The Safe Standing Debate

The Times

February 19, 2009
The Safe Standing Debate
Do I want to see a return to standing at football? No.

A "return" to something is to step back; I want to step forward.

In the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster, the subsequent Taylor Enquiry recommended that all football grounds in the top two divisions become all-seater. Not because standing was unsafe, as Lord Justice Taylor stated himself that standing itself was not dangerous, but because the football grounds of the 80's were poorly managed and maintained. Change was needed.

Hillsborough didn't have a valid safety certificate in 1989, it was 10 years out of date, and had only and handful of turnstiles available to admit over 10,000 fans into the Leppings Lane. Not only was the stadium not fit for purpose, but fans were penned into terraces using fences and cages, with the match day commander, David Duckenfield ordering the gates to be opened due to crushing outside, yet failing to close off the already crowded central pens and direct fans into the empty pens at the side of the terrace. The result was 96 lost lives and arguably the biggest cover up in British history followed.

The belief that standing caused Hillsborough is taking away from the real causes of the disaster; Hillsborough Stadium and South Yorkshire Police. The reasons Lord Justice Taylor gave in his report. One thing he didn't blame was standing.

Clearly, a massive overhaul was needed in the way crowds were managed, and the standard of football grounds had to be drastically improved. Abolishing the changes recommended by Lord Justice Taylor to improve the safety of and conditions for fans is something I'd never advocate. I want to move forward, not go back. Supporters had been treated as little better than cattle for years and watched their football in sub standard stadiums; conditions are now vastly improved, and nobody wants to undo that work.

The demographic of the crowd has changed dramatically over the years. Our grounds are well policed and stewarded and aided by modern technology such as CCTV. Much more is understood about crowd control; however this is not a reason why modern safe standing areas, as seen on the continent, should not be properly investigated.

To me, safety is everything. Any risk or danger in standing then I wouldn't advocate it in any way. Safety is paramount.

No right minded supporter would ever argue for anything that puts supporters at risk. With modern technology, it would be easy to ensure that standing areas do not become over crowded. There is no reason why an access control system should not be put on entrances to safe standing areas and of course we already have CCTV; specially trained stewards could be put on duty in these standing areas. Nobody is suggesting compromising safety and nobody wants to see a return of terraces of old.

Whenever this topic is discussed, some people point blank refuse to contemplate standing at football, as the fear the knock affects, such as fences having to go up at the front of stands etc. There is no ruling with FIFA, UEFA or The FA that fences have to be erected in front of a standing section. Standing and fences no longer go hand in hand. One of the recommendations made after the Bradford fire disaster, is that fans should have access to the pitch in case of emergency. That was obviously ignored with the fences that remained and resulted in 96 lost lives. Nobody would support the introduction of fences at the front of our stands. Nobody.

Look around every ground in the country today, and there are fans standing in seated areas for 90 minutes every week. At Anfield, we have 12,500 standing on The Kop for 90 minutes at every European game and high profile League games. The atmosphere improves as a result, and it works.

I've heard the issue being debated by ex-professionals and media types before, and they defend the all-seater stance when it's being used to explain the lack of atmosphere in our grounds by saying that the atmosphere in the semi final against Chelsea was better than anything in the past 30 years, and that was in an all-seater stadium. They fail to realise that on that night, over 20,000 fans stood for the entire 90 minutes. If they seriously believe that that sort of atmosphere could have been created with everyone sat down then they need help.

Arsenal, Bolton, Chelsea, West Ham, Liverpool, Man Utd, Man City, Sunderland, Tottenham, Newcastle, Hull and West Brom. They are just a sample of top flight clubs that have fans standing in seated areas for 90 minutes every single week. Look at the Championship and it's the same again, with the majority of clubs having sections of fans standing in seated areas every week.

So why not accept this is what some fans want, and house them in a far safer environment? Leaving those that want to sit, to be able to do so, without having their view of the game obstructed by persistent standers in seated areas as happens now? Give fans that choice.

Customer care works both ways, not just to the benefit of those that want to sit. Some fans are now buying tickets for areas where fans persistently stand, and they may want to sit and watch the game. It is common knowledge with most fans where to go if you want to stand, and where to avoid if you don't. Yet if you don't have that knowledge, as the clubs will never disclose it, then how are you supposed to know if you are buying a seat for an area where fans will stand? Head in the sand attitude from clubs and authorities alike result in those fans being dissatisfied, instead of being open and admitting that fans want to stand and will stand, and dealing with that situation.

