FSF Safe Standing Petition

[bluej]

Attitudes have changed?
Really?
I think if people were to ask Mario if attitudes had changed he might have something to say.
If people were to ask our SWP if he thinks attitudes have changed he might be able to give examples of where it hasn't.
The game between Scotland and Brazil last week had an incident of a young German throwing a banana at Neymar so the people thinking hooliganism was dead and buried it appears that the so called "English Disease" is alive and kicking in the fatherland.
The "English Disease" is only under control cos of seating.
The fact that the price has gone up is hardly relevant.

There's a fairly big difference between hooliganism and racism though.

[carl_feedthegoat]

Seating has FUCKALL to do with the fall of hooliganism..........the reason we dont see this any more is down to the amount of CCTV coverage that is installed in every ground and on every corner street to an extent......we are the big brother of the world - if you want to fight you will be caught.

This is why we see little to no trouble at matches.

[bigblue]

Seating has FUCKALL to do with the fall of hooliganism..........the reason we dont see this any more is down to the amount of CCTV coverage that is installed in every ground and on every corner street to an extent......we are the big brother of the world - if you want to fight you will be caught.

This is why we see little to no trouble at matches.

Plus the fact that any suspicion of disorder (Scotland v Brasil) is made into world wide new coverage. Football has marketed itself upscale to make more money. Hooliganism has no place in the current business model. Standing sections remind people of the past and the violence associated with it (for better or for worse). While I'd love to see standing sections again, it just doesn't fit into the current brand image and marketing plan

[Rag_hater]

Attitudes have changed?
Really?
I think if people were to ask Mario if attitudes had changed he might have something to say.
If people were to ask our SWP if he thinks attitudes have changed he might be able to give examples of where it hasn't.
The game between Scotland and Brazil last week had an incident of a young German throwing a banana at Neymar so the people thinking hooliganism was dead and buried it appears that the so called "English Disease" is alive and kicking in the fatherland.
The "English Disease" is only under control cos of seating.
The fact that the price has gone up is hardly relevant.

So, from one German throwing a banana, you somehow come to that reasoning? Here mate, the reality:

after police later revealed the fruit was thrown by a German tourist who had "no racist intent."

I do wonder sometimes!

Yeah he was obviously trying to get some Magnesium in his body hence having a banana.
I was more trying to highlight attitudes.
Bananas were thrown in the past along with some very unsavory chants from the crowd,and they are still being thrown now.
The thing that has changed is being able to catch these fools cos the people whose job it is can see what seat they were sat in.

[Ted Hughes]

Attitudes have changed?
Really?
I think if people were to ask Mario if attitudes had changed he might have something to say.
If people were to ask our SWP if he thinks attitudes have changed he might be able to give examples of where it hasn't.
The game between Scotland and Brazil last week had an incident of a young German throwing a banana at Neymar so the people thinking hooliganism was dead and buried it appears that the so called "English Disease" is alive and kicking in the fatherland.
The "English Disease" is only under control cos of seating.
The fact that the price has gone up is hardly relevant.

So, from one German throwing a banana, you somehow come to that reasoning? Here mate, the reality:

after police later revealed the fruit was thrown by a German tourist who had "no racist intent."

I do wonder sometimes!

Yeah he was obviously trying to get some Magnesium in his body hence having a banana.
I was more trying to highlight attitudes.
Bananas were thrown in the past along with some very unsavory chants from the crowd,and they are still being thrown now.
The thing that has changed is being able to catch these fools cos the people whose job it is can see what seat they were sat in.

How come rags fans can regularly let off flares in seated areas then?

[Rag_hater]

Attitudes have changed?
Really?
I think if people were to ask Mario if attitudes had changed he might have something to say.
If people were to ask our SWP if he thinks attitudes have changed he might be able to give examples of where it hasn't.
The game between Scotland and Brazil last week had an incident of a young German throwing a banana at Neymar so the people thinking hooliganism was dead and buried it appears that the so called "English Disease" is alive and kicking in the fatherland.
The "English Disease" is only under control cos of seating.
The fact that the price has gone up is hardly relevant.

