Football League alls for Safe-Standing Areas in Championship - Research Paper Example

Football League Сalls for Safe-Standing Areas in Championship Abstract Overcrowding in football stadiums has always been a common phenomenon in England and long history of the game shows that the event has faced deadly accidents many a times. Safe game is always a prime matter of concern in English Premier League. It has always been a matter of dispute whether standing should be allowed in the British football stadiums which are subjected to different hooliganism incidents and fatal crowd disorder accidents. The 1989 Hillsborough tragedy had resulted in introducing all seated facilities in all the stadiums and subsequently different measures were taken. A legislative bill was proposed in the context of that and it was passed without any opposition because of the concerned issue related to safety aspects of the game. But in modern times, fan groups are protesting against the all seated facilities and football authorities have supported their views. Considering the intrinsic factors associated with the game, the government has also approved standing in the stadium by introducing new legislation on safe standing. Today, British football is on the verge of reintroducing the standing facilities because of the desire of the fan groups to stand and watch football once again. Acknowledgements The completion of this project would not have been possible without the cooperation of the sporting industry and its fans who kindly responded to my survey requests. A special thanks to you to the Newcastle United Football Club Fan forum that completed and promoted my survey Furthermore my family and friends, who have supported me during this project. I would like to express my sincere acknowledgement to the football loving fans, sports authorities and all the people associated without whom this research would remain incomplete. Contents Introduction 6 1.1Background 6 1.2Rationale 11 1.3Statement of Problem 12 1.4Significance of the study 12 1.5Aims and Objectives 13 Literature Review 14 1.6Past Incidents and Studies 14 1.7History of overcrowding incidents 15 1.8Regulations on standing in stadium 21 1.8.1The First Legislation 22 1.8.2Modification and Up gradation 23 1.8.3Provisions and Regulations of seated accommodation 25 1.9Present Scenario 31 Research Methodology 33 1.10Overview 33 1.11Nature of Research 35 1.12Research Hypothesis 37 1.13Qualitative and quantities data 38 1.13.1Research Approach: Deductive 42 1.13.4Designing the Questionnaire 46 Findings and Discussion 57 1.16Findings 57 1.17Discussion 80 Conclusions and Recommendations 83 1.18Conclusions 83 1.19Recommendations 86 Bibliography 89 Appendices 99 Introduction Overcrowding in football stadiums has always been a common phenomenon in England and long history of the game shows that the event has faced deadly accidents many a times. Safe game is always a prime matter of concern in English Premier League (Slater, 2013). Earlier, standing facilities were allowed in the stadiums which results in serious overcrowding, especially during big matches. Although large number of spectators can give significant profit figure to the stadium authority, and often can act as a catalyst to the home team, but it is generally considered unsafe. English football is an event of collective hooliganism and indiscipline and it often results in serious fatalities (Finnegan and Rookwood, 2008). To combat this problem, all- seating facility was introduced and it was a mandatory legislation to be followed by all the stadium authorities. It is generally assumed that all seating provides better safety and better comfort compared to standing facilities. Today, British football is on the verge of reintroducing the standing facilities because of the desire of the fan groups to stand and watch football once again. 1.1 Background English football has always been in the spotlight of football enthusiastic fans over the years. It all started in the year 1946 when overcrowding at Bolton vs. Stoke City match in Burden Park left 33 dead (Slater, 2013). Regulation on standing facilities did not change with this incident. The stadium authorities considered this incident as a petty case, and ignored to take necessary safety measures. But the increasing number of accidents forced to change the plan. In the year 1981, High field Road, the home ground of Coventry City, introduced an experimental change. Jimmy Hill, the head of stadium authority, had done an experiment of introducing sitting facilities to combat hooliganism. The experiment lasted for two years (Slater, 2013). It was stated that a big stadium can accommodate a large number of fans, and it serves as a great catalyst to the players out there as well, but it often results in disorders. Standing for one and half hours duration, i.e.; the duration of the total match may encourage the fans and can create substantial atmosphere perfect for a game like football, but it often results in overcrowding and ultimate failure of security. Jimmy Hill announced that if the stadium was renovated to a small, fully seated one then necessary safety measures could be ensured. Even before starting this experiment, several protests were going outside the stadium premises. The stadium was renovated in March 1981, and protests started rising in April-May. In the middle of protests, in the middle of August 1981, first match was played against Manchester United in front of an all seated capacity crowd. Although it was a success, but fans disliked it. Dissatisfied fans results in poor attendance inside the stadium and it has affected the revenue. It was announced in April 1982 that the official attendance has been reduced to 25% of the previous. The stadium authority tried to cope up with this loss by increasing the base price of newly modified seats. It was officially announced that revenue of Coventry city had risen by 15% for all home matches. Hence it was deduced that fans prefer to visit sports events if it meets the minimum level of service standards. Things got changed when only 8000 fans attended a match causing huge loss for the stadium authority. Eventually the idea got scrapped after two years from its starting (Murphy, 1984). After this, crowd disorders were a part and parcel of the game. The worst case happened in the year 1989, infamously known as the Hillsborough Disaster. On 15th April, 1989, during the FA Cup semifinal match between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest, a section of the stadium crushed. It was a big match in a small venue like Sheffield that results in drawing large number of spectators and over enthusiastic fans. The stadium was already overcrowded and due to lack of proper evacuation facilities, many people have died. The exact fatalities were 96 and 766 people were injured. The police were blamed for the incident and an investigation panel was introduced. But it could not be denied that there were faults from the stadium authority too (BBC, 2009). Most of died ones were Liverpool fans. This event has triggered the all seated legislation which was very soon introduced. According to the legislation, no separate standing areas shall be provided in a stadium where many spectators can watch and enjoy the game in standing position only (Slater, 2009). This has not only ensured safety but comfortable experience during the match. UEFA followed this trend and they banned standing areas in European games. Germany did not accept this idea because of their spectators’ choice of watching the match in standing position rather than in seated position. Fans made a point that standing in a safe position could be a thrill to watch. Football itself is a highly energetic game; dazzling atmosphere is a key factor in every game. Supporters are the hearts of the game and they should not be deprived of the enjoyment they used to receive. In the year 2001, Football supporter’s Federation was formed. The primary objective was to make sate standing a key issue in a football match. Again in 2013, all football league clubs voted in favor of safe standing. Bristol City stadium, in 2014, introduced the first rail standing area. In this case, the seats can be flipped up to allow standing. Bristol City authority announced that they do everything according to their fans demand and spectators’ enjoyment is the first priority. It is still in the process of obtaining the approval from the Sports Grounds Safety Authority. Should Standing be allowed at all? It is a matter close to many fan’s hearts. A recent survey has discovered that almost 80-90% of fan’s support safe standing during matches. The most surprising thing is that most of the fans agree to the argument for standing with prior knowledge about the drawbacks and dangers associated with this approach. They also possess full knowledge of the 1989 tragedy. The counter argument was raised by many football authorities and NGOs. They said that standing is not only unsafe and uncomfortable for the spectators, but it also ruins the image of the game. Aston Villa, Sunderland and Swansea city are the three teams already agreed to the safe standing campaign. Manchester United is rethinking the strategy of introducing a section of their home ground, Old Trafford, into a standing section with rail seats. It means the measures taken by the concerning authorities are not enough. Sports and enjoyment comes first to fans, rest all the staffs associated to risks are inevitable means of getting into the core of enjoyment (Bloom, 2013). The 1989 Football Spectators Act and 1994 amendment decreed that all stadiums in the top two divisions must be all- seated and any change in the afore mentioned needs government intervention (legislation, 1989). Football Federation backing all seated facilities has always stated that in case of a clear demand from the parties involved with the game, there should be a provision to add exception in this case in the form of safe standing. Support for safe standing It is a very natural incident in any league one or league two division games that most of the crowd prefer standing during the match. People are used to standing in high voltage matches and adding a safe standing area is going to end up with serious positive responses. During the matches of Liverpool and Manchester United, almost all the crowd stood up (Clarke, 2011). Since the Taylor’s report in 1989, technological improvements have been made. Things are not the same that they used to be. The regulatory format that follows safe standing area is called the Green guide (Football safety, N.d). Green guide sets the parameter for building and managing terrace areas available for standing. The country which first invented the alternative safe ways of standing is Germany, where the first uses of rail seats in Bundesliga matches were seen. The re- introduction of the safe standing section would not only provide the football fans with the option of standing or sitting while watching their favorite sport, but would also have a direct impact on the cost of tickets for the matches. The reduction of the tickets prices would lead to many more people attending live matches since the previous increase of the tickets locked many people in lower sections of the society from enjoying the live football matches (Finnegan and Rookwood, 2008). Support against Safe Standing The main point against safe standing facilities in UK stadiums is the safety problem in the section of the crowd and the stadium as a whole. The Hillsborough Accident has opened the eyes of many football fans on their stringent views for standing during highly tensed matches (Whetstone, 2014). It is found that rate of arrest per 100,000 supporters was higher at League One and League Two matches having standing facilities than the matches with full seated facilities (Slater, 2013). Second argument against safe standing was the overcrowding phenomenon and the resultant failure of people management due to it. The huge number of crowds needs to be managed carefully and accordingly. Overcrowding occurs due to people’s tendency to gather together during the match for chanting, supporting or even singing the anthem of their preferred clubs and it is almost impossible to evenly distribute the crowd throughout the stadium (Slater, 2013). Fixed allocated seats can act as a better solution for easier people management. Crowd may feel uncomfortable during standing throughout a one and half hour football match and to reduce their boredom; they will interact with each other. Increased interaction with each other can result in clash on their viewpoints and can lead to unwanted confrontation (Green, 2012). 1.2 Rationale It is indeed a well known fact that tragedies occurred in British football frequently. It has resulted in taking lives of hundreds of spectators. When in one hand, it can be easily deduced that extreme enthusiastic nature of fans were the main reasons of the mishaps, but on the other hand, it cannot be denied that the game of football is itself challenging enough to electrify the crowd. Therefore, crowd management should be taken seriously into account, where as crowd control can be achieved properly by reducing the total spectators. Also it is found that discomfort level of the spectators acted as a positive catalyst to the problems. For this reason, standing in the stands was banned completely via introducing new rules and legislations (Mullins, 2005). Reduced number of spectators resulted in changing the viewing experience and the game became more family friendly, but the nature of the game did not suit this ‘calm’ profile. Starting from 1989, the year when standing was stopped, fans were protesting against the idea, and eventually, support for introducing safe standing area were going loud. Protesting spectators were forcing on safe standing facilities on the basis of the right to choose either standing or sitting during the match. They were also claiming that already a large number of matured audiences are aware of the fatal occurrences that stalked the game many times and thus, they will never be that enthusiastic that they used to be. Like the German fans, British fans are also well educated about the game and safe standing facilities with modern day facilities of both standing and sitting during the match can be beneficial for both the spectators as well as the stadium authorities. 