Fans stand in front of an allocated seat, with stewards working to ensure the aisles and exits are clear. This happens up and down the country, week in, week out, yet the Football Licensing Authority (FLA) choose to ignore what is happening, instead of looking to manage it. It is worth remembering that being able to passionately support their team is as important to many as what happens on the pitch. After all, you cannot regulate passion, and it's what makes our game so special.

The authorities claim that all-seater stadia have encouraged more women and children to the game, yet are unable to back up this claim. Further to that, it is rather sexist to suggest that woman don't want to stand or would not like to see choice.

Nobody is proposing large standing areas; there will still be around 80% of the stadium's capacity available to fans that want to sit. It is all about giving fans a choice. The Grange End terrace at Cardiff has a Season Ticket population that is almost 50% women. So much for women being discouraged by standing.

The FLA legislation states that it is "unsafe" to stand during passive play as fans may lose their balance and fall while "straining" to follow play (seriously!). But they then state it is acceptable to stand during "moments of excitement" such as attacking parts of play and goal celebrations. They also deem it "safe" to stand before the game, during half time, and when leaving en-mass at the end of the game. All these apparent "safe" incidents were deemed to be far more dangerous than standing during passive play, as highlighted by an independent Risk Assessment carried out on standing at Old Trafford recently. Their "safety first" logic is flawed, and that Risk Assessment has never seen the light of day since. It doesn't suit their agenda. It's hidden under a carpet somewhere.

There are constant threats of ground closure, stand closures, financial penalties and revoking the safety certificates of grounds where the fans stand in seated areas. Yet despite all these threats over the past decade or so, not one of those threats has ever been realised. The most drastic step has been to close off a few rows of seats and at a handful of grounds.

To be able to revoke the safety certificate, or impose any sort of closure on a stadium, the FLA would have to prove in court that the action being proposed (closure of a stand / stadium) is in proportion to the risks involved. This is something they will never be able to do, as there is no evidence of any risk. The risks highlighted by the FLA are based entirely on assumption and prediction. There is no evidence in existence that proves sitting is safer than standing in seated areas.

Last year, as I do every year, I attended the Hillsborough Memorial Service on 15th April, where Phil Hammond, the Chairman of the Hillsborough Family Support Group, mentioned the treatment of British fans abroad. The local police and authorities treating football fans as hooligans, not humans. To me, it is those attitudes that are putting fans in danger, not because fans are standing to watch the game.

The FLA have stated that football fans were not allowed to stand as "they have a different profile" to rugby and music fans, that are permitted to stand in the same stadiums. Also, according to the FLA, fans may stand in Germany as they to fit a different 'profile' to English fans. This attitude highlights the contempt in which football fans are held. It also completely dispels the safety side of the argument they've been trying to push for the past countless number of years.

If it is unsafe for football fans to stand in these areas, then why is it suddenly deemed safe for music fans to stand in those same seats? Those same music fans that will be dancing around and drinking in their seats, as opposed to football fans who for 90% of the time, will be standing stationary watching the game. As a multi purpose stadium, surely the new Wembley must have been designed with the idea of fans standing in mind, given the number of music events held there?

For anyone that goes to watch football, you will know that during goal celebrations is the time most injuries can occur. In a recent game against Everton I was knocked down 2 rows of seats during the celebrations. I got back to me feet with cuts all over my shins from the seat in front that acted as a trip wire.


There is a bar in front of every seat / standing area, which prevents any crowd surges. This is a far safer way to watch football, yet the FLA point blank refuse to acknowledge the German model of safe standing, nor will they address the idea of putting these bars in current seated areas. Instead, they continue to try and enforce the impossible in getting fans to sit all over the country. If they really did consider our safety, then they'd look to address these issues, not hide from them.

Despite my injuries, the FLA deem standing and jumping around to celebrate a goal to be acceptable, as it's a "moment of excitement". Whereas we used to be treated like animals by the authorities, we're now treated like idiots.

This isn't the 80's anymore. There are no crumbling terraces with fans caged in by fences and treated like sub-human scum. There are no pay on the gate turnstiles with no restriction on how many fans are on that terrace, other than closing the gates when "it looks full to me".

Football today is on a completely different level. There are no fences. There are no cages. There are strict ticket inspection procedures in place. Numbers of fans in each section of the ground carefully controlled with strict ticketing procedures. It's not even close to being like it was back then. And certainly nothing to do with standing that would result in fans being at risk. Crowd control techniques and the facilities are now on a completely different level.

Technology and the game have moved on - it's about time the FLA did the same.

Paul Jones