|
Post by milestaylor on Mar 22, 2011 18:28:47 GMT
Dear fellow Oxford United fans, We are trying to gather the opinions of Oxford United fans, whether or not we should bring back terraces to English football, starting with Oxford United! If you could please fill out our questionnaire it will help get your thoughts to the club. www.surveymonkey.com/s/oxford_united_surveyMany Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Paul Cannell on Mar 22, 2011 18:51:43 GMT
OK, done.
Who do you represent, what are you going to do with this?
|
|
|
Post by rollsy on Mar 22, 2011 18:53:38 GMT
Done, still think its a long way away from being at out Stadium
|
|
|
Post by Beav on Mar 22, 2011 19:11:54 GMT
I voted 'no' for children standing in the safe standing area.
But I was presuming that be like U14s?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Cannell on Mar 22, 2011 19:16:55 GMT
I voted no as well. Bloody kids.
|
|
|
Post by hairy on Mar 22, 2011 20:12:22 GMT
I voted 'no' for children standing in the safe standing area. But I was presuming that be like U14s? But you get some big 13 year olds beav so maybe the ban should be height related, no one under 5 foot 6?
|
|
|
Post by Long John Silver on Mar 22, 2011 21:28:30 GMT
OK, done. Who do you represent, what are you going to do with this? I would imagine it's the survey being carried out by Brookes students as part of the various surveys mentioned on the Standing thread. Some of those questions (13-15) could have done with a third option of 'don't mind'.
|
|
|
Post by bornyellow on Mar 22, 2011 21:39:06 GMT
Voted no to kids makes sence in terms of saftey I think.
|
|
|
Post by Beav on Mar 22, 2011 21:56:16 GMT
I voted 'no' for children standing in the safe standing area. But I was presuming that be like U14s? But you get some big 13 year olds beav so maybe the ban should be height related, no one under 5 foot 6? Yeah... but I wanna stand...
|
|
|
Post by woolly on Mar 22, 2011 23:06:47 GMT
Yeah no kids (under 16s) in safe standing. Bloody hate sitting at football matches
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Mar 22, 2011 23:10:24 GMT
I abstained
|
|
|
Post by dartfordox (RIP) on Mar 23, 2011 7:25:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by basingstokeox on Mar 23, 2011 11:00:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Mar 23, 2011 13:19:00 GMT
Somewhat leading questions to get the answers they are looking for I felt.
|
|
|
Post by sarge on Mar 23, 2011 14:46:44 GMT
theres a change already! Hugh Robertson minister for sport 'ready to listen to football fans' - according to his civil servant lackeys the Ministry were opposing the Don Foster MP Bill... lobbying it seems does have an effect keep lobbying MPs in the run in to 17th June Vote in the house of commons and people power ( copyright Cuddy ) will succeed in overturning the requirement for allseater stadiums in the top two tiers of English football
|
|
|
Post by sarge on Mar 23, 2011 14:54:40 GMT
Ive emailed Don Johnson the Premier League spokesperson, asking extortionate prices levied to 'sit' and watch a Premiership game live excepted, what exactly are the Premier league's objections to Safe standing at football? It cannot be for safety reasons the FLA's (limited) statistics on the subject are inconclusive and erroneous, other spectator sports allow standing, its legal to stand on a moving bus and train yet not to watch top flight football? Im not holding my breath for an instant response though
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Mar 23, 2011 15:15:29 GMT
Perhaps we should have the stadium conscecrated as a Church. At 2:59 pm on match days. "All rise for the first hymn Chris Wilder my Lord ". If we then keep that going for 90 minutes, surely that would be OK? But seriously, sitting is not conducive to singing.
|
|
|
Post by sarge on Mar 23, 2011 15:36:51 GMT
Perhaps we should have the stadium conscecrated as a Church. At 2:59 pm on match days. "All rise for the first hymn Chris Wilder my Lord ". If we then keep that going for 90 minutes, surely that would be OK? But seriously, sitting is not conducive to singing. ... we ARE playing at home this Sunday, I'll be there to worship the mighty Yellows
|
|
|
Post by secondsout on Mar 23, 2011 16:45:47 GMT
I'm not really for or against standing at games.
I'm a season ticket holder and stand at the back of the OM but I sit down at half time or if the game is particularly shite (which is rare).