1.3 Statement of Problem From the background study it is obvious that the concept of all seated stadium is a definite way of ensuring adequate safety and security in the stadium. Standing during the match often results in unwanted confrontation among rivals due to close interaction between them. From the history of football related accidents in English Football, it is a common fact that accidents do occur frequently in case of overcrowding. Considering broader prospective of the game, banning of standing can easily be a part of the recommendations. But in case of enthusiasm, football-lovers satisfaction, there must be an alternate tradeoff in this regard, so that the standing facilities along with the related safety can be introduced simultaneously. 1.4 Significance of the study This research is going to analyze the cases related to football overcrowding and safety failures. Further it is going to focus on the restricted and secured approach of safe standing in the football matches versus the complete ban of standing in the stadiums as recommended by different disciplinary committees. Further, this research will give ways to commence future actions related to sports place safety and better crowd management procedures. 1.5 Aims and Objectives This research is intended to discover the validity of the opinion for safe standing that has been a significant matter of discussion for the last 20 years. This research will also focus on traditional views of all seated facilities and the reasons behind it. The research will be based on qualitative data obtained from unstructured interviews of focused spectators. The football fans, enforcing authorities (including the stadium personnel), and the media are considered as the proposed samples. The data from different online and offline journals, resources, published information are taken into account. The background of the study is also discussed in this research which can give an overall insight of the reason behind banning the traditionally famous standing facilities in the stadium. After that, the research is focused on regulations on standing facilities and the newly emerged approach to safe standing during the matches. The objective of this research is to study the opinion and interest of all the football fans, stakeholders, policy makers, implementers and general public for and against safe standing. Game of football is an integral part of mankind and thus, the observations are carefully monitored and analyzed. Lastly, the findings are documented from which the recommendations for stadium management can be deduced. Literature Review Football hooliganism along with the unsafe viewing has always been considered as a specific “English Disease” (Dunning, 1994). After 1960s, research on safety concerns of football became an issue of international concern. It is also found that unsafe football occurs due to the high level of tension and intensity around the games. Standing during high intensity matches is not a new occurrence in British football. It is found that most of the crowd prefers standing due to the reason that high voltage matches are a treat to watch while standing. Also it is true that enthusiastic fans prefer standing over seating because it is easier for the crowd to cheer for their home team, encourage the players by singing anthems of the club etc. the stadium authorities encouraged this standing during matches due to the reason that it can draw large number of spectators, the more the spectators are inside the stadium, the more revenue the stadium authority will earn. From the late 1960s to 1970s, provision for necessary measures to induce safety in the stadium has become a buzz around the world (Elliott and Smith, 1998). Different studies were conducted before introducing the all seated facilities in the stadium. The past studies on this issue gave an overall insight of the reason for which safe standing has always been a primary agenda in British Football (Dunning, 1994, p.136). 1.6 Past Incidents and Studies English premier league was always considered as a global event as it is of today. It was always a centre of attraction and has the capability to draw large number of crowds. During derby matches, the number of spectators became so large that the already full house stadium with thousands of fans standing inside turned into a very small venue and many spectators had no option left but to stand outside the stadium. Crowd congestion in the stadium and lack of spacing between the spectators often resulted in clashes between them (Dunning, 1994). There were several incidents when the home supporters reportedly attacked the opposition supporters just because of the extra tension added in their mindset. Adequate security personnel were to be provided during the matches even though it created little impact on the safety of the spectators. 1.7 History of overcrowding incidents The popularity of football in England had grown rapidly after the game’s codification in the year 1863. Within few years, crowds of over 20,000 watching the match was a very common phenomenon. In the year 1896, in a match in New Castle, continuous pushing from the crowd resulted in collapsing of railing in the ground. Many people were injured in that event, including a boy who lost his foot. Overcrowding in the stadiums was not a rare incident in football stadiums in the twentieth century too. But the serious drawback of this overcrowding phenomenon came in front in the year 1902 when collapsing of stands in Ibrox Park stadium due to overcrowding took away 25 lives, and injuring 517 supporters. It was a match for the British Home Championship between Scotland and England. Severe rainfall before the match day already had weakened the structure of the stand and hundreds of supporters fell from a height of 40 feet above the ground. Later, historians and sociologists tried to find the hidden and impersonal causes behind this accident. The hillside ground of Ton Pentre Football Club, Rhondda was damaged seriously due to crowd mismanagement. In the year 1911, the rush of the spectators leaving the ground resulted in breaking the iron fencing in one side of the ground and several people fell into the river below sustaining head injuries. Reports were asked by the disciplinary committee from the stadium authority and there was again not a single mention of the large number of standing crowd in the stadium. They only focused on stadium entrance and evacuation procedures (Johnes, 2001, p.3). During the year 1914, overcrowding was a common incident in British stadiums. Large crowd was seen in Southampton Stadium in Dell during 1914s. Most of them prefer watching the match in standing position. In fact, there was no seating facility for the common spectators. It was reserved only for the VIPs and the officials (Campbell, and Kelly, 2014).In that year, a wall collapse at Hillsborough injured almost 80 people. After this incident, several government regulations were imposed by the Edwardian administrators. The regulation on this private business was nothing but the imposition of economic controls by government agencies or by any external agency responsible for enforcing the regulation (Keelerand Foreman, 1998, pp. 213-222). Victorian statutory regulation of transport in the UK was the pathway to the stadium management concerns (McLean & Johnes, 2000, pp.729-49). One of the most serious incidents came in front during the year 1946s, where a minor match between Bolton vs. Stoke City drew huge crowd at the small Burden Park stadium. The organizers underestimated the match hoping that the not so premier match might not draw huge crowd and it would not turn into an exciting one too. But their prediction went wrong. It was estimated that more than 85,000 crowd were inside the stadium. Roof was only present in the Manchester end of the stadium and the Bolton end had no roof at all. It was during the wartime, and the stadiums entry and exit paths were already severely damaged. Over capacity crowd in the stadium resulted in crashing the stands and the barriers situated at the Railway end of the stadium. In the end it is found that, 33 people were dead and almost 400 were injured. Many of the fatalities were due to crashing of the steel barriers and the stands. After the match is over, many people demanded justice and subsequently, as a result of it, an inquiry commission was established. The commission recommended that more rigorous control of crowd sizes needed to be there. But the inquiry commission, lead by Moelwyn Hughes, did not make any statement on the reasons of overcapacity and on the safety aspects of the standing position. The home Club, Bolton Wanderers moved to a new ground, and the stadium was renovated to a retail park. Although this accident was one of the deadliest sports accidents in the history of the game, it did not make substantial effect on the regulation of standing positions in the stadium (Baker, 1998, pp. 120-151). One of the deadliest incidents came in front in the year 1971, infamously known as the Ibrox Disaster of 1971 (Elliott and Smith, 1998). It happened on the 2nd of January, 1971 in one of the exit stairway at the Ibrox Park Stadium in Glasgow. The match between Rangers and Celtic was attended by more than 80,000 fans; most of them were in the standing position. When Rangers trailed by a goal from the Celtic, many of the rangers supporters started to leave the ground (Forsyth, 2010). As thousands of spectators started to leave the ground by the narrow exit stairway, some people fell into the ground due to the continuous pushing from the large number of people behind them. Instant crowd outbreak resulted in disorder and many of the fans became victims of stampede. After the disaster, government had to look into the safety matter of the ground and a disciplinary committee headed by Lord Wheatley, a Scottish judge was established. His findings were published in the year 1972 which was solely focused on the renovation of the ground and the safety aspects of the exit and entry paths. Therefore this also did not consider the issue of crowd congestion due to overcrowded standing crowd (Forsyth, 2010). But this ignorance did not last very long. Jimmy Hill, head of Coventry City F.C. had planned to covert Highfield Road to a small stadium with all seated facilities amidst crowd protests. The stadium was renovated in March 1981 and on August 1981; the very first match was played against Manchester United in front of an all seated capacity crowd. Although it was an instant success, crowd dissatisfaction occurred (Dunning, 1994). It was announced in April 1982 that the official attendance has been reduced to 25% of the previous. The stadium authority tried to cope up with this loss by increasing the base price of newly modified seats. It was officially announced that revenue of Coventry city had risen by 15% for all home matches. Hence it was deduced that fans prefer to visit sports events if it meets the minimum level of service standards. Things got changed when only 8000 fans attended a match causing huge loss for the stadium authority. Eventually the idea got scrapped after two years from its starting (Murphy et.al, 1984). But this idea gave the first time idea of the advantages associated with sitting experience. A comparative view of the two different aspects, all seated and all standing was deduced which came into the focus of modern day crowd management after the deadliest accident, Hillsborough Disaster. On 15th April, 1989, during the FA Cup semifinal match between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest, a section of the stadium crushed. It was a big match in a small venue like Sheffield that results in drawing large number of spectators. The stadium was already overcrowded and due to lack of proper evacuation facilities, many people could not make safe exit. 96 people were dead and over 766 were injured. Year Incident Result Analysis of the Event and courses of action 1896 Collapsing of railing in the ground. Injured: 1 Continuous pushing from the crowd in the small exit. Crushing of part of Blackburn stadium stand. Injured: 5 Overcapacity Crowd Proper entry and evacuation management with regulations. 1902 Collapsing of stand in Ibrox Park stadium. Dead : 25 Injured: 517 Responsibility on the Contractor who built the stands. Complete ignorance on overcrowding. 1911 Breaking of iron fencing in Ton Pentre FC ground Injured: Several General rush of spectators after completion of the match. 1914 Collapse at Hillsborough Injured: 80 Government regulation on stadium authority. 1923 Overcrowding caused crowd mismanagement Injured: 1000 Public criticism and probe by inquiry commission. Lack of stadium renovation 1946 Crashing of steel barriers of Burden Park stadium. Dead: 33 Injured: 400 Crowd Mismanagement Improper renovation of stands. 