The Instigator
TheDimpleboy
Pro (for)
Winning
10 Points
The Contender
JonMilne
Con (against)
Losing
2 Points

Safestanding should be introduced at Premier League Grounds

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
TheDimpleboy
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/2/2013 Category: Sports
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 966 times Debate No: 34442
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

TheDimpleboy

Pro

I am supporting the introduction of designated Safe-Standing sections in the English Premier league.

Rules:
1. Because I'm forfeiting my first argument stage, my opponent will not use his fifth stage.
JonMilne

Con

Challenge accepted. I will argue that, quite simply put, the argument against "safe-standing" areas is overwhelmingly strong enough that such a proposal quite simply cannot be considered.
Debate Round No. 1
TheDimpleboy

Pro

I'm arguing for the introduction of SafeStanding in Premier League grounds (if the individual club wishes to, depending on if they can afford to).

Currently a proportion of fans stand throughout the match at all clubs in the league in home ends, and there tends to be an 'unofficial' standing area at these clubs for home fans. Examples of this are at Newcastle (Level 7), Man United (Stretford End and K Stand), Sunderland (South Stand and SWC) etc. I could go on to name a section of the ground at every single top flight club where fans choose to stand throughout the game. It is currently against ground regulations to do so (although not against the law, the law simply states the club have to provide those seats), however fans continue to do so, and will continue to do so regardless of the authorities stance. Some clubs choose to take a hard line approach to standing (e.g. Sunderland have temporarily banned some fans for standing in the South Stand during the last season as a warning to others); some clubs quietly tolerate it such as Man United (The entire Stretford End Level 2 stands for every game with no opposition from stewards); and some clubs openly tolerate it (Manchester City actually have a designated standing section which contains around 5000 fans across it). As well as in home sections, the away fans of a number of clubs ALL stand throughout the game every week, including Newcastle, Man United, Man City, Chelsea, Arsenal, West Ham and Liverpool to name but a few.

So put simply - regardless of whether it is allowed or not, fans will continue to stand, and this will not change.

1.) I believe Safe Standing sections should be introduced because quite simply, fans deserve a choice over whether to sit or to stand. Currently some fans who don't want to stand are forced to because the people in front of them are - so the introduction of Safe Standing areas would ensure that those who want to stand can do so without effecting the enjoyment of the game of others.

2.) Standing is not dangerous. Standing did not cause Hillsborough. The Lord Justice Taylor report into the aftermath of Hillsborough found that 'Standing is not inherently dangerous'. A study by the FSF found that the most dangerous period of time to stand during the game was when a goal is scored, and the least dangerous is throughout the match when fans are standing passively. In fact, Safestanding areas would IMRPOVE safety, as currently fans could topple over into the rows in front when celebrating a goal, and safestanding has a railing separating EACH row, which prevents a crush from ever possibly occurring.

The important things to remember are:
-Standing at matches will not go away, and to bring in Safestanding would only improve the safety of those who choose to do so.
-SafeStanding areas would only be implemented in one section of the ground, and the majority of the ground would still remain seated, so that those who want to sit can sit, and those who wish to stand can stand.
-Safestanding areas would prevent fans from being hassled and persecuted for simply choosing to stand up.

I fail to see how Safestanding could rationally be opposed, and I personally have stood persistently throughout matches on a number of occasions following Newcastle away from home. (Our away support hasn't sat down at a competitive fixture for the last ten years).
Thankyou for accepting the debate, and I look forward to reading your response.
JonMilne

Con

Having educated myself about this further, I realise it was a mistake to take on this debate. I concede all arguments to Pro, and advise that he start this debate again with someone who will provide him the quality of debate he deserves.
Debate Round No. 2
JonMilne

Con

(/debate)
Debate Round No. 3
TheDimpleboy

Pro

Opponent forfeited - vote Pro
JonMilne

Con

I agree with Pro.
Debate Round No. 4
JonMilne

Con

End debate
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 3 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
TheDimpleboyJonMilneTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession. Pro gets MCA, and Con gets conduct. I did not give pro conduct so as to counter Mrparkers VB. Why should he lose all 7 points just because he conceded?
Vote Placed by Mrparkers 3 years ago
Mrparkers
TheDimpleboyJonMilneTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
TheDimpleboyJonMilneTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.