
"They have led to more women and more children attending the games and no matter how safe standing can be made, seating is always safer.
"We will not be encouraging the Government to change the law."

Hallo Dan. So it's safer to currently stand in seated areas, which is happening at almost every ground, every week, up and down the country, is it? Also. We are talking about one stand or one section in one stand to be given over to safe standing, not the whole stadium. Talk about burying your head in the sand.

Full article.

Proposals to bring back standing areas at football grounds have been blasted by the Hillsborough Family Support Group (HFSG).
The Football Supporters' Federation (FSF) have launched an online petition calling for the return of standing areas in the top two divisions of English football.
The campaign already looks to be foundering however, with the HFSG and Premier League opposing the move, and the Government saying there has been no compelling case to bring back terraces.
Standing at matches in the top two divisions was banned following the Hillsborough disaster in 1989, and HFSG chairman Margaret Aspinall said: "The Hillsborough Family Support Group are totally against any form of standing whatsoever. We are absolutely against it and always will be.
"Our football clubs should remain all-seater stadiums.
"People always say they have standing areas in Germany but we don't play any part over what happens in that country - we just believe there's no such thing as safe standing in this country.
"We will not be encouraging the Government to change the law."
The issue of allowing some standing areas has been revisited a number of times since all-seater stadiums became compulsory in 1994. Kate Hoey tried to back a scheme when she was sports minister in 2001 but the then Government blocked it.
The FSF held a meeting on Monday with representatives from the police, Government and football authorities.
FSF chairman Malcolm Clarke argued that many fans already stand all match despite having seats, which is viewed as a safety risk.
Clarke said: "Fans do believe they have lost something in the move to all-seating. We will be doing further research to respond to the concerns of those who are not yet convinced."
Sports minister Hugh Robertson said he would examine the evidence for safe standing but played down any likelihood of a change to the law.
The first time that a significant accident or crowd trouble took place on a terrace would have major repercussions. Robertson told the meeting: "The minister's head would be on a spike on Tower Bridge before he could draft a resignation letter."
The FSF say safe standing areas can be convertible to and from seating to allow Champions League matches to be played in all-seater grounds.
They also argue that ticket prices for standing areas are lower than in seated areas.
The Premier League insist that all-seater stadia are safe and better for fans.
Premier League chief spokesman Dan Johnson told Press Association Sport: "Our view is that the benefits of all-seater stadia far outweigh the return of standing areas.
"They have led to more women and more children attending the games and no matter how safe standing can be made, seating is always safer.
"We will not be encouraging the Government to change the law."

Mate, the response of the authorities is not concerned with safety. Don't be fooled into that<br /><br />-- Wed Mar 23, 2011 7:08 pm --<br /><br />

What do you mean "who the fuck do they think they are"?

They've just given their opinion on the situation, which is fully understandable considering they lost close relatives. Get a grip pal

I agree, 'who the fuck do they think they are' is not necessary. However, this Hillsborough issue is never put into context within the actual debate raised by the FSF. No one is suggesting people forget about Hillsborough. But the Taylor Report itself concluded, Hillsborough was not a result of standing. Furthermore, that standing is not 'intrinsically' unsafe. I appreciate arguments can be emotive, but one of the problems, is that the debate never logically gets addressed, if people mention the word Hillsborough without context or rationale

 

[ancoats]

what could they do if everybody was to stand up at games
they could not kick out everybody

the game needs the fans end of
without the fans what would the clubs do for money
if everybody got behind it then it would happen next season

safe standing is the way forward in england
even if you had the corners levels it would be a start

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The clue is in the title - SAFE standing. I.e. not unsafe.

The sad truth is that the problems at Hillsborough weren't caused by standing per se but by a combination of factors including poor planning and then the police failure to deal with the crowd build-up caused by that poor planning. Finally, poor crowd management at the entrance to the Leppings Lane end led to the tragedy.

Yes - the fact that people were standing was a contributory factor but it wasn't the cause of the disaster. People stand at football matches, as well as concerts and other events. It's a fact of life so let's make sure they do it safely.