1971 Ibrox Disaster of 1971 Dead: 66 Injured: 200 Ground renovation Proper Entrance and exit planning 1981 Coventry City’s all seated stadium All Seated Facility. Reduction of crowd size. No standing facility in the stadium 1989 Hillsborough Disaster Dead: 96 Injured: 766 Total ban on standing in all matches of EPL. New stadium management rules and regulations Source: (Shiels, 1998) 1.8 Regulations on standing in stadium Comfort level of the spectators during the match was always considered as an important factor in English football matches. It is found that the more the people sit in the stadium, the more it becomes organized (Fontana and Frey, 2005). Better people management is also possible if a large number of crowds sit inside the stadium. Researches on safety during football matches came into limelight after 1902 Ibrox Park disaster. Proper renovation of the stadium along with evacuation management was the primary concern of the newly enforced rules and regulations. The self-regulation of safety was in turn turned out to be a distant approach to knowledgeable and recognizable crowd management procedures and didn’t have the facility to receive advice from experts. After the 1923 incident at Wembley Stadium, where overcrowding of spectators resulted in injuring more than 1000 spectators, the inquiry commission reported that the ground was not constructed in the best possible manner and they were often subjected to frequent overcrowding. The commission recommended certain technical measures and suggested for the licensing of stadium authorities. Although the committee’s recommendations were not debated in the parliament, its technical aspects had little impact on management of football grounds. Increase in number of accidents in football stadiums were being noticed by the police. But in the absence of legislation, the police were toothless tiger in this regard and they had nothing to do but to rely on the willingness of the football world to cooperate (Shiels, 1998). In the immediate post Second World War years, the game of football reached to a new height of popularity. The limitation of safety standards with large number of crowds were exposed during the infamous 1946 FA Cup matches at Burden Park. The emerging problem of hooliganism indicated that the issue of crowd management must be viewed by the club authorities through different perspectives. As a result, the football associations of England, Scotland and Wales opted for an annual certificate that in case of capacity of 10,000 or more, their grounds are subjected to inspection by qualified personnel. The main setback of their proposal was in their definition of the qualified inspector. The inspector could be from any background, from government or from independent external bodies, but their qualification was not elaborately defined (King, 1998, p. 102). 1.8.1 The First Legislation The failure of the proposed system came in front within two years, when in 1971, 66 people were killed in the disaster at Ibrox Park, Glasgow. A committee was formed, whose report, popularly known as The Wheatley Report, had recommended that the existing system must be operated by the local authorities. As the report mentioned that the existing legislation is inadequate, new legislation on ground safety is inevitable. As a result of that, Cross Party agreement was demonstrated. To increase safety standards in stadiums, Safety at Sports Ground Act, 1975 was introduced by the Government (Fontana and Frey, 2005). The act had established a series of technical safety requirements that must be present in the ground in order to commence smooth functioning of the football match. However, the cost of implementing large-scale safety measures in the small clubs’ stadiums was increasing significantly (Denzin, 1989). This approach, thus, became very risky to the small clubs. Insufficient funds of the small clubs made this approach risky, expensive and in turn, unnecessary. But the committee was determined to ensure that not a single accident would occur in the following years. Government took a stance to support the small clubs. The act was initially only applied to the English first division and Scottish premier division clubs considering the funding problem of the small clubs. In spite of all these, in the year 1979, clubs in English premier league second division were brought under this Act. By the end of 1975, football hooliganism had become a significant problem (Shiels, 1998). Large number of crowds entering the stadium and watching the game often became extra vocal during the matches and that increased tension. Football was considered as the national sport of England where people appealed more for club’s pride than to build a safe and comfortable stadium. 1.8.2 Modification and Up gradation Expectations from the 1975 Act was high. But it turned out to be faulty when in the 1980s; British Football saw a series of disasters (Inglis, 1987). Mainly because of the poor quality of stands to accommodate over capacity crowds, several accidents took place. Most notably, in the year 1985, the valley parade ground in Bradford burnt down killing 56 people (Denzin, 1989). It was noted that there was absence of clear fire and safety management procedures but the reason of this accident was different. It was found that a member of the crowd had thrown a matchstick or so forgetting the fact the stand itself was highly inflammable. The worst scenario situation came in 1989 when 96 fans died during the FA Cup semifinal in Hillsborough, Sheffield (Denzin, 1989). This was an eye opener that revealed the true reason behind all these tragic incidents. At the primary stage, police blamed hooliganism, but the newspapers revealed the truth. Continuous public demand resulted in forming an inquiry commission under Lord Justice Taylor with a collective determination of stopping these types of mishaps for good (Siegfried and Zimbalist, 2000). Hillsborough brought a radically different approach to stadium safety through the introduction of all seated stadiums as per recommendations of the Taylor inquiry. According to Taylor report: Stadium authority should not aim their focus on the minimum measures for safety. The standards that were never achieved even though they were of the minimum level. Grounds should be renovated and updated with modern day facilities with a vision of better football watching experience. The objective of the stadium authority should focus on providing the supporters more modern and comfortable accommodation with better facilities. These can result in easier crowd control. Apart from comfort and safety, seating has a distinct advantage in achieving crowd control. Any disturbances in the all seated stadium can be easily noticed by the concerning authority. The 1989 Act formed the foundation of the Football Licensing Authority (FLA) to operate a licensing system for the grounds used for football matches with hindsight of monitoring the local authorities’ approach towards spectator safety (Johnes, 2001). Since then, standing in stadium was completely banned. From 2011, the FLA’s responsibilities were delegated to the newly established Sports Grounds Safety Authority (SGSA). The main aspects of issuing licenses are: Licensing was a scheme used to enforce the Government’s policy towards all clubs in England, Wales and Scotland to have all seated facilities in their stadiums. The licensing authority had full right to oversee the licensing and subsequent rules and regulations of grounds. In case of small clubs, the financial cost of rebuilding a stadium is softened. The money was distributed through the newly established football trust. 1.8.3 Provisions and Regulations of seated accommodation From 1989 onwards, several recommendations were made related to provision of all seated accommodation in the stadium. According to the Taylor Report, 1989, standing in the stadium during the matches was strongly not recommended and regulations related to all seated facilities came in front (Denzin, 1989). It is strongly recommended that all sports grounds (including football grounds) where spectators are an essential element during the organized event, provision of seated accommodation is recommended (Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds, 2008, p. 107).This should be applicable to the existing grounds as well as the newly constructed venues. Often there exists a concept of filling the whole stadium with seats as a mean to all seated facility (Skelton, 2014). This concept is misguided as the maximum number of seats provided is not same as the total number of safely managed seats. Therefore, the number of seats in the stadium must be carefully monitored and assessed using the guidelines provided in the Green Guide to safety at sports grounds by Department of Culture, Media and Sports. It is therefore recommended that, design of seats, accommodation, and all related matters, management must seek professional advice from competent persons with appropriate skills and expertise (Siegfried and Zimbalist, 2000). New and existing seated areas should provide enough accessible viewing to all kind of physically disabled spectators. The viewing point of each seat needs to be analyzed separately and it should be reviewed periodically by the management, in consultation with the stakeholders and football spectators (Johnes, 2001). Viewing standards are crucial factors in comfortable seated facilities. It is often found that people prefer to stand the most because of the reason that in standing position the game can be watched with a better viewing (Campbell and Kelly, 2014). It can sometimes happened that the person sitting in a seat is tall, thereby obstructing the field of view of the person sitting just behind him, ultimately results in disputes and standing of both of them. Thus design of seats must be in a manner so that it can ensure the spectators remain in seated position without any discomfort (Skelton, 2014). Quality of sightlines is an important element in calculating the viewing standards. The better the quality of sightline, the better it is for the spectators to watch the game, and in turn, the better their chance of remaining in seated position (Keeler and Foreman, 1998). It is important to ensure that there is adequate sightline so as to have safe seated accommodation (Ashton, 2013). Since the method of calculating the sightline can be complex and tricky in nature, it is highly recommended that careful selection is made in selecting the professionals that will provide the kind of advice that would be able to guide the designing of the kind of spectacular accommodation in large sporting venues. This would help not only to minimize the cost of operation but establishment of quality accommodation at the shortest time possible. The Green Guide provides guidelines for unrestricted viewing and provides a brief overview of the factors that can lead to viewing problems. The causes of potential restrictions include: a. Inadequate and inappropriate sightlines. This is the prime factor of restricted viewing and unsafe seating areas. b. The barriers in the passageways. It is often found that the spectators sitting near the entry and exit path of the ground are subjected to restricted viewing due to barriers present between the entry and exit paths and the stands. c. The barriers and fences are often segregated from upper tier to lower tier and this segregation can lead to restriction in proper viewing experience. d. Structures such as floodlights, scoreboards or temporary camera platforms can serve as an obstacle in viewing. e. Large advertising hoardings are often present in games as a mode of promotion by the sponsors. These hoardings can be a distraction to the spectators. f. In case of big football matches, numerous media personnel are present in the stadium. There can be existence of promotional staff, bookmakers and camera operators. g. Sometimes sports equipment like goal netting, protective netting can lead to restricted viewing. Management is responsible for assessing the effects of restrictive viewing from every seat and they are obliged to take appropriate action where necessary (Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds, 2008, Section 12.6, pp. 110-112). The concerning management should take the following strategies towards restrictive viewing in all seating: For newly constructed stands, there should not be presence of any seats offering serious or partial restrictions. Rigorous efforts must be made to ensure elimination of all full and partially restricted views. The management and the designers are responsible for ensuring that the viewing standards provided are adequate and appropriate. For existing construction with already existing immovable restriction, considerations must be clearly mentioned while distributing the tickets. Management should ensure that people are advised before the purchase of tickets with to partial viewing option. In case of serious restrictions, where the restrictions can’t be removed, the affected seated must not be available to the spectators and they should be excluded from the holding capacity (Keeler and Foreman, 1998). In order to ensure full protection of the seating covers, it is strongly recommended that all seated accommodation should be fully covered. Where the protection provided is partial, or there is no cover at all, the following strategies must be ensured: In case of partial cover, it is found that spectators tend to migrate from the uncovered section to the covered section resulting in crowd congestion. In these kind of situations, management