The over riding argument I have seen for standing areas is that it would increase the atmosphere but I think that's rubbish. The atmosphere is directly affected by the what's going on on the pitch and who we're playing. I have been to many grounds over the years where it's standing and I have never come across a better atmosphere just because people are standing up. What's wrong with people that they can only make noise if they are stood up?
So despite the fact that I couldn't really care less if I am forced to sit or stand, I do wish that the people advocating this would come up with a better argument.
|
|
|
Post by concretebob on Mar 23, 2011 17:13:36 GMT
It should be, but it won't be.
|
|
|
Post by Long John Silver on Mar 23, 2011 17:45:04 GMT
I'm not really for or against standing at games. I'm a season ticket holder and stand at the back of the OM but I sit down at half time or if the game is particularly shite (which is rare). The over riding argument I have seen for standing areas is that it would increase the atmosphere but I think that's rubbish. The atmosphere is directly affected by the what's going on on the pitch and who we're playing. I have been to many grounds over the years where it's standing and I have never come across a better atmosphere just because people are standing up. What's wrong with people that they can only make noise if they are stood up? So despite the fact that I couldn't really care less if I am forced to sit or stand, I do wish that the people advocating this would come up with a better argument. How about the simple one of freedom of choice? Probably a bettter one is that having a designated standing area would take away all the current animosity (that must occur at almost every ground with just seating areas) between those who are 'forced' to stand in current seating areas,and in doing so p*ss off those that want to remain seated. Having designated standing and seating areas has to be a good thing for everyone, and I have trouble seeing any logical argument from the 'seating only' brigade, especially as the few arguments they use are based false information, or 20 year old out of date 'facts'.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Mar 23, 2011 18:36:54 GMT
I'm not really for or against standing at games. I'm a season ticket holder and stand at the back of the OM but I sit down at half time or if the game is particularly shite (which is rare). The over riding argument I have seen for standing areas is that it would increase the atmosphere but I think that's rubbish. The atmosphere is directly affected by the what's going on on the pitch and who we're playing. I have been to many grounds over the years where it's standing and I have never come across a better atmosphere just because people are standing up. What's wrong with people that they can only make noise if they are stood up? So despite the fact that I couldn't really care less if I am forced to sit or stand, I do wish that the people advocating this would come up with a better argument. Whilst I agree that standing or sitting is not the only factor that affects the atmosphere it certainly is one of the factors. The simple fact that people tend to bunch closer together when standing has an impact on noise levels and atmosphere. You are right that the most important factor is, of course, the quality and/or the importance of what is happening on the pitch. I can remember many poor atmosphere's in the London Road when the fare on the pitch was also poor but when it was good/important you could feel the roof lifting. I do wonder what a seating stand with a lowish roof would be like rather than the artificially high roof over the East Stand. There was a great atmosphere at Luton last season despite the seating but their stand has a relatively low roof and all stands are close to the pitch. There have also been some very good atmosphere's at the Kassam despite the failings of the place. Dagenham towards the end of the first season of the Conf and Exeter in the play-offs come to mind.
|
|
|
Post by secondsout on Mar 24, 2011 10:28:08 GMT
I'm not really for or against standing at games. I'm a season ticket holder and stand at the back of the OM but I sit down at half time or if the game is particularly shite (which is rare). The over riding argument I have seen for standing areas is that it would increase the atmosphere but I think that's rubbish. The atmosphere is directly affected by the what's going on on the pitch and who we're playing. I have been to many grounds over the years where it's standing and I have never come across a better atmosphere just because people are standing up. What's wrong with people that they can only make noise if they are stood up? So despite the fact that I couldn't really care less if I am forced to sit or stand, I do wish that the people advocating this would come up with a better argument. How about the simple one of freedom of choice? Probably a bettter one is that having a designated standing area would take away all the current animosity (that must occur at almost every ground with just seating areas) between those who are 'forced' to stand in current seating areas,and in doing so p*ss off those that want to remain seated. Having designated standing and seating areas has to be a good thing for everyone, and I have trouble seeing any logical argument from the 'seating only' brigade, especially as the few arguments they use are based false information, or 20 year old out of date 'facts'. Like I said, I really couldn't care less either way, and I am all for freedom of choice, but that's not the argument that's used. If your trying to petition MP's and even taking it on further than that, the argument has to be stronger than "well it makes the atmosphere better". That's my problem with the whole thing. If there was a standing area, great, I'd most likely use it, but the argument needs to made stronger for it to be taken more seriously.