So, from one German throwing a banana, you somehow come to that reasoning? Here mate, the reality:

after police later revealed the fruit was thrown by a German tourist who had "no racist intent."

I do wonder sometimes!

Yeah he was obviously trying to get some Magnesium in his body hence having a banana.
I was more trying to highlight attitudes.
Bananas were thrown in the past along with some very unsavory chants from the crowd,and they are still being thrown now.
The thing that has changed is being able to catch these fools cos the people whose job it is can see what seat they were sat in.

How come rags fans can regularly let off flares in seated areas then?

Cos they are knob's.
Maybe they have found a way to get round any ban the get.
Do you know what happened to the fan who let of a flare?
Were any complaints made to the authorites.
Did you and got no joy?

[Ted Hughes]

The rags set off flares quite a bit & get away with it and also they had to use pictures in newspapers etc to try & identify the various troublemakers at the semi rather than arresting them at the ground.

Therefore the premise that seating prevents such behaviour is untrue.

If people wanted to kick off with each other badly enough, it would be much easier to do it nowardays, just piling through a bunch of stewards etc rather than having to get over a metal fence with spikes on the top whilst being hit by police trucheons as was the case in the bad old days of terracing. The only reason it doesn't kick off so much now, is that people aren't so keen to do it. They like to pretend instead.

[Rag_hater]

The rags set off flares quite a bit & get away with it and also they had to use pictures in newspapers etc to try & identify the various troublemakers at the semi rather than arresting them at the ground.

Therefore the premise that seating prevents such behaviour is untrue.

If people wanted to kick off with each other badly enough, it would be much easier to do it nowardays, just piling through a bunch of stewards etc rather than having to get over a metal fence with spikes on the top whilst being hit by police trucheons as was the case in the bad old days of terracing. The only reason it doesn't kick off so much now, is that people aren't so keen to do it. They like to pretend instead.

I think there are some valid points in what you say.However I think the fact that people are now far more easily identified because of where they sit they know that there will be repercussions after their event of foolishness if they do more than pretend.As you say it might be easier to do it now but it has become easier to find people and punish them I think it is largley down to seating.

[Ted Hughes]

The rags set off flares quite a bit & get away with it and also they had to use pictures in newspapers etc to try & identify the various troublemakers at the semi rather than arresting them at the ground.

Therefore the premise that seating prevents such behaviour is untrue.

If people wanted to kick off with each other badly enough, it would be much easier to do it nowardays, just piling through a bunch of stewards etc rather than having to get over a metal fence with spikes on the top whilst being hit by police trucheons as was the case in the bad old days of terracing. The only reason it doesn't kick off so much now, is that people aren't so keen to do it. They like to pretend instead.

I think there are some valid points in what you say.However I think the fact that people are now far more easily identified because of where they sit they know that there will be repercussions after their event of foolishness if they do more than pretend.As you say it might be easier to do it now but it has become easier to find people and punish them I think it is largley down to seating.

If a seasonticket holder kicks off in an argument about pies they'll prpbably throw him out but that's what they like; easy targets.

In the old days at Maine road, once proper segregation was brought in, there were usually fights in the Platt Lane seats, some big ones. It was easier to have a punch up there than in the Kippax. At the 1-5 derby, where did the rags choose to kick off? The North stand seats.

Nowardays, they have cameras etc but they had them at Maine Rd when Millwall fans ripped up the seats & threw them at people. All the police were interested in doing was getting them home & minimising damage from both sides on the way.

In the old days, football was cheap. Anyone who fancied a punchup could stroll over to a game, pissed out of his brains, & join in. I know Utd fans who'd go to City to fight with Liverpool; proper hardcore Stretford End hoolies; they'd just go with their City mates from the pub because it would be fun. Barely any of them even goes to OT now; ever. They watch it on TV.

Now it costs a fucking fortune. Unless you're really desperate, it's much cheaper to have a fight somewhere else.

That's why there's less hoolliganism inside grounds.

[Andy, lincs]

Lets have it straight, the Hillbrough tragedy, while in no small part the fault of the policing could also be attributed to Liverpool fans hellbent on getting into a ground when it was plainly obvious they couldn't. They did it at the Champions League final in Turkey too to such an extent that genuine ticket holders couldn't get in the ground as it had been filled by fans who shouldn't have been there.