should consider the following options: 1. Extension of roof or provision of new roof to the whole area. 2. Appropriate barriers and stewarding strategies to prevent and control crowd migration. In case of no cover, management must be responsible to ensure that the spectators seeking shelter do not overcrowd in other areas of the ground, especially in the covered stands. As a part of the general principle of ticketing, tickets for uncovered seats must be marked with the words ‘Uncovered Seat’. As stated in Section 12.1, provision of seats cannot guarantee safe conditions for spectators, it is also necessary to provide standard gangways in seated areas. According to BBC Sports Football, (2014), it is imperative to have carefully design the ingress and egress routes so that the safety of the spectators might be enhanced. This may also require the designing of not only the lateral gangways but also the radial gangways that are all made according to the specification of the given field. The specification of the gangways may include: a. They must be provided in a manner so that no spectator can migrate more than 30 meters from their seat in order to enter an exit system. b. Any stepped side gangway should be provided with either with a barrier or a handrail. In case of lateral gangways, the design and management of them requires particular attention such as: a. In order to discourage the enthusiastic foot spectators from standing on the lateral gangways, the designing should be done in such a way that it ensures that the people sitting on the front rows to not prevent act as barriers to them that are behind hence provoking them to stand on the lateral gangways b. In case of mid level spectators and spectators sitting immediately behind them, the same considerations need to be applied. In addition, designers should provide geometry of design in a way that the sightline used by the spectators are that are on the rows that are behind are not blocked from having a clear view of the field. Seat dimensions are essential part of all seated facilities. Safety, comfort, and amenity of spectators are the determinants of measuring seat dimensions. For newly constructed seats, it is the duty of the professionals managing the stadium to have the appropriate seats with standard dimensions must be provided to the spectators whereas in case of existing constructions, upgrading of seats may be considered. Seat width and seat row depth must be of the standards prescribed by the guideline. It is found that safe seating can be ensured if there exists proper clearway between the seats. The clear way which is need to be exactly 305 mm should be measured regularly and corrected. This distance of the leeway between the front sit and the back seat should be always clear so that people can have easy access. Such measures are required for safe movement and exist of the spectators especially when he or she has to do it within a short period of time (Campbell and Kelly, 2014). Number of seats in a row is an important factor of safety management. In the event that the rows have to deviate from the established guidelines that is used to ensure the safety of the football spectators, it is imperative that assessment are first done by an established body that would be able to submit the report that demonstrates that the new designs are not only acceptable but will not interfere with the safety arrangements and the seat design the Green Guide discusses the matter of seat design by introducing the following requirements: I. All seats should be fixed in their position in a secured fashion. The fixing should not present any trip hazards or sharp edges. II. All seats, irrespective of material used, should satisfy the ignition source requirements in accordance with the British Standards. III. Seats must be designed carefully so that it does not cause injury to the user. Along with the stated recommendations, all seated accommodation will be assessed based on their physical conditions in terms of structures, sightlines etc as well as the safety factors like holding capacity, standing in seated areas etc (King, 1998). 1.9 Present Scenario Continuous protests from football enthusiasts against all seated facilities in the stadiums have resulted in deriving the most obvious question, that is, “Has the time come for standing areas to return to top-flight football? Or should it remain a thing of the past?” (Bloom, 2013) Different think tanks have shared their thoughts taking into consideration the crowd behavior and responses. Safe standing facilities have already existed in Germany and it inspired them. Following by a decision, Scottish premier league authority have allowed the return of safe standing in the stadium. Subsequently, the obvious debate came in front about the safety issues of British Football (Sky sports, 2014). English football has planned to introduce safe standing in their stadiums. The rules for safe standing are also included in the Green Guide provided by department for Culture, Media and Sports (Green, 2012). In their guidebook, standing accommodation can be provided to the sports venues which should be properly are done so as not to affect the safety arrangement of the stadium (Sharratt, 2013). In addition, the establishment of the standing accommodation should take into account not only the ease with which the spectators access available amenities but also the standard measure of comfort that would fulfill the recommendations required in seated areas (Bloom, 2013). Planning, designing and adding of a new standing area for the football spectators need to involve converting the seats to rail seats. Management must seek professional advice from competent and experienced persons during the design of the stands (Green, 2012). Good design is considered as the most important factor of introducing safe standing areas. However, it can be complicated to control the standing crowd because they may be in constant circulation. A proper system of controlling the standing crowd include the balanced use of various interrelated elements like entry systems, ensuring that the terrace steps are safe, the entry and gangways need to be secured (McLean and Johnes, 2000). Other factors include use of the crush prevention barriers and having exits routes ready for emergency evacuations. The safety in the standing sections of the stadium and circulation routes can be secured by: For the spectators that need to use the standing sections, they should be able to gain access with from any point of entry. It is imperative that the spectators provided with enough room so that they can easily move out of the venue at the convenience or when they are required to do so. When the event is in progress, spectators must be able to gain access to emergency facilities in an easier fashion. Gangways, clearways and terrace steps must be properly designed so that the spectators don’t experience any restrictions or discomforts (Porter, 2014; Sharratt, 2013). Green guide has strongly mentioned division of standing positions, i.e., large areas of standing accommodation should be divided into small divisions with pre-analyzed capacity. Entry and exit to each division must be controlled by pre-determined designated tracks. It is important that the security and managers ensure that the standing sections are not carrying excess people. Decomposition of large stands into smaller divisions is the most suitable way of converting the stands. Following the Green Guide’s regulations on safe standing in the stadium, the concerning authorities considered this option as a suitable one and ultimately bent to the pressure of crowd demand. The first change initiated was in Bristol City, where in Ashton Gate stadium, first rail seats were introduced (Porter, 2014). Although it was introduced in only two stands following all relevant legal hurdles, it received a large number of positive feedbacks. Large majority of the fans were already supporting this option and the redevelopment of the stadium took place in accordance with the crowd opinion (Baker, 2014). Research Methodology 1.10 Overview Following an established mechanism for conduction of research is important as it provide the data that can help organization and companies to establish effective strategies and products that would be relevant to the target market (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). Depending on the nature of the research, there are various tools and techniques that are available and help in the processing and analysis of the collected data so that the researcher can reach the desired goals (Kolb, 2008, p. 12). More importantly, in the business world, conducting market research provides insights and market opinions or trends that are collected and carefully analyzed for the desired end. Research methodology used in a particular study would also determine the sources of data used by the researchers whether it is focusing on the consumers, policy makers or the consumers of the products (McDaniel and Gates, 1998, p.5). For effectiveness and validity of the research findings and report, a researcher is expected to abide by the set procedure of conducting market enquiry. For example, the use of the research question is important in providing the framework and structure that would guide all the activities that would be undertaken in the research process. The purpose and goal of the research determine the kind of the sources that would be collected to test the hypothesis in the study. While the approach in the study is critical, it is the planning of what to include in the research method that indicate the resources that is required in undertaking both the primary and secondary research. After the analysis of the data, the final stage in the research process is the development and presentation of the final report. Figure: Overview of Research Methodology (Source: Kolb, 2008, p. 23) 1.11 Nature of Research There are two main methods of undertaking research; these are either the primary or the secondary research. Primary research This is the method used to compile the statistics from the data that have to be collected from the targeted sources. The data used have never been used by any other researcher before and is usually referred to as raw data. Some of the tools that are used in collecting data in the primary research may include questionnaires, interviews, surveys, and focus group discussions among many other techniques (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). These are some of the tools that would be used to meet the objective of this research is to study the opinion and interest of all the football fans, stakeholders, policy makers, implementers and general public for and against safe standing. The primary research is important in this research as it helps to access accurate opinions and other facts as they are in the market place and therefore develop a product that is suitable. It however has the disadvantage of being expensive to implement Secondary research This research process is complimentary to the primary research and involves a researcher collecting research from other research that has been done in that field (Creswell, 2014). The sources of data would therefore be composed of books, trade journals, policy documents on sports management and other research publications found on the internet. Although is it is cheaper to conduct than the primary research, the validity of the data used my sometimes not be valid. The primary research is mostly used in the collection of data foe literature review and development of the research instruments (smith et al. 2009) 1.12 Research Hypothesis Here, in this research, the independent variable is Issue of standing in the stadiums, whereas the dependent variables are sports place safety, security, comfort and diversity. This can be explained in the following function: Following the function, the research hypothesis can be drawn. Hypothesis is nothing but the tentative explanation of the research problem, the possible outcome of the research and a scientific guess about the research outcome. There are two types of hypothesis. Research Hypothesis/Alternative Hypothesis (H1): this is the statement which is set to establish only when the null hypothesis is cancelled after data analysis. In this research, alternative hypothesis is “Safe Standing should be allowed in British football matches”. Null Hypothesis (H0): this represents a story that has been put forward because of the belief that it is true in nature. In this research, the null hypothesis is “Standing should not be allowed at all in football matches”. It is represented in the following manner: 1.13 Qualitative and quantities data Quantitative data is basically used in the research for it provides the empirical evidence for undertaking research decisions. The empirical evidence is important in developing the conceptual framework that is used to test the variables used in the research (Creswell, 2014). This research method that is based on the actual data collected from the research materials is based on the data that can be numerically described (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, 2008). It is the best approach for descriptive research. It would also be characterized by the use of the positivist and scientific approaches of testing knowledge requiring a researcher to think from the cause and effect and testing of specific variables and hypothesis. The best strategy for quantitative kind of research would be the use of experimentation and survey to collect the needed data. Qualitative research refers