Welcome Notice

Hello and welcome to Molineux Mix a forum for Wolves fans by Wolves fans.

Register Log in

Safe standing.

top fox wolf

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
428
Reaction score
1,227
Can somebody explain to me have we still got safe standing areas at Molineux.
 

SingYourHeartsOut

"Its less confusing with a smaller brain"
Joined
Aug 11, 2012
Messages
38,057
Reaction score
36,690
Can somebody explain to me have we still got safe standing areas at Molineux.
I think the official answer is no. We have rail seating and should the government ever deem the act of standing up to watch a football match to be safe in rail seating we have the ability to allow it.

In reality of course yes, 5500 people risk their lives every other week and watch from the South Bank without the use of a seat. Also the quadrant where I assume people stand but haven't been to check.

Our position is unchanged as we dropped out of the trial to save having to install rail seating for away fans.

Please delete the thread now in case I've let the cat out of the bag!
 

WolfLing

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jun 29, 2016
Messages
15,542
Reaction score
28,288
We have the functionality to officially have safe standing. But other than those in the trial, no one is officially allowed it until it is (hopefully) given the green light.

We pulled out of the safe-standing trial as we would have had to install rail seating in areas for away supporters too. So probably an unnecessary cost short-term.

If the trial is successful and they allow safe-standing, we will be able to officially allow it. At the moment, we unofficially have it by not enforcing that people sit on the rail seating!!
 

WeAreTheWolvesII

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Feb 15, 2020
Messages
9,323
Reaction score
20,789
I think that if we'd have been part of this trial, nothing would've changed for the South Bank.

So, we're already doing what United, City, Cardiff etc have just been granted permission to do. Pretty pointless for us to sign up IMO as the only benefit was for away fans, why spend for them?
 

top fox wolf

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
428
Reaction score
1,227
I think that if we'd have been part of this trial, nothing would've changed for the South Bank.

So, we're already doing what United, City, Cardiff etc have just been granted permission to do. Pretty pointless for us to sign up IMO as the only benefit was for away fans, why spend for them?
Thanks guys understand now ........I think
 

Oh When the Wolves

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
29,051
Reaction score
24,697
Not sure how these are safer.

Someone will crack their head open on the metal poles one day
 

1972 i began

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
12,928
Reaction score
12,048
I think the official answer is no. We have rail seating and should the government ever deem the act of standing up to watch a football match to be safe in rail seating we have the ability to allow it.

In reality of course yes, 5500 people risk their lives every other week and watch from the South Bank without the use of a seat. Also the quadrant where I assume people stand but haven't been to check.

Our position is unchanged as we dropped out of the trial to save having to install rail seating for away fans.

Please delete the thread now in case I've let the cat out of the bag!

can yow explain how we are risking ar lives,in a rail standing area which has got to be one of the safest places to stand in the ground.
 

SingYourHeartsOut

"Its less confusing with a smaller brain"
Joined
Aug 11, 2012
Messages
38,057
Reaction score
36,690
can yow explain how we are risking ar lives,in a rail standing area which has got to be one of the safest places to stand in the ground.
Sorry, my level of irony is rarely too subtle. For my money it was safe in 1989 when I stood on the terrace that Thatcher's crew said wasn't safe, still safe in the 2000 when Jez used to have to get stewards to stop people standing, and now it's about as safe as humanly possible even though we're supposed to be sitting down officially. All beyond laughable that anyone thinks we need a 'trial' to check.
 

chignalwolf

Has a lot to say
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
1,801
Reaction score
2,908
Sorry, my level of irony is rarely too subtle. For my money it was safe in 1989 when I stood on the terrace that Thatcher's crew said wasn't safe, still safe in the 2000 when Jez used to have to get stewards to stop people standing, and now it's about as safe as humanly possible even though we're supposed to be sitting down officially. All beyond laughable that anyone thinks we need a 'trial' to check.
wasn't it one of Thatcher's side kicks ? (might be wrong), that became the director of a struggling seating company just before it became law,
then got contracts to install this companies seats worth millions, very convenient i think,
 
Last edited:

1972 i began

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
12,928
Reaction score
12,048
Sorry, my level of irony is rarely too subtle. For my money it was safe in 1989 when I stood on the terrace that Thatcher's crew said wasn't safe, still safe in the 2000 when Jez used to have to get stewards to stop people standing, and now it's about as safe as humanly possible even though we're supposed to be sitting down officially. All beyond laughable that anyone thinks we need a 'trial' to check.

Sorry I misunderstood ya...Which ay summat new just lately...Think I'll gew back to having a drink before posting. :tonguewink:
 

JJ59

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
569
Reaction score
861
wasn't it one of Thatcher's side kicks ? (might be wrong), that became the director of a struggling seating company just before it became law,
then got contracts to install this companies seats worth millions, very convenient i think,
Do tell more
 

chignalwolf

Has a lot to say
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
1,801
Reaction score
2,908
Do tell more
apparently its a topic (Politics) not to be discussed on here, with respect i will leave that topic in the cupboard with the other skeletons from that era,
 

SingYourHeartsOut

"Its less confusing with a smaller brain"
Joined
Aug 11, 2012
Messages
38,057
Reaction score
36,690
apparently its a topic (Politics) not to be discussed on here, with respect i will leave that topic in the cupboard with the other skeletons from that era,
Quite right, especially as there is no overlap whatsoever between politics and football. Even though the same police who broke the miner's strike were repaid by the Conservative government in the whitewash of Hillsborough which lead to no justice for the 96 for 30 years and all seater grounds for the rest of us. Just saying like...
 