Would someone plese tell me what the difference between a safe standing area in a ground is and standing up with a seat behind you all game is anyway. Plenty of fans in the premier league stand all game regardless and that 18inch piece of plastic behind them makes no difference. We really should be looking to the Bundesliga for the example of how to establish, maintain and police safe standing areas.

[Ted Hughes]

Lets have it straight, the Hillbrough tragedy, while in no small part the fault of the policing could also be attributed to Liverpool fans hellbent on getting into a ground when it was plainly obvious they couldn't. They did it at the Champions League final in Turkey too to such an extent that genuine ticket holders couldn't get in the ground as it had been filled by fans who shouldn't have been there.

Would someone plese tell me what the difference between a safe standing area in a ground is and standing up with a seat behind you all game is anyway. Plenty of fans in the premier league stand all game regardless and that 18inch piece of plastic behind them makes no difference. We really should be looking to the Bundesliga for the example of how to establish, maintain and police safe standing areas.

Those kind of small animal pen type areas were always more uncomfortable & potentially dangerous than the big standing areas as the crowd couldn't move sideways to disperse pressure. The one at Sheffield Utd was fucking horrible as well. Add to that, incompetent police treating every fan like an animal & a bunch of the most violent, obnoxious, drunken, selfish, scum on the planet mixed in with a bunch of harmless Liverpool football fans & you get Hillsborough.

[Piccsnumberoneblue]

Lets have it straight, the Hillbrough tragedy, while in no small part the fault of the policing could also be attributed to Liverpool fans hellbent on getting into a ground when it was plainly obvious they couldn't. They did it at the Champions League final in Turkey too to such an extent that genuine ticket holders couldn't get in the ground as it had been filled by fans who shouldn't have been there.

Would someone plese tell me what the difference between a safe standing area in a ground is and standing up with a seat behind you all game is anyway. Plenty of fans in the premier league stand all game regardless and that 18inch piece of plastic behind them makes no difference. We really should be looking to the Bundesliga for the example of how to establish, maintain and police safe standing areas.

That is so simplistic and wrong Andy.You should read up on Hillsborough to know the real causes.

[Rag_hater]

The rags set off flares quite a bit & get away with it and also they had to use pictures in newspapers etc to try & identify the various troublemakers at the semi rather than arresting them at the ground.

Therefore the premise that seating prevents such behaviour is untrue.

If people wanted to kick off with each other badly enough, it would be much easier to do it nowardays, just piling through a bunch of stewards etc rather than having to get over a metal fence with spikes on the top whilst being hit by police trucheons as was the case in the bad old days of terracing. The only reason it doesn't kick off so much now, is that people aren't so keen to do it. They like to pretend instead.

I think there are some valid points in what you say.However I think the fact that people are now far more easily identified because of where they sit they know that there will be repercussions after their event of foolishness if they do more than pretend.As you say it might be easier to do it now but it has become easier to find people and punish them I think it is largley down to seating.

If a seasonticket holder kicks off in an argument about pies they'll prpbably throw him out but that's what they like; easy targets.

In the old days at Maine road, once proper segregation was brought in, there were usually fights in the Platt Lane seats, some big ones. It was easier to have a punch up there than in the Kippax. At the 1-5 derby, where did the rags choose to kick off? The North stand seats.

Nowardays, they have cameras etc but they had them at Maine Rd when Millwall fans ripped up the seats & threw them at people. All the police were interested in doing was getting them home & minimising damage from both sides on the way.

In the old days, football was cheap. Anyone who fancied a punchup could stroll over to a game, pissed out of his brains, & join in. I know Utd fans who'd go to City to fight with Liverpool; proper hardcore Stretford End hoolies; they'd just go with their City mates from the pub because it would be fun. Barely any of them even goes to OT now; ever. They watch it on TV.

Now it costs a fucking fortune. Unless you're really desperate, it's much cheaper to have a fight somewhere else.

That's why there's less hoolliganism inside grounds.