to the research data that is derived based on the opinions and interpretation of the people in the research. It is therefore based on the meanings that are provided by respondents to the research questions (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, 2008). The qualitative research would therefore mostly be done by interviews and open questionnaires and would often be better implemented by a researcher that has prior knowledge of the direction the research would take since it is based on the constructive perspective. The qualitative research would therefore be done successfully by employing such strategies like ethnography, phenomenology, use of the grounded theories and case studies. Exploratory Research, Descriptive Research and Causal Research Research may seem like a simple process of making the tools and collecting data information, but researchers has noted the need to carefully select the correct method of research for effectiveness (Creswell, 2014). The explorative, descriptive and causal research is very important in research in such areas like marketing, technology and social sciences research. Exploratory research This is the form of research that is done when very little is known about the topic that is being investigated. The primary aim of the exploratory research is to provide a researcher with the pertinent information that would enable the initial formation of hypothesis that would help in the study of the subject (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, 2008). This is the research that is undertaken to uncover information that unknown areas that is covered in the research question. It is therefore undertaken in a very flexible manner so that the researcher can have a wider scope for establishing the required insights and the pattern to be used in the study (Krishiswamy et al. 2009). The descriptive research on the other hand focuses on specific research question of the study. It therefore makes use of a set of objectives like the population, market segment and the problem of the study (Green, Tull and Albaum, 1993). The descriptive research would therefore not only need the research questions but also the populations and the determined method of investigation that would be used in the study. One example is the longitudinal studies that look at the behavior of the subject of the studies over a given period of time (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, 2008). The other descriptive research is the cross sectional study that would basically observe a population over sometimes. It is the kind of research that is used to find the root cause of the problem or solutions. The third category is the causal research that may sometimes be referred as the explanation research. According to Blanche et al. (1999), the causal research is used by an investigator to establish the causal relationship between the various variables in the study. This is an important element of the primary research as it based on the determination of the cause and effect relationship in the research question. On the other hand, the descriptive research has been looked at as the qualitative research. This research on the investigation of whether safe standing can be re-introduced back to the life football matches. This research was not only done by the qualitative data but also on the interpretative philosophy (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). It therefore uses deduction method of data analysis so that all the different opinions respondents would be included into the study (Malhotra and Dash, 2009). The interpretation is also included in the final conclusion based on the guidelines of that are developed by the literature review. This research methodology has been presented by the use of research onion developed by Malhotra and Dash (2009). Figure I: The Research Onion Source: (Malhotra and Dash, 2009) The above research onion is a summary of the of the research methodology that has been employed in this study of investigating the re-introduction of the safe standing for the fans interested to watch live English matches (Malhotra and Dash, 2009). The onion provides the philosophy of the study, the approach that was used in the data collection and analysis, research design and tools used in the data collection which is the interviews. 1.13.1 Research Paradigm: Interpretive The interpretive philosophy has been selected in the study due to the fact that it provides for the researcher to get the actual opinions of the respondents in the data that is collected. This descriptive way of research is ideal in the case of participant observation (Creswell, 2014). In this research interpretive method is used because the hypothesis is aimed at producing an understanding of the effect and reaction of law enforcing authority’s decisions on the most energetic game of the country. To conduct interpretive research on a setting where already there exists substantial debate and dispute over this burning issue, intense and methodical participant observation is required, followed by deliberate and long-term reflection on the mindset of the participants involved, strong analytical skill should be present in the interviewer (Orlikowski et.al, 1991). An understanding of the social process involving all the all participants inside the world, who are generating the reaction, is the key essence of interpretive research. Generally in case of interpretive research paradigm, content analysis method is used to analyze the data. The advantages of interpretive research lie in the scientific trustworthiness of the paradigm- i. Credibility: this is also the internal validity of the data. The prolonged engagement, persistent observation associated with interpretive approach assures the credibility of the data. ii. Transferability: this is external validity of data. The broad description of context, process, and findings helps in establishing the trustworthiness of the research. iii. Reliability: The descriptive analysis method used in this method makes the paradigm dependable. iv. Objectivity: there exists substantial consistency between collected data and the interpretation. 1.13.1 Research Approach: Deductive Deductive reasoning is the method of developing hypothesis based on existing theory, and after that, designing a suitable research strategy to test the developed hypothesis (Pelissier, 2008, p.3). This is known as the top down approach where the researcher comes down to the narrow conclusion of the research after observation and analysis of the collected data. In short, deductive reasoning is the method of deducting conclusions from propositions (Monette et. al, 2005, p.34). In our research, to confirm the general hypothesis, i.e. whether standing should be allowed in British football or not, collected data are analyzed to link the deducted observation with proposition prescribed (Gulati, 2009, p.42). The whole model (Waterfall) of deducting approach is shown below: Deductive approach leads to testing of observations with the existing theory which can result in acceptance or rejection of the hypothesis (Snieder and Larner, 2009). 1.13.2 Research Method: Qualitative The qualitative research is the selected for this study due to its ability to facilitate the researcher’s interpretation of the data according to the meaning that the respondents ascribed to them (Creswell, 2014). It will therefore enable the researcher to delve deeper into the implementation of the safe standing in for the English football games. Through qualitative research, it is possible to not only interpret the subject matter but also priorities on the important information that the data has provided. This will be done through in-depth interviews that provide a chance for the respondents to be describing exactly how the central theme in the study is can be solved. As a result, the investigator is able to focus on the actual meaning of the respondents answer to each question on the interview (Kvale, 1996). The qualitative research will therefore not only cover the factual responses that the interviewees give but also their own meaning of the answers that are provided based on their experiences For effectiveness, the in-depth interviews need to be supported by questionnaires that enable the people that have been interviewed so that they can clarify on the information that they have provided and other additional information. This method of investigation can be very costly in both time and money since the interviewers have to meet all the respondents physically and record the responses that they provide. Qualitative research can also be done by online surveys that can support the unstructured interviews and data collected through focused group discussions. 1.13.3 sampling Method Sampling design Sampling design is very important step in the collection of the valid data in any kind of research. The process includes processes like the definition of the target population for the study (Green, Tull and Albaum, 1993). Determining frameworks for the sample selection and use of relevant sampling techniques based on the kind of population. It is important that the researcher should have the right sample size to provide result that can be generalized to the entire population. Target population The target population for the study on the need to reintroduce safe standing in the football matches would mainly involve football fans and policy makers. Sampling Frame The sample will consist different kinds of people that are compost of football loving audiences as well as the law enforcing authorities are domestic in nature. The research is concerned with the football loving audiences from England, Scotland and Wales only, and even if the domain does not seem very large, it provides substantial diversification in opinions due to the unstructured nature of the interview process. Sampling Technique The sample techniques that help in the data collection include the simple sampling technique. This method is used because of the following reasons: Although it is true that English football spectators generally shows the tendency to attend the matches in groups, but it is found that every member of the group tends to response in the same manner as other members of the group (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, 2008). Thus taking the whole group in sampling (Stratified Random) is not a suitable option because a single member can represent the whole group. Football Authorities include the police, stadium authorities and the local law enforcing bodies. Each governing body has their own laws and regulations and it is generally fixed in nature. In this case also, a single member of the group has the ability to represent the whole body. Simple random sampling provides more variation. As the matter discussed in this research is debatable for a long time, random sampling can show the diversified nature of respondents’ behavior. Sample size For appropriate and accurate data collection, 300 football fans were shortlisted and interviewed. These 300 football fans were chosen in a convenient manner so that a single football fan can represent their own group. Thus, the number of focus groups was 300. There are 92 professional football clubs exist in the whole UK. But, for the purpose of ease of data collection, a selected 50 renowned football clubs were selected. A single member having adequate knowledge and idea about this issue were selected and they were approached with the designed close ended questionnaire. 1.13.4 Designing the Questionnaire As an important primary tool for collecting data, the researcher is guided by the nature of the data required and the purpose of the research. The Questionnaires are one of the tools that were used to collect data in this study. This is because they enable the respondents to answer the questions more elaborately (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). It is therefore a tool that consists of several questions that the respondents should answer. While the structured interviewed have been used quantitative research. However, this study will use the open ended questionnaires in the face to face administration in which the respondent’s answers are carefully record. The questionnaires are designed so that the researcher can correctly get the opinion and suggestion of the population that are targeted. According to McBurney and White (2009), the researcher also needs to focus on getting quality data that is relevant to the research question so that the research will be able to meet the objectives for the research. As an exploratory research, the research was designed by having the open ended questions as opposed to the close ended questions. The open ended questionnaires have the advantage of enabling the respondents to provide the exact answers that are expected by the researcher based on the predetermined format, but they may not be effective in providing opportunity for the respondents to explain their Reponses (Green, Tull and Albaum, 1993). Before the questionnaires are administered, it is imperative that a pretest is done after they have designed so that their accuracy can be determined. The pretesting of the questionnaire is very important and it is done by having a small scale demonstration of the data collection using the designed tools (Beri, 2010, p. 18). The pretest helps in checking the relevance of the designed question that will be used in the main research. It also helps to eliminate the errors that might be in the designing of the questionnaire enabling the changes to be done to improve the accuracy of the instruments. 