Peszkywolf

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Messages
7,956
Reaction score
4,684
wasn't it one of Thatcher's side kicks ? (might be wrong), that became the director of a struggling seating company just before it became law,
then got contracts to install this companies seats worth millions, very convenient i think,
Probably bribed & got in the VIP lane to deliver the seats like they did with the dodgy PPE to hospitals and care homes. Criminals.
 

SingYourHeartsOut

"Its less confusing with a smaller brain"
Joined
Aug 11, 2012
Messages
38,057
Reaction score
36,690
Will anything actually change? Some rail seating in the Steve Bull lower?
 

WickedWolfie

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Oct 26, 2018
Messages
41,887
Reaction score
46,998
Doubt anything will change , Rail seats already in South Bank and the North Bank Quadrant, Just standing is to be officially allowed
I wonder whether it may be accompanied with a crackdown on standing in other areas though?
 

Oldgoldilox

Groupie
Joined
Sep 9, 2019
Messages
326
Reaction score
599
So the Conservatives are claiming they delivered it. And they used the South Bank as their “poster boy” yet we weren’t allowed to take part in the trial.
View attachment 28708
Seriously, are they claiming this? World beating safe standing courtesy of your patronisingly working class tolerant Tory government. Absolute ****s.
 

Timberwolf

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
10,992
Reaction score
9,711
So the Conservatives are claiming they delivered it. And they used the South Bank as their “poster boy” yet we weren’t allowed to take part in the trial.
View attachment 28708
I couldn’t quite understand it, when the media made a song and dance about Chelsea and United (?) having railed seating/safe standing, calling it the first in the country. Didn’t the South Bank count?
 

jrpb-3

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
14,160
Reaction score
7,248
Seriously, are they claiming this? World beating safe standing courtesy of your patronisingly working class tolerant Tory government. Absolute ****s.
thought we could have applied to take part but decided not to ? might be wrong on that though
 

AndyY

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Sep 19, 2016
Messages
6,789
Reaction score
8,506
So the Conservatives are claiming they delivered it. And they used the South Bank as their “poster boy” yet we weren’t allowed to take part in the trial.
View attachment 28708

Fairly sure that we opted not to take part in the trial.

I can’t remember why but I think it may have been because of the expense of having to convert part of the visiting fans area to safe standing too, with no guarantee of the trial resulting in full time permission..

Nothing to do with not being allowed.

 

Sussex Wolf

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
24,224
Reaction score
33,939
Will anything actually change? Some rail seating in the Steve Bull lower?

Will probably mean the seats can be locked in the standing position. As you suggest, it may also mean the club considers it elsewhere, but without a lift in capacity (as is allowed elsewhere in Europe), I’m not sure I see the justification beyond what they’ve already converted.
 

greco wolf

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
5,531
Reaction score
3,091
Yes
Fairly sure that we opted not to take part in the trial.

I can’t remember why but I think it may have been because of the expense of having to convert part of the visiting fans area to safe standing too, with no guarantee of the trial resulting in full time permission..

Nothing to do with not being allowed.

that was the reason. We would have to have done the Steve bull lower as well
 

SingYourHeartsOut

"Its less confusing with a smaller brain"
Joined
Aug 11, 2012
Messages
38,057
Reaction score
36,690
Will probably mean the seats can be locked in the standing position. As you suggest, it may also mean the club considers it elsewhere, but without a lift in capacity (as is allowed elsewhere in Europe), I’m not sure I see the justification beyond what they’ve already converted.
Can't see the point in locking the seats even if they can as it's nice to sit down at half time! From memory they added one seat per block in the SB, so probably about 200 extra in there, it's pretty snug though. If they did the whole Steve Bull lower it might add 150,but probably more in the fantasy rebuild with a change to the pitch of the concrete. So optimistically towards 90k a season extra (150x20x30). So don't suppose it'll happen until they do something with it anyway (no time soon).
 

Very Proud (AKA Still Proud)

Prouder than a proud thing in Proudville
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
13,173
Reaction score
18,718
Fairly sure that we opted not to take part in the trial.

I can’t remember why but I think it may have been because of the expense of having to convert part of the visiting fans area to safe standing too, with no guarantee of the trial resulting in full time permission..

Nothing to do with not being allowed.

Technically we applied to take part and we were told we didn't qualify under their rules despite having a full stand with 5,000 rail seats. We were told to take part we would have to convert the Steve Bull lower which we weren't willing to do so we weren't allowed to enter and we withdrew our application.

We weren't allowed with just the South Bank and they used the South Bank to claim their victory!
 
Back
Top Bottom