I'm not being sarcy.I didn't know much of that stuff,thanks for telling me.If cameras didn't work then and it appears that price is the factor that puts an end to it then it seems the solution is to price all the daft fuckers out of it.
Having a scrap is a part of growing up(is that the bit about fights in the Platt lane seats.City against City) for some though and if the hoolies of yestayear have taught their sons that the footy is a good place to let of this frustration then the attitude has been passed on.
It seems to me that until our generation start teaching our kids that things are better now with the progress we have made towards changing attitudes and proceedures they will hark back to how things were when there was the "atmosphere"

[john68]

@ Rag Hater,
May I pick you up on the point about teaching the next generation mate. Historically there has always been a perception by the older generation that the younger kids growing up are less disciplined, more aggresive and lazier than they were. Following it to its natural and logical conclusion, if thet were really true, society would have degenerated into a morass of chaos many years ago. It is truly not the case.
Youth crime has always existed. 150 years ago, walking safely down Deansgate was a lottery. It is now quite a safe place. the 50s had the teddy boys, the 60s, Mods, Rockers and Hell's Angels. The 70s, its BootBoys and Skinheads...and so it went. Despite what the tabloids would have us think, most of this younger generation are just as ambitious, hard working, responsible and fine citizens as we were. In my cab, I see far less street violence than i did 31 years ago and get far less trouble.
Don't fall for the myth of broken Britain, they said the same in the 50s and 7os and 80s.

[bluej]

@ Rag Hater,
May I pick you up on the point about teaching the next generation mate. Historically there has always been a perception by the older generation that the younger kids growing up are less disciplined, more aggresive and lazier than they were. Following it to its natural and logical conclusion, if thet were really true, society would have degenerated into a morass of chaos many years ago. It is truly not the case.
Youth crime has always existed. 150 years ago, walking safely down Deansgate was a lottery. It is now quite a safe place. the 50s had the teddy boys, the 60s, Mods, Rockers and Hell's Angels. The 70s, its BootBoys and Skinheads...and so it went. Despite what the tabloids would have us think, most of this younger generation are just as ambitious, hard working, responsible and fine citizens as we were. In my cab, I see far less street violence than i did 31 years ago and get far less trouble.
[highlight]Don't fall for the myth of broken Britain,[/highlight] they said the same in the 50s and 7os and 80s.

You should join us snotty uni lot in off topic more often John ;-)

[Ted Hughes]

The rags set off flares quite a bit & get away with it and also they had to use pictures in newspapers etc to try & identify the various troublemakers at the semi rather than arresting them at the ground.

Therefore the premise that seating prevents such behaviour is untrue.

If people wanted to kick off with each other badly enough, it would be much easier to do it nowardays, just piling through a bunch of stewards etc rather than having to get over a metal fence with spikes on the top whilst being hit by police trucheons as was the case in the bad old days of terracing. The only reason it doesn't kick off so much now, is that people aren't so keen to do it. They like to pretend instead.

I think there are some valid points in what you say.However I think the fact that people are now far more easily identified because of where they sit they know that there will be repercussions after their event of foolishness if they do more than pretend.As you say it might be easier to do it now but it has become easier to find people and punish them I think it is largley down to seating.

If a seasonticket holder kicks off in an argument about pies they'll prpbably throw him out but that's what they like; easy targets.

In the old days at Maine road, once proper segregation was brought in, there were usually fights in the Platt Lane seats, some big ones. It was easier to have a punch up there than in the Kippax. At the 1-5 derby, where did the rags choose to kick off? The North stand seats.

Nowardays, they have cameras etc but they had them at Maine Rd when Millwall fans ripped up the seats & threw them at people. All the police were interested in doing was getting them home & minimising damage from both sides on the way.

In the old days, football was cheap. Anyone who fancied a punchup could stroll over to a game, pissed out of his brains, & join in. I know Utd fans who'd go to City to fight with Liverpool; proper hardcore Stretford End hoolies; they'd just go with their City mates from the pub because it would be fun. Barely any of them even goes to OT now; ever. They watch it on TV.

Now it costs a fucking fortune. Unless you're really desperate, it's much cheaper to have a fight somewhere else.