1.13.5 Data collection methods: Focus Groups and Unstructured Interviews These are other tools that are used to collect data include unstructured interviews and focus group discussions. The interviews are important in supporting the use of the questionnaires since they help in the easy collection of the data from the correspondents (Creswell, 2014). These types of questionnaires have the advantage of enabling researcher to seek clarification from the respondents about the answers they provide. The focus group discussions are important in enabling the respondents to brainstorm over the issues that concern to the study (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, 2008). They are done by unstructured interviews that are flexible and responsive thus allowing the appropriate data to be collected. Types of Data – primary and secondary Data This data used both the primary and secondary data to reach find the solution to the problem. To start with, the secondary data was mainly used in the literature review and designing of the tools of the research methodology. The researcher therefore analyzed books, journals, magazines and public policy documents that have articles on safe standing on the stadium during the English football matches (Malhotra and Dash, 2009). The primary data on the other hand was collected through various instruments that include questionnaires, unstructured interviews and focus group discussions. Through these tools, it was possible to get views of various categories of people on the issues of safe standing on the Terrance’s to watch the football matches. Focus Groups: Focus group is the form of qualitative research where a group of people are asked about their perceptions and beliefs towards an idea (Creswell, 2014). Generally, in focused groups, questions are asked in an interactive manner to find the random opinion of the group. Focus groups are important element of acquiring feedback regarding newly commenced ideas or approaches. Focus groups are generally interviews, conducted by an interviewer among a small group of respondents (Green, Tull and Albaum, 1993). In this research the focus groups are the groups of football fans as well as the concerning authorities. The fundamental difficulty of focus group is the observer dependency associated with it. Known as the experimenter’s bias, focus group interviews are often affected by the own thought process and comprehension of the interviewer. Sometimes, one focus group’s value perception becomes so consistent with interviewer’s own mentality that he/she is subjected to group thinking. Apart from these biasness problems, focus group interviewing is the most suitable way to perform a qualitative research containing deductive interpretive paradigm. In our research, different focus groups are targeted and interviews are conducted (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, 2008). Selection of focus group is the most important element. It is desirable that each member of the focus group exhibits same opinion as the rest of members so that interviewing a single random member of the group can be useful enough to find the related information. Interviews Interviews were selected as the rights tools to be used in this study as they enable a researcher to instantly correct the information from the respondents. Since this is a qualitative research, just like the questionnaires, the interviews questions were designed to so as to ensure flexibility on the part of the respondent to provide explain their point of view (McNamara, 1999). Structured interviews These are the forms of interviews use in the quantitative research and would involve the use of preplanned structures that define exactly how a question should be answered. The interviews questions are much closed end and can be done through such methods as face to face interviews through telephone and use of internets (Green, Tull and Albaum, 1993). Since the questions are structures, the role of the interviewer is limited to reading and ensuring that the question is understood to be answered correctly so as to reduce the biases. Semi structured interviews In this type of interview, there is structure of the questions but the process is not controlled so much. It is also referred as the in-depth interview, the control part of the interview helps to bring about a standard in gathering of the data while at the same time having flexibility for clarification of the data (Creswell, 2014). The indepth interviews are not only time consuming but the flexibility may lead to bias of the interviewer on the respondents. Unstructured Interviews This is the interview method that is used in this study of seeking to reintroduce safe standing on the football stadia during English matches. This is a tool that is more effective in soliciting people’s social consciousness since they are conducted in a free and non standardized manner. It would therefore be used to establish the correct approach in establishing a safe standing policy during the football matches. According to Minichiello et al. (1990), the interview type of interview can only be possible through the social interaction between the researcher and respondents. Since they are based on the observation of the participants, it is the right tool for understanding people’s behavior that cannot be included in the other methods of investigations (Patton, 2002; Punch, 1998). The researcher selected this method of data collection as it also exposes the researcher to the other realities of the Football funs because they are based on the narrations. Although the hypothesis would be pre-determined by the research design, the questions may be developed randomly during the interview. The main limitation of this method of data collection is that they are random and therefore may not focused on providing main solutions to a problem. This kind of research therefore needs to be guided by the researcher’s knowledge about the subject of study hence enabling them to start the conduct the interpretive paradigm (Denzin.1989). So as to ensure that the research on the re-introduction of the standing during football matches comes up with a reliable data, the researcher would need to overcome such challenges like investing time to the administration of the interviews so as to get in-depth understanding on issues. These kind of interviews need to be administered with professionals who understand the terms that are likely to be used by the respondents. The random nature of the data collection process makes it very difficult for the analysis to take place. Methods of conducting unstructured interview Step 1: Getting to stadium settings As a new area of research, there were many underlying reasons that had to be considered to collect reliable data. In order to ensure success of the study, important that the right people that provide their views on the introduction of the safe standing facilities in the football stadiums. The researcher therefore used different negotiation techniques that are to get access to the relevant crowds. Since some of the respondents included the policy makers, the investigator has to take into account other factors like political and policy issues that may arise when taking while trying to get the responses from the concerned people. The researcher did not only deal with the restrictive nature in accessing the standing section of the stadiums but also sorting out statements of the fans who provided unsubstantiated and biased statements. Step 2 Understanding the interviewees It is imperative that a research study that employs unstructured interview design tools that can be used to categories responses for proper analysis. The research need to hire qualified research assistants that would be able to delve deeper into the various responses and diagnoses the real issues of concern to the problem of the study (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, 2008). The researcher needs to go beyond the biases of the football fans and political differences of the stadium management and football administrators. The can only be done by appreciating of the cultures of the interviewees. Steps 3: importance of the presentations Presentation of the interview is critical since the unstructured interview is a conversation process hence the quality of the interview can be influenced by how the interviewer presents the questions to the target responses. Since the issue of problem of the study, introduction of the standing in stadiums during live matches can have political and cultural persuasions, it is imperative that research assistants are able to ask the right questions that will get the opinion of the respondents contribute to the goal of the study. This means that the questions that are presented to the football fans will not be the same as that presented to the football administrators who have the expertise on the advantages and disadvantages of standing in the stadiums during live games. Step 4 locating the interviewee The designing of the sample population used in the study carefully provided from the people that would be requested to be interviewed in the project (Blanche, et.al., 1999). In the policy formulation to reintroduce standing option during football games required that the respondents be knowledgeable so that they can be able to provide more insight by answering the research questions. As much as the funs love the game, they may not be able to answer the questions about the administrations and safety concern that need to be sorted. Step 5 Gaining trust and establishing support In order to gain the required information from the managers of the stadiums and football administrators, it is very necessary to gain the confidence and trust of the officials. Without trust, it was not possible for the Football policy makers to provide the reasons that led to the mismanagement of allowing the fans to stand in the stadium. The interviewees needed to be assured of the confidentially in the compilation and distribution of the report’s findings. By keeping the conservations with the respondents trustful and harmonious, it was possible to achieve the purpose of the research (Fontana and Frey, 2005). Step 6: Capturing of the data So as not to interrupt the flow of the interview, this research process employed audio recording of the interviews. The other importance of audio is that it ensures that every detail is captured and the researcher can go back to it during the analysis and get the exact wording and meanings of the respondents. This was supported by short hand notes so that important facts would not be left out (Lofland et al. 2006) 1.14 Data Analysis Method: Content Analysis Due to the large unstructured nature of interview as a data collection method, the data analysis was done by content analysis method (Green, Tull and Albaum, 1993). This method follows a procedure of categorizing the data that has been collected verbally by summarizing the answers which are allocated in tables to establish the relationship between them. The content analysis is especially useful in analysis of the data that is collected by such qualitative processes like the unstructured interview and focused group discussions (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, 2008). This is because it takes into consideration the behaviors and underlying meanings of the respondents answers. Since it involves coding and classification of data, this method would be suitable for establishing the meanings of the responses provided to the research question. Data are therefore analyzed in two levels that include: Basic level, which is the level in which the description of the data is done and therefore does not make use of the theories in understanding data. The second part is known as the Latent level and it involves making interpretive analysis that is guided by use of assumptions and theories. Justification of the use of unstructured interview The interview tool was selected in this study as it enabled the researcher to direct specific question to the interviewee who is able to responds to the specifics issues. In cases the responds is not adequate to answer the research questions and meet the objectives of the research, the interviewer is able to ask the question in another way so that the interviewee can clarify what it means (Green, Tull and Albaum, 1993). . This would enable the interviewee to put weight on his observation in the need to reintroduce standing on the stadium while watching the football matches. The unstructured interview can also be used to conduct the focus group discussions as it enables the researcher to direct specific question according to the qualification and knowledge of the respondents in the football standing in UK. The unstructured interview was therefore used to collect data from stadium mangers, football administrators and other government officials because they are very flexible and provides the opportunity for the researcher to control the interview according to the objective of the research and expertise of the professionals. The people to be interviewed were also carefully selected because of their influence in the formulation of the policies and management of the football activities. In order to avoid ambiguity, the researcher modified the research questions so as to increase the understanding of the respondents on the objective of the study and how the data they should provide. Justification for using the questionnaires The questionnaires were used in this study to support the information to provide more structural data. This method of data collection was selected as it enables the respondents to answer the questions at the comfort of their offices or homes when they are not interrupted (Kerlinger, 1994). This tool was therefore suitable for the officers that did not be accessed so that we could undertake the research interview. The questionnaires are therefore most applicable method of data collection since they allow the respondent to answer the questions at his or her discretion hence increasing the accuracy of the data provided. In addition, the use of the pretest questionnaires enables the researcher to establish the attitude of the respondents (Beiske 2007). 