Stop trying to twist it back to the fanatics.
Spurs stadium seats are legal because the latest green guide says barriers in front of seated accomodation are now legal. Don't believe me? No problems, we'll see when they open their stadium next month.

It's all changing, the lower tier will be safe standing very soon! I assume that's all part of the plan to maximise the effect of the singing section (which was a real success btw against spurs)

Some big exciting changes coming!

Thanks, I'd missed this development. I'm all for safe standing, so if this trial proves successful then it could be a game changer. How does this effect the legislation on the matter? The tweet says that this option is viable now, but I don't think that's correct.

Taking it at face value, it shows how poorly the club and the HF have handled the matter. If safe standing is becoming a legitimate go-to option, why not announce the intention to implement it and let those who want to remain seated choose to vacate? The integration of the HF into the vacated seats would have been organic rather than randsomed.

As usual you are trying to become the centre of attention by niggling. It doesn't matter who takes the collateral damage.

So let's be clear. The HF did not make any decision apart from to stop attending games as an active group. They requested a move to the centre of the LH.

For everything else the club is responsible, as it has said itself on multiple occasions.

In my opinion the HF has handled itself - if indeed it can be considered unitary - with great aplomb.

The HF did not 'demand my seat' or 'move me out'. In fact when I approached individuals within the HF they were extremely welcoming and not at all desirous of me leaving my seat to make way for other HF members.

I suggest you disaggregate your arguments.

My understanding to date is that the club does not believe safe standing is an available option. Rail seats can be fitted but at the moment they can't be used as standing positions. Wolves have put in some rail seats as a proof of concept in an unused area.

Seems a sensible suggestion.

Another poster has said that rail seating doesn't facilitate standing and the club doesn't support it though.

This raises another question: I thought that the council and the club had an ongoing dispute about the HF due to health and safety concerns.

What happens if they move and the powers that be (PL, FA, local authority etc) lean on the club to enforce seating?

Parish has openly said he wants it & was one of the PL chairmen who persuaded a large number of them to push for at least a trial for safe standing. I think what 'available option' means is that the rules have yet to be changed.

There is a lot of focus on Shrewsbury Town who installed rail seats in the back half of their new stand (with permission). The intention was that these would be used for non-football events however, it has fast become a stamina section. The cup game against Wolves showed it works even when at capacity.

What would really help is if they could get promoted to the Championship as then there would need to be a decision made - they either get ordered to rip it all out or the rules get relaxed for everyone.

I seem to recall a report at the end of last season which evidenced that these seats that the Celtic 'fanatics' use have reduced issues to nothing & were declared a success.

Away sections stand all over the UK & the authorities are well aware of this - hopefully, trials will start sooner rather than later.

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

Not on a singing section: on persistent standing.