Rail seating (safe standing) installation in Holmesdale Lower at Selhurst Park ?

[Dorking .Eagle]

On 1st November 2018, the latest edition of the “Green Guide” was published by the Sports Grounds Safety Authority. This has been described as ‘ground breaking’ because from now on, clubs in the Premier League and Championship are allowed to install “seats with rails” (sometimes known as ‘safe standing’) provided they are not locked in a closed position.

The “flip seats” with rails such as those installed at Tottenham’s new stadium are now permitted, as they are classed simply as “seats”

Crystal Palace has previously been one of the clubs at the forefront of the campaign to be allowed to have an installation of these seats with rails.

The main proviso of installing these seats is that clubs need to have a management policy “to get fans to sit down in those areas”. However all clubs already have such a policy in place, and would effectively turn a blind eye to standing in these areas as is currently the practice.

One of the main benefits of ‘seats with rails’ is that there is minimal chance of a dangerous incidents of standing fans toppling over each other, such as when celebrating a goal. There has previously been a petition to Government signed by 111,000 people calling for such areas to be allowed in the top two divisions, in the hope that it will help improve atmospheres in grounds.

A further benefit of such an area is that the fans who wish to stand know where it is acceptable, and fans who wish to sit, know where to avoid getting tickets.

I personally believe that the current plan, to evict 400 fans from the back of block E, which would ‘cost’ the club circa £100k in compensation is not the best solution - not only because of the cost to the club, but because it does not solve the issue of fans standing at the very front of E block (in front of sitters), plus fans who sit in block F will have lateral sightlines adversely affected by fans standing in the new singing section (back half of E)

If the club could split the stand horizontally into standing (ie rail seats at the back) and sitting (front half remain as normal seats), then all fans in the Lower Tier could re-choose their positions depending on their preference, nobody need be evicted from the stand, and the £100k of compensation could go a long way towards paying for the new rail seats.

Hopefully the poll above will give an idea of people’s preferences and the level of demand, not only for standing amongst current lower tier fans from a proportion of those polled, but also the level of interest in rail seating (standing) from fans elsewhere in the ground, as a full conversion might be possible further down the line when other stadium developments have taken place.

[Kirby]

You forgot to add the poll option again.

[Dorking .Eagle]

It's there now. 100 character limit was the issue.

Whilst the BBS isn't representative of the whole fanbase, it should give at least a clue as to peoples feelings towards rail seating/"seats with rails" (aka Safe Standing)

[Eaglefoz]

well done Dorking, about time somebody took the lead on this. I know it will not be conclusive but will help the understanding of it all.

[Dorking .Eagle]

Thanks Eaglefoz.

There have been lots of good suggestions on the many other threads, but until this week, safe standing aka rail seating couldn't be considered as part of the solution.

My suggestion in the opening post is that the front half is officially sitting, and the whole back half across all the blocks get the rail seats.

This assumes that the demand for sitting and standing amongst current fans in the Lower Tier is a 50/50 split in preference (maybe the poll will clarify this?) - currently A,B,C,D and some of E stand, the rest sit.

Of course some in the back half of E might currently be sitting out of courtesy to their neighbours and those behind them, because standing is not accepted in their block, yet they might be very keen to be in a recognised standing area (even if not a bouncing and flag waving area)

The club were pretty vocal in pushing for safe standing to be allowed. The 1:1 ratio with flip seats as is now legal is their opportunity to put this into practice, use all of the compensation budget on infrastructure instead, and not have to evict anyone from the Lower Tier.

In the longer term, when there are an extra 8,000 seats in the Main Stand, then maybe the whole Lower could become rail seats (standing)?

[Davy64]

Great news

[wrightchipvcfc]

Good idea suppose numbers for top 3 options will be telling those not interested in being in Lh there vote percentage don't realy matter

[glaziers fan]

Where’s the option “only for the HF priority seating (aka the ‘“‘“singing section’”’”) “

[Dorking .Eagle]

Originally Posted by wrightchipvcfc

Good idea suppose numbers for top 3 options will be telling those not interested in being in Lh there vote percentage don't realy matter

Agree. Option 4 is pretty irrelevant in all this, but I thought it best to try and give everyone an option that would apply to them so that nobody had reason to put their vote against the wrong option.

Option 4 is kind of useful though in one respect - you can add together options 3 and 4 (ie the votes from all fans not in the Lower Tier) and get an idea of the percentage of fans from other parts of the ground who would be interested in being in a railed (standing) area

[Dorking .Eagle]

Originally Posted by glaziers fan

Where’s the option “only for the HF priority seating (aka the ‘“‘“singing section’”’”) “

Moo (option 5)

[wrightchipvcfc]

Originally Posted by Dorking .Eagle

Agree. Option 4 is pretty irrelevant in all this, but I thought it best to try and give everyone an option that would apply to them so that nobody had reason to put their vote against the wrong option.

Option 4 is kind of useful though in one respect - you can add together options 3 and 4 (ie the votes from all fans not in the Lower Tier) and get an idea of the percentage of fans from other parts of the ground who would be interested in being in a railed (standing) area

True but when poll finished maybe just do the percentages for top 3 seperretly as well as all 5

[rach_d_cpfc]

For the purposes of this poll, for question 2 would the seats still be in the LH?

[Dorking .Eagle]

Yes

[tlr_cpfc]

I'd love to have a safe standing spot, hopefully I'd have the option being one of the E400 rather than shunted off to the Arthur.

[Sick Bucket]

Well hopefully this will be done in the summer giving the club the perfect opportunity to reset all the ST in the LH. Surely they'd have to wouldn't they if say the back half of the LH became standing?

[eagles #1]

Good news. Get the whole lower tier standing.

[Sick Bucket]

If the LH became standing would you be able to fit more people in? I think not but not sure.

[Gazza2]

I think the demand for standing from people currently based all over the ground will exceed the capacity of 50% of the Lower Tier.
In which case, my preference would be to make all of the Lower Tier rail standing to try and satisfy the demand. The other 3 sides of the ground and the upper tier can be for those who want to sit.

[elgin eagle]

Originally Posted by eagles #1

Good news. Get the whole lower tier standing.

All but the first few rows. Got to cater for every need and age.

[Dorking .Eagle]

Originally Posted by Gazza2

I think the demand for standing from people currently based all over the ground will exceed the capacity of 50% of the Lower Tier.
In which case, my preference would be to make all of the Lower Tier rail standing to try and satisfy the demand. The other 3 sides of the ground and the upper tier can be for those who want to sit.

Although not scientific by any means, the poll at the top certainly suggests a great deal of interest in standing from people not currently in the Lower Tier