That's why there's less hoolliganism inside grounds.

I'm not being sarcy.I didn't know much of that stuff,thanks for telling me.If cameras didn't work then and it appears that price is the factor that puts an end to it then it seems the solution is to price all the daft fuckers out of it.
Having a scrap is a part of growing up(is that the bit about fights in the Platt lane seats.City against City) for some though and if the hoolies of yestayear have taught their sons that the footy is a good place to let of this frustration then the attitude has been passed on.
It seems to me that until our generation start teaching our kids that things are better now with the progress we have made towards changing attitudes and proceedures they will hark back to how things were when there was the "atmosphere"

It's only my opinion but I recon the pricing has killed most of it; there are still hooligans there who would fight if there were no stewards but they will of course be there mainly because they want to see a game of football rather than going mainly to get pissed & have a fight, as many used to when it was cheap!

[BlueinBosnia]

Would someone plese tell me what the difference between a safe standing area in a ground is and standing up with a seat behind you all game is anyway. Plenty of fans in the premier league stand all game regardless and that 18inch piece of plastic behind them makes no difference. We really should be looking to the Bundesliga for the example of how to establish, maintain and police safe standing areas.

I think the main difference is that safe standing would ensure that those that want to sit down don't have their view obscured by people in front who stand all game. I think that the FSF's plan (although I'm not 100% sure on this) is for the safe standing areas to have 'token' seats, so people can sit down, and are given an allocated place, but to allow them to stand without contravening any rules or disturbing other fans.

[Rag_hater]

@ Rag Hater,
May I pick you up on the point about teaching the next generation mate. Historically there has always been a perception by the older generation that the younger kids growing up are less disciplined, more aggresive and lazier than they were. Following it to its natural and logical conclusion, if thet were really true, society would have degenerated into a morass of chaos many years ago. It is truly not the case.
Youth crime has always existed. 150 years ago, walking safely down Deansgate was a lottery. It is now quite a safe place. the 50s had the teddy boys, the 60s, Mods, Rockers and Hell's Angels. The 70s, its BootBoys and Skinheads...and so it went. Despite what the tabloids would have us think, most of this younger generation are just as ambitious, hard working, responsible and fine citizens as we were. In my cab, I see far less street violence than i did 31 years ago and get far less trouble.
Don't fall for the myth of broken Britain, they said the same in the 50s and 7os and 80s.

Your right the broken Brittain line was probably a bit extreme and you probably have a point about the youth of today being no worse than we were.In my own case my kids are probably better behaved than I was.
But in homing in on the cosier parts of the Britain of yesteryear, it is easy to ignore the horrors that have gone. Straight white men are especially vulnerable to this sort of amnesia.
It would be idiotic to claim that Britain is perfect. The vomitous binge-drinking mainly by the young, the drug abuse and teenage pregnancy that are still higher than in most west European countries and the large proportion of single-parent families all tell a tale.
The fact that these things still exist says to me that a change in attitude is still a long way of for some people.



And Ted your accounts of your experiences within the ground are totally different to mine and very enlightening as I have only been able to experience what happens outside the ground and learn through what the Beeb and newspapers say Its quite an education for me but in general it makes me think there is still a long way to go and there is no definate answer yet.

[bobby brows]

Well I certainly wasn't expecting this when i posted a couple of weeks ago.

Personally i thought that everyone would jump at the chance to stand again if thats what they wanted to do. I know from experience of hundreds of non league or lower league games that i prefer to stand. As a general rule when your able to stand at city away games all packed together there is a superior atmosphere.

As for trouble I think it is a combination of all three: culture, ticketing, seating policy.

The one i wanted to throw in is the average age of the football supporters. Over the last 10 years the average age has gone up 10 years which means that its the same supporters growing up and attitudes have changed.

i'll leave everyone with a link to two hundred percent.net about the bundesliga which is currently being held up as a model league.

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=11674

[Beefymcfc]

I think RH should be banned from this topic, afterall, he won't be standing (or sitting) anywhere in CoMS soon.

He does bring a lot of debate though, reminds me a bit of JF.