|
|
|
Post by sarge on Mar 24, 2011 11:30:44 GMT
How about the simple one of freedom of choice? Probably a bettter one is that having a designated standing area would take away all the current animosity (that must occur at almost every ground with just seating areas) between those who are 'forced' to stand in current seating areas,and in doing so p*ss off those that want to remain seated. Having designated standing and seating areas has to be a good thing for everyone, and I have trouble seeing any logical argument from the 'seating only' brigade, especially as the few arguments they use are based false information, or 20 year old out of date 'facts'. Like I said, I really couldn't care less either way, and I am all for freedom of choice, but that's not the argument that's used. If your trying to petition MP's and even taking it on further than that, the argument has to be stronger than "well it makes the atmosphere better". T hat's my problem with the whole thing. If there was a standing area, great, I'd most likely use it, but the argument needs to made stronger for it to be taken more seriously. including the previous Yellows forum this Stand up for standing thread is extensive, AND pretty much covers a multitude of arguements and points regarding the reasoning behind campaigning for safe standing ( here at Oxford United's ground) - Yes Atmosphere is one of many factors- for the others... go back and read ALL the STAND UP FOR STANDING thread on here and the previous yellows forum. PLEASE.
|
|
|
Post by Yellowbrains on Mar 24, 2011 13:26:51 GMT
How about the simple one of freedom of choice? Probably a bettter one is that having a designated standing area would take away all the current animosity (that must occur at almost every ground with just seating areas) between those who are 'forced' to stand in current seating areas,and in doing so p*ss off those that want to remain seated. Having designated standing and seating areas has to be a good thing for everyone, and I have trouble seeing any logical argument from the 'seating only' brigade, especially as the few arguments they use are based false information, or 20 year old out of date 'facts'. Like I said, I really couldn't care less either way, and I am all for freedom of choice, but that's not the argument that's used. If your trying to petition MP's and even taking it on further than that, the argument has to be stronger than "well it makes the atmosphere better". That's my problem with the whole thing. If there was a standing area, great, I'd most likely use it, but the argument needs to made stronger for it to be taken more seriously. There are many different reasons and freedom of choice IS one of those that has been used in the campaign. Another is that it will make professional football more accessible to those who have been priced out of attending football matches. It's about far more than just the atmosphere and there are plenty of other arguments as well.
|
|
|
Post by Best Mate on Mar 24, 2011 15:33:07 GMT
Can't agree that there is no evidence that atmosphere is not better when you stand.
Lets look at 'decent' away followings. It is always a better atmosphere.
The reason: When you go away, you mainly, sit where you want. If there is a group, you bundle together and the atmosphere can be electric.
I am not saying I am an expert - I am 29 so though I attended a good decade of standing - there will be others who have more experience then me.
But I have been to countless games where, when standing, I have edged towards the singers with my mates to get close to the singing etc The more fans grouped together, singing together create a better atmosphere.
Also, people stand closer together - as everyone wants to be part of the atmosphere. Its why half the people (who do not really sing) sit in the East stand? The view is not great and they don't really want to sing that often. But they want to be close to the atmosphere. In standing they can do that better as more people are grouped together.
I reckon - if OUFC had a stand for standing that held 3,000 - it would almost be full every game. It would certainly attract fans who want to come up with their mates (who may be regulars when they are not) and then the hassle of switching tickets around or sitting away from them is avoided....
I think such a stand would be perfect for the 4th stand - give it a low roof and call it the London Road.....
|
|
|
Post by Beav on Mar 24, 2011 16:42:43 GMT
Its why half the people (who do not really sing) sit in the East stand? The view is not great and they don't really want to sing that often. But they want to be close to the atmosphere. In standing they can do that better as more people are grouped together. I reckon - if OUFC had a stand for standing that held 3,000 - it would almost be full every game. It would certainly attract fans who want to come up with their mates (who may be regulars when they are not) and then the hassle of switching tickets around or sitting away from them is avoided.... I thought it was because the OM was the cheapest stand!
|
|
|
Post by longliveclarkey on Mar 24, 2011 17:32:44 GMT
Having actually been told to sit down at various points by people behind me, it's understandable that I think an all-standing area would be a brilliant idea. I probably wouldn't actually end up going there, but I still think it's a really good idea. Standing is just so, so much more fun than sitting!
|
|
|
Post by sarge on Mar 25, 2011 11:30:33 GMT
Interesting ... AND pro standing at footy debate/phone in on the Wright Stuff on Channel 5 this morning!
|
|