1.15 Validity and Reliability of the research The researcher took several steps to ensure the research questions and themes that were to be probed further was the right tools to provide information on the issues of standing in the football games. The research is therefore very factual and related to the other research that was discussed in the literature review (Kerlinger, 1994). The tools used in the data collection, which are questionnaires and unstructured interview and focused group discussions, were all appropriate for providing valid and reliable data that can be used in establishing policy on standing during football matches. It is however crucial to understand that there are several aspects of research validity that can affect the reliability of the final research findings. Limitations of the research Focus of the study and limitations are some of the factors that affect the validity and reliability of the research study and therefore the focus of the study has to be indicated (Kerlinger, 1994). The limitations attributed by the nature of this research include is the inadequate literature and other research that has been carried out. The research could therefore be affected by literature on the football policies that had not been updated to take into account modern technological development. This made it difficult to design the tools like questionnaires and data analysis tools that were used to complete the study (Beiske, 2007). It was also noted that some of the respondents did not take seriously the interview and focused group discussions (Kerlinger, 1994). On the other hand, some of the respondents with the accumulated knowledge in the development of football did not have enough time to delve deeper into the concerns of this study. Findings and Discussion 1.16 Findings When the respondents from focus groups of both the football fans and the concerning authorities are approached with the set questionnaire, the result is found out as below: Result of interviews of football fans 1. Should standing areas be allowed in football matches? When the fan groups were asked about their views on standing in the stadium, which is, indeed, the proposed research question, it is found that most of the fans feel that standing in a safe pattern should be allowed in football matches. The fan groups were selected irrespective of their ages. While it was expected that the traditional family oriented fans may opt for all seated propaganda, the result found out significantly different. Almost 90% of the fans preferred safe standing facilities in the stadium (Bloom, 2013). 2. Do you feel comfortable in standing during the match? It was surprisingly found that most of the young fans prefer standing during the match because they prefer to experience match in groups. Whereas it is found that traditional old fans who tend to visit the ground with their family members, prefer seated position over standing on the ground of comfortable experience (Skelton, 2014). 3. Do you feel rail seats create obstructed view? When the spectators were asked with this question, it was found that almost 99% of them felt that safe standing using rail seats do not create obstruction in watching the game (safe standing road show, n.d.). 4. Do you feel standing during the match unsafe? It is found that fans have strict knowledge of the past fatal incidents that happened with the game and they are fully aware of the things that can happen if safe standing is introduced (Safe standing road show, n.d.). But most of them viewed that safe standing is not unsafe now a days because of the changed spectator behavior and infrastructure (BBC Sports Football, 2014). 5. Do you think standing creates better atmosphere? Almost every fan representing their respective focus groups exhibited that standing creates electrifying atmosphere that is required with the game of football (Campbell, and Kelly, 2014). 6. Can you watch a game with your family members while standing? Most of the young fans felt that watching the game with family members is unrelated with the mode of watching the game. On the other hand, it is found that traditional fans who prefer watching the game with family members, felt that standing creates problem in watching the game with family members (Ashton, 2013). 7. Do you think women will dislike standing during match? While it is true that only 7% female fans prefer to view the game in standing position which strongly opposed the position of the fans in support of safe standing in matches, but it is also true that most of female fans felt that standing creates better atmosphere (Slater, 2013). 8. Don’t you think current stands in stadium cannot be changed? Fans said that current stands could be changed with little modification as opposed to the view of the football authorities (Sharratt, 2013). 9. Can you move while standing during the match? Fans said that they can easily move in the gangways present in between rail seats. Standing can increase ease of moving in the stadium (Slater, 2013). 10. Do you feel football authorities are quite stringent on their views on allowing standing? Football fans think that the authorities are quite stubborn on changing their view towards safe standing in football (thefa.com, n.d.). 11. Would you like standing area's to return to British Football? Regarding as to whether fans would like standing area’s to return to British Football, we got mixed reactions with majority (55.7%) being of idea that standing areas to return to British Football, 31.3% disagreed while 13% neither agreed nor refused (undecided). 12. Do you think standing areas would enhance spectators’ experience? Majority of fans (69.5%) believe that standing area’s would enhance spectators experience while approximately 30% of the fans are of a different opinion (standing area’s would have no impact in enhancing spectators experience). 12. Do you have any safety concerns? Fear of overcrowding is the major safety concern of the fans, 43.9% of the fans are worried of overcrowding in the stadiums, and another 16.4% raised concern of emergence of conflict while 13.5% feared the return of hooligans. However, 26.3% of the fans had no safety concerns at all. 13. Should there be any restrictions on standing areas? 46.3% of the fans are advising that restriction of children in the stadium should be enacted, 29.4% feel that restrictions should be put only in small sections while 12.5% agree that restrictions should be made though they didn’t specify. However, 11.9% of the fans believe that no restrictions on standing areas should be made. Result of the interviews of football authorities 1. Should standing areas be allowed in football matches? Football authorities are quite strict on their views on standing or seating in the stadium. Some of the traditional football clubs did not agree with this issue whereas some clubs, like Bristol city, Manchester United, are supporting this keeping a view on the fans’ urge (Crafton, 2014). 2. Do you think standing during the match is safe? Most of the stadium authorities behaved in a partisan way, while some of them expressed that standing during the match as unsafe, others supported this view and agreed that safe standing with modern day infrastructures and facilities can ensure safety and security. In recent times it was found that most of the clubs supported safe standing (Porter, 2014). 3. Are you aware of the fact that people prefer standing during the matches? When this question was asked it was found that football authorities were fully aware of the fact that football fans generally preferred to stand during tensed football matches. Standing resulted in creating ideal atmosphere for the game (The Football Supporters Federation, 2014). 4. Do you think medical staffs will find it difficult to reach ill fans? Some clubs argued that due to the overcrowded excited nature of standing crowd, it would be hard for the medical staffs to reach any spectator in case of illness. But it can also be said that standing basically provides better space between seats, which can result in ease of access to the medical staffs (safe standing road show, n.d.). 5. Is safe standing areas difficult for the police to control? It is always a matter of argument that police will find it difficult to control the standing crowd. English football is subjected to widespread hooliganism. There are numerous incidents of crowd disorder due to security failures occurred in the past. Clubs always expressed this issue as one of the most primary issues against standing in football stadium, though some clubs are opposing this view by ensuring proper police control (Whetstone, 2014; safe standing road show, n.d.). 6. Do you think clubs prefer to build all seated because of revenue only? It was found that although rail seats offer large number of fans inside the stadium, but the cheap price of ticket resulted in low revenue. Seated accommodation ensured high revenue because of the high ticket price (Siegfried and Zimbalist, 2000, pp. 95-114). 7. Can you guarantee even distribution of fans while standing? Even distribution of fans can be ensured by dividing large block into small divisions in the way that is recommended by the green guide. Clubs too agreed with that (Sky sports, 2014). 8. Do you think standing increase confrontation among opposition fans? Football authorities think that standing encourages confrontation among fans if they are not organized in a separate manner (Green, 2012). 9. Do you prefer a mix of standing and seating in your stadium? Fans generally prefer to stand in their allocated space only. When safe standing campaign was first taken into forefront, the stadium authorities and the governing bodies were thinking of introducing both standing and seating facilities in a stadium (Russell, 2014). 10. Do you think rail seats serve as an alternative of seating? When asked about the feasibility and preference of rail seats, authorities immediately responded in a positive manner. They pointed out that Austria had successfully introduced safe rail seating in their stadiums, so it could be easily applied in English football too (Darch, et.al, n.d.). 1.17 Discussion Therefore, from the above findings it can be analyzed that: a) Standing is not unsafe: The Football Licensing Authority had claimed continuously about the intrinsically unsafe nature of standing facilities. But when they were challenged to prove this by statistical evidence, they failed to produce relevant back up statistics to prove them (The Football Supporters' Federation, 2014). On the other hand, Department of Culture, Media and Sport’s “Green Guide” has introduced a large section on provision of standing facilities in the ground. They didn’t ban standing. Even the Taylor Report, 1989 did not clearly mention that standing was intrinsically unsafe. Therefore, standing is not only safe but its safety standards can be increased significantly by providing rail seats with handrail facilities for every row. b) Standing would never put off women: the common myth against standing during the match is that women strongly dislike standing. A statistical data has shown that only 7% female fans prefer to stand which proves this statement. However, contrary to the authorities’ claims, it was also found that female fans felt that standing during matches can increase the level of enjoyment of the game. Moreover, there are already four stadiums with full standing facilities during the match which turned out to be big success among both male and female audiences. c) Current stands can be changed: opponents against standing during the match used to claim that safe standing should not be introduced at all, because existing grounds could not be upgraded to the latest facilities an appropriate, easy and inexpensive way. But this argument can be easily countered. First of all, ground development, in case of existing grounds, can result in substantial return on investment because the cost of installation of rail seats is not that expensive and it assures high return. People sitting in the hospitality boxes prefer to sit throughout the match. Existing grounds are upgrading to install expensive hospitality boxes whereas rest of the stadium can be easily fulfilled with safer rail seats with least cost. Secondly, in case of new development projects, suitability of accepting stands with standing facilities is not an issue. d) Ill fans can be easily taken into medical custody: There existed claim that paramedical staff would find it difficult to get the ill fans. But in case of modern stadiums, rail seats could create wider clearways which could serve as better access to the paramedics. Thus, it can be said that rail seats can actually make things easier for the medical staffs. e) Safe standing areas would not be difficult to police to control: This entire argument was based on the assumption that offenders could not be identified by their seat number. But in reality it was found that this argument is vague. Many tickets