I attended the launch of the IFC Annual Report today.

A whole section is devoted to safe standing.

- They recognise that standing is on the increase
- They recommend that the policy of reducing seat allocations to away fans who stand is reviewed.
- They seem to think that when clubs do have their allocations reduced the fans who do attend stand in "homage" to those fans who haven't received a ticket.
- There is critiscim of a prem club for refusing to serve alcohol as "punishment" for standing
- The FLA refuse to budge
- The police are not keen on the idea of standing as seats make controlling crowds easier
- They touched favourably on the Government debate last October in that they highlighted the positive comments more than the negative
- They suspect that this debate will be the first of many
- The FSF Report was "truly excellent"
- They acknowledge that the AFSO "....plainly has a problem because it is frequently their members who have to carry out Gmt legislation..."
- The report acknowledges issues to disabled fans caused by standing
- The IFC rubbish the idea that standing is dangerous quoting a senior officer or a large Prem club who could not remember an injury caused by standing.
- The IFC consider that if there was overwhelming evidence that proves fans are being hurt... falling over seats... it woudl be easy for the authorities to justify their actions
- They acknowledge the noisier support comes from those who stand


CONCLUSIONS
The issue of standing has plainly become a centre of attention for anyone and everyone involved in crowd safety. Purely from the IFC's observations it would appear that this is something for a red herring. It is actually a Customer Relations issue. the fans affected by standing in a seated arear are those who would prefer to sit, those who or are not able to stnading, and people who, even if they do stand are still not tall enough to see. All of those fans would have their view blocked if somebody stood in front of them.



The whole issue is a mess. It leaves football in the ridiculous situation where many fans that cannot stand or who don't want to stand pay for a seat, yet probably end up either not seeing or not enjoying the game. In the interests of customer service the current pretence of no standing cannot continue



The IFC recommens that something is done to resolve this ludicrous situation where clubs are obliged to enfoce a seating rule but plainly either cannot or refuse to bother. This is leaving clubs, stewards, local authorities etc in a situation where no-one seems to know what to do. Rather than running scared from what many perceived as a massive safety issue the football authorities at least need to give their clubs some help in resolving what is fast becoming the major customer care issue at many grounds.



In conjunction with Government the football authorities should consider whether allowing clubs to permit some standing areas might have some beneficial effects. IN a perverse way once the fans know that they are no longer representing the reble few, they may willingly sit down. It could also prevent those fans who want to sit, ending up in the wrong section of the stadium where persistent standing takes place. Stewards could be sensibly deployed elsewhere; it is likely that fewer police would be needed; the CUstomer RElations Dpt at the ground could get fewer fans complaining and, finally, with the removal of one source of potential aggravation it is likely that health and safety figures might improve.



To do nothing is no longer an option.

Who are this body Amanda, or perhaps more to the point do the Government/authorities have any interest in what they say?

Who are they commsioned by?

Having just googled them I can see that they are affiliates of both governemnet and football bodies whcih makes the significance of their conclusions paramount IMO.

Coudl this be the best news that we have had in the lst 12 months?

Sounds good this, well done to all.

Interesting stuff.

Yes sounds really encouraging, this would be the first time a body affiliated with the government has broached the possibility of standing areas I think?

Only the Five-O have a problem, but it's moreorless impossible to make out that sensibly placed standing areas (i.e. not having home and away standing areas next to each other, having the away standing area in between blocks of seating, etc. etc.) could make the potential for trouble in grounds any greater than it is now. The "all folk in standing areas are hooligans" is the last tottering leg the advocates of enforced seating have to stand on, and that's pretty shaky. All the old nonsense about domino effects and so forth is simply a joke now.

Quite surprised that this good news hasn't generated more comment.

Anyone can see that standing is on the increase. Let those stand who want to, and lets bring the atmosphere back into our, yes, our grounds.

Interestingly the IFC webpage seems to have dissapeared of google and whenever I now try to access the site through other links it doesnt work.

It's almost like a conspiracy theory. Perhaps the FLA have hacked in and pulled the plug!

This is certainly positive news that yet another footballing organisation is backing the introduction of safe standing areas. It's encouraging that they recognise many of the reasons currently given for not re-introducing such areas, or at the very least initiating a debate on the issue, hold very little substance. It's even more encouraging that they appear to recognise that the introduction of safe standing would in fact resolve many issues in regards to problems with supporters as opposed to increase them, which has all too often been the official line.

It's also interesting to note that they are stating that the one issue currently is at a customer service level at not that of a safety issue. This mirrors the concerns that Norwich have stated several times previously with regards to their own views on standing at matches.

I presume that a copy of this annual report will be sent to the DCMS, the FA, the Premier League, the Football League and the member clubs but are we able to confirm this? From the overview of the relevant parts of the report to our campaign and of the conclusions I would hope that it will be given a fairly high profile.

So is customer care now taking over from crowd control? If it is then its even easier for us to break down, as there is then a comman sense solution :rolleyes:

If it is now a customer care issue, then why have I been told to sit at about 75% of home games this season despite being on the back row?

Still all positive. Does this organisation know anything about us Amanda. Coul dwe try and get them officially on side?

I assume the club mentioned with the alcohol was Reading. They should be named and shamed.

Very encouraging stuff, they see the light, like most other football organisations. If they are connected to the govt. then this is brilliant news.

Quick comment on the IFC on the Daily Mail site

According to this link, the IFC provides “independent monitoring of the FA, FA Premier League and Football League” but later on in the document it's stated that “the IFC's work is dependent on their (i.e the 3 bodies mentioned above) co-operation; it has no independent powers” <_<

http://www.thefa.com/NR/rdonlyres/948F9DCC...IFCResponse.pdf

It also states that the IFC is required to report on best practice in financial and commercial matters, particularly with regard to customer service and stakeholder involvement.

So whilst customer service is included as a priority element of their brief, they needn't have gone so far as to turn the issue of standing from a safety one to a customer service one :)

Good news BUT does the IFC have any teeth, or is it just a sop? Is it still in existence, if so, for how long? (the Mail article refers to killing it off). And where's evidence of affiliation to the Government?

Good news, but as cityman says, looks like they have no teeth to back up their voice.

The IFC has been disbanded as of that last meeting and been replaced by an ombudsman so the picture is confused

but not so confused

The former head of the IFC is now the ombudsman

so this could well be a strong signal of how he will view standing issues in future?

Dug this out:

http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/NewsFromTheFA/P...FOStatement.htm

I love the last sentence about there being only 26 complaints referred to the IFC since 2001. Not exactly in the FAs interest in terms of self-regulating to refer complaints on.

“Complaints which have not been resolved by the football authorities” – be interesting to see what their definition of being resolved is, and who actually decides whether a complaint has been resolved or not - presumably the FA, Premier League and Football League. On the face of it, it's encouraging that the two guys who were at the IFC will become the IFO and Deputy IFO, but I hope that this isn't a move to try to dilute whatever powers the IFC may have had. From Amanda's post, it struck me that the final report of the IFC was pretty damning of the football authorities, and that the authorities may now want to try to sidestep what they see as awkward issues by setting up another toothless watchdog in a different guise. Be very wary about ombudsmen that are appointed and/or funded by the organisation they're supposed to keep tabs on!

Anyway, time will tell, but when the IFO is set up maybe a few letters to the FA about safe standing, highlighting that the right to stand doesn't compromise safety AND is a major customer care issue, wouldn't go amiss. If the complaints aren't “resolved”, see what the IFO then has to say.