Have a look at modern ‘safe standing’ - a far cry from Hillsborough. It’s in at Celtic & Shrewsbury (I think) but many German clubs have done it in recent years. Technically, everyone has a ‘seat’ and every row has safety rails to stop surging etc.

Will this be five? It's gonna be five! It IS five!

Hi BarEagle.

I have only used the term whopper once to challenge a post very unlikely to be true, which is as strong as I've been. In actual fact I've had some aggression directed my way, and get regularly insulted, including bringing my family into it, but it doesn't bother me: it's a human reaction when what somebody has what they believe to be an established belief challenged with logic and they can't counter, and anyway: it's only words.

Arguably, your 'warning' could also be seen as an attempt to silence me as it's inaccurate: I have not been aggressive, and would encourage you to report any instance of this to a moderator. Perhaps you just don't like the cut of my jib, or the status quo being challenged, which again is ok.

As this is my thread, I feel I should respond.

Had you read the thread, I made it clear from the outset that I would do all in my power to avoid moving and explained what I was doing so others could do the same. I have done that successfully. I believe my son and I are unique in that. It took some work.

As you said on another thread that you have followed the HOL for some time, you will know that I am a poster in good standing. It was a foolish thing to do accusing me of lying, as well as a deeply unpleasant thing. I always react to such accusations.

Turning to your following message:

''I've received several private messages commending my posts, one asking if I have a twitter account as they feel I'll be chased out soon by the 'clique' and want to follow my opinions. I've also received some nasty private messages which I'm big enough to ignore and not report. Sticks and stones and all that.

It's a shame that a small minority attempt to shut down debate and freedom of opinion by throwing insults and demeaning posts because they don't agree. Having followed this site as a non member for years it was the driving force to join: a different voice to challenge the status quo.''

As an avid reader of the HOL you will know that on multiple occasions I have argued that the site isn't welcoming enough to new people, especially those that aren't keyboard warriors. In your case, however, you were hoisted by your own petard. You came on here being negative and agressive yet have no history. You neither understood the people to whom you were being bombastic, nor do you have brownie points in the bag so people give you the benefit of the doubt.

I do not believe there is a clique on the HOL, it's a real mixture. Perhaps I am wrong. If there is a clique I sure as hell am not a part of it.

I have never known anyone to get 'run out of town'. A few people have created situations where they innevitably and predictably received red cards.

Finally, it is clear you are erudite and in fact it appears you have now toned down your posts. I would rather not lose any poster but if you make accusations against me again, by gum you will get both barrels.

Edited by Mapletree (09 Jan 2019 9.10am)

I'm sorry you feel this way.

I haven't called you a liar or questioned your integrity, I used one word: whopper. I do find your reaction to this inoffensive word fascinating.

Good standing is a term used to describe somebody's position in regards to payment received or outstanding of subcriptions or fees. It's commonly mistakenly attributed to a personal trait, which I think is similar to what's happening here.

My opinions, backed with reason are being taken personally, when they shouldn't. Any counter should be weighed against facts.

You talk about giving both barrels, but I'm not breaking any of the forum rules so I would discourage you from this as I wouldn't like you to get yourself in trouble.

I think it is very likely a trial will start next season for a period of 5 years. The introduction of all seater stadium has reduced the number of incidents at grounds dramatically, the powers that be will need to be persuaded that introducing safe standing will not be detrimental. As I understand it interested clubs will be able to put forward plans for this trial including detailed risk reduction measures and controls. In another thread another post another poster gave a description of how safe standing was done well elsewhere and this will most likely be a benchmark.

The bad news is that the Block E decision falls outside these descriptions. Coupled with people standing on and breaking seats with no enforcement by club (based on comments on this forum). Both of these are unlikely to help any proposal by the club to take part in a safe standing trial

Good point, I hadn't thought of that. Do you have a link regarding the proposed trial? I'd be interested to have a read of that.