are generally bought by one person for a group of friends or family members. Each ticket would give access to specific block only which could be easily identifiable by the concerning authority during disputes. Maximum block size would be regulated and rails along every row would make it easy for the police to trap offenders. f) Rail seats do not mean an obstructed view: Opponents claimed that rail seats would result in restrictive viewing for the spectators due to obstructions. When fans sat on rail seats, they found it difficult to watch the game. It was found that in 99% of the cases, fans did not feel distracted during the match while standing. The fans generally preferred not to seat on the rail seats, thereby reducing the possibility of distraction and unwanted confrontation. g) Clubs wanted to build all-seated grounds: the argument supporting all seated facilities was that the clubs wanted to invest money in all seated facilities. Football authorities stipulated that grounds must be all seated as a condition of their financial support. Thus, it could be said that clubs had chosen this option because they had no other choices left. But it was also true that despite losing out funding options, many clubs have listened to their fans and resisted the pressure to go all-seated. If football federation funding was available, many clubs would opt for rail seats and safe standing options. Conclusions and Recommendations 1.18 Conclusions This research is driven by purpose of understanding if standing should be allowed during the football matches. The finding of the study indicates that it is an issue that is close to the hearts and minds of the football fans. From the questionnaires, it shows that about 80% of the fans support the introduction of the standing rail so that fans can have a better view during matches (Baker, 2014). The policy makers and football administrators are otherwise concerned with the threat to security posed to the fans due to the possibility of either overcrowding or stampede that has previously led to injuries and deaths like the one experienced in 1989. This is mostly the position of the football authority and other non Governmental organizations. They argued that standing during football matches was not only unsafe but also ruin the image of the game as being violated especially when there is an incident. Some of the football clubs that have already agreed to introduction of the safe standing duueing the matches include Aston Villa and Sunderland. The Manchester united is also on the process of establishing standing section with the rail seats in its home ground, the Old Trafford. The research has therefore established that the government needs to amend the 1989 Football Spectator Acts that required all the stadiums hosting the top two divisions in the football to have only seating section. The Football Federation is on the opinion that when the conditions in a stadium meet the standards require to host standing fans safely, there need to be an exception. Although the safety measures are always a matter of concern for every standing venues, but the following advantages have been discovered by the researchers on standing: a) Standing Creates better atmosphere: The crowds feel much more involved in the game when they are in standing position. It was found that human nature instinctively makes the spectators jump out of the seats when something exiting happens in the field. As standing in the stadium intensifies the atmosphere, people generally tend to stand in all seater stadiums anyway. Also standing helps people to walk around and change positions as required which can be a better option for the spectators. b) Standing would act as a cheap alternative for the spectators: Presumably, the terraces can become cheaper than the stands. Because of this reason, the working class people will be able to reconnect to the sports. Seating is found to be a more expensive option as it includes prohibitive prices. c) Seating will be safe now: The respondents in the study who expressed strong opinion against the introduction of safe standing argued based on the Hillsborough accident that has since triggered fear in among many Football authority and fans. They argued that standing in the live matches was unsafe especially during very intense matches (Baker, 2014). The second major reason for the opposition to standing is the mismanagement by the football authority that lead to overcrowding in the standing section of the terraces. In addition, the study has established that huge number of the people can be manage well and safely in the stadiums by use fixed seats that makes the women to feel safer if all the people are seated. On the other hand, the diehard football fans are of the opinion that the calm nature of viewing the games from the seats does not suit the energy that is exhibited in the games. The management need give the spectators the options of standing or seating section when watching the match. They have argued that standing need to be introduced since the football fans are now educated the use of safe standing facilities and would also provide the opportunity for more fans to fill the stadiums as opposed as watching from the televisions. If the correct numbers of spectators are allowed to enter a well designed terrace, there exists simply no danger. The advancement of technologies and methodologies can now result in safe standing areas. The people are well aware of the fatal accidents happened earlier and they will prefer to stand in a safer position (Green, 2012). . 1.19 Recommendations Based on the following analysis, in the end, the following recommendations can be made: Recommendations on Healthcare aspects of Spectators: The recommendation of this study is based on the findings that more of the fans are in favour of introduction of safe standing areas. This would not only encourage better view but also ensure that fans can enjoy the life games. It is however important to take into account the crowed behavior and ensure that there is control and safety of all to avoid the tragedies that occurred in the past. The safe standing techniques can be introduced. This is because they are already being used in Germany. The same has also been allowed by the Scottish premier league. The British football authority can introduce that by: For spectators wishing to use the standing sections of the stadiums, they should be allowed to use any entry for entry and exists. This would eliminate huge flow of people trying to use few outlets during getting in or coming out. The stadium management should be able to ensure the stadium is not filled beyond their capacity. The standing and sitting spectators should have enough room to conveniently move out of the venues. It is important to also facilitate easy entry into the emergency sections especially during accidents. This report recommends that the gangways and terraces need to be designed to enable the spectators sitting or standing not have any discomfort. Organization can be enhanced by having dividing the standing sections into small divisions that would accommodate a specific number of the spectators. Introduction of proper information gathering system so as to obtain prompt and updated information about the problem in progress. Increasing public awareness of the common symptoms associated with the game of football. Providing adequate hydration and cooling facilities in the form water misters and drinking water facilities. Encouraging Active public prevention behavior and proper organizational assistant in all stages of the sports management. Succession planning: In order to deal with the unforeseen situations, proper succession planning needs to be done with an eye on the future. Clinical support and advice team: the stadium must be equipped with a readily accessible clinical support and advise team who can take medical attention on ill fans. Recommendations on Crowd Safety: Ensuring proper design of the facilities in the football stadium in accordance with the standard guidelines. Safety Announcements: Safety programs’ announcements must be made prior to the implementation of actual safety measures. For example, the crowd movement pattern must be carefully monitored before starting a match because it can give an idea on the number of security personnel required during the match. Risk Assessment Programs: There must be a proper program, initiated by management, which can assess the risk associated with the match in a particular sports ground. Training and Competence of Staffs: the staffs must possess appropriate competencies and they must be trained in fire safety, emergency evacuation and dealing with sudden incidents. Design and planning of the ground with computer simulation can be a proper way to find the necessary safety measures. Incident Reporting System: the ground must be properly equipped with a computerized incident reporting system which can detect any source of problems during the match. Bibliography Ashton, N., 2013. ASH WEDNESDAY: Now is not the time to turn back the clock and bring back a bygone era of fans standing at football. [Online]. Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2521484/Now-time-bring-standing- football-- Neil-Ashton.html. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Baker, A., 2014. City installs ‘safe standing’ rail seats. [Online]. Available at: http://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/20140212-safestanding-1354602.aspx. [Accessed on March 19, 2014]. Baker, N., 1998. “Have they Forgotten Bolton?” The Sports Historian, No. 18, 1. London. British Society of Sports History. BBC Sports Football, 2014. Football League calls for safe-standing areas in Championship. [Online]. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/26079503. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. bbc.com, 2013. Safe Standing at Football Matches is ‘common sense’. [Online]. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-25534110. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Beiske, B., 2007. Research Methods: Uses and Limitations of questionnaires, interviews and case studies. GRIN Verlag. Beri, G.C., 2010. Business Statistics. Third Edition. New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill. Blanche, M.T., and et.al. 1999. Research in Practice. Second Edition. South Africa: University of Cape Town Press. Bloom, B., 2013. Standing sections in English football: should they be reintroduced or not? [Online]. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/premier- league/10388034/Standing-sections-in-English-football-should-they-be-reintroduced-or- not.html. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Campbell, A. and Kelly, D., 2014.Should we have 'safe standing' at football matches? [Online]. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/15/safe-standing- football-matches-bristol-city. [Accessed on March 13, 2014]. Clont, J. G., 1992. “The concept of reliability as it pertains to data from qualitative studies”. Annual meeting of the South West Educational Research Association. Houston, TX. Crafton, A., 2014. United declare support for safe standing terraces at Old Trafford in major boost for campaign. [Online]. Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2559247/Manchester-United-declare- support-safe-standing-Old-Trafford-handing-campaign-major-boost.html. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L., 2000. “Determining validity in qualitative inquiry”. Theory into Creswell, J. W., 2014. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approach, (4th Ed.), California: Sage Publications. Darch, J., et.al, No date. What Are Rail Seats? [Online]. Available at: http://www.bristolcityst.org.uk/pdf/What%20are%20rail%20seats%20PDF%20- %20final.pdf. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S., 1998. Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication. Denzin, N.K., 1989. “The sociological interview”. Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Dunning, E., 1994. “The social roots of football hooliganism: a reply to the critics of the ‘Leicester school’”. Football, violence and social identity. Elliott, D. & Smith, D., 1998. “Waiting for the Next One: Management Attitudes to Safety in the UK Football Industry”. Organizational Learning from Crisis: An Examination of the Football Industry, 1946-97. University of Durham. Finnegan, P., and Rookwood, J., 2008. “Taking a stand? Examining fan culture and the proposed re-introduction of allocated standing areas in British football stadia”. Journal of Qualitative Research in Sport Studies.2, 1. Fletcher, P., 2013. Football League Clubs consulted on return of standing. [Online]. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/25526329. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Fontana, A., & Frey, J.H., 2005. “The interview: From neutral stance to political involvement”. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, Sage. Forsyth, R., 2010. The Ibrox Disaster of January 2, 1971 which claimed 66 lives was a tragedy waiting to happen. [Online]. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/8230503/The-Ibrox-Disaster-of- January-2-1971-which-claimed-66-lives-was-a-tragedy-waiting-to-happen.html. [Accessed on March 13, 2014]. Frosdick, S., and Newton, R., 2006. “The nature and extent of football hooliganism in England and Wales”. Soccer and Society.7, 4. Green, A., 2012. Should Standing areas return to football stadiums. [Online]. Available at: http://yougov.co.uk/news/2012/05/14/should-standing-areas-return-football-stadiums/. [Accessed on March 19, 2014]. Green, P.E., Tull