Safe Standing Debated in Parliament

It's a shame that Liverpool as a city was sold a lie that Hillsborough was down to terracing, rather than the cages and police mismanagement, what's even more frustrating is safe standing isn't even terracing in the old sense of the word. I know it's callous to say, but the Hillsborough families should have absolutely no say in this debate, as it's nothing to do with the issues that brought in the all-seater policy years ago.

However, the positives to come out of this debate outweigh the negatives. Most MP's were supportive of Safe Standing and Tracey Crouch herself apologise for some of the language she used previously to dismiss the supporters of Safe Standing. Furthermore she's acknowledged that if it were to change it would require legislation, and has authorised a study into the matter to be published by the end of the year.

Perhaps this time next year Safe Standing will be legal.
 
Last edited:
I can't see one logical argument against Safe Standing. At the moment there is standing that isn't safe. How can converting that into standing that is safe be wrong ?
 
Its purely the concern that the Hillsborough group over the loss of their loved ones. The majority seem to have got to grips with the real cause of the original incident, which was no safety barriers to stop a mass movement. Erect safety barriers for every (say) four rows of individuals standing and the Hillsborough disaster scenario doesn't happen.
 
Totally agree with GordonRoadMat. Why should Hillsborough have anything to do with it when the disaster was not caused by terracing?
 
I can’t imagine being in the relatives’ shoes. It might be that if you have a relative who dies on public transport then you may never want to use that mode again despite all facts suggesting it’s perfectly safe. While completely understanding this, I feel this is the sole reason holding us back from having a return to safe standing. Even then, as we know already safe standing is nothing like terracing!
 
Gills 58 said:
Totally agree with GordonRoadMat. Why should Hillsborough have anything to do with it when the disaster was not caused by terracing?
Click to expand...
While terracing was not the cause of the Hillsborough disaster, a lack of barriers certainly contributed to the disastrous outcome of decisions made by the authorities on the day.

As for safe standing being introduced, I doubt we'll see much unless it's included in a new stadium.
 
Wayne.Kerr said:
As for safe standing being introduced, I doubt we'll see much unless it's included in a new stadium.
Click to expand...

As ironic as it is considering the amount of football clubs who simply bolted seats onto existing terracing, it wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility to rip out the seats on a current all seated stand and install Safe Standing rail seats. as the dimensions would be the same. This has literally just happened with Shrewsbury ripping out some seats and installing a safe standing area. Scally could theoretically do this with a section of the Rainham End, though I agree it's probably unlikely.

What's more important about the change in legislation though, is that it would end this idea that you have to future proof your stadium by making it all seater, just incase you get promoted and have to end up ripping them out. Were it to pass I imagine any new Priestfield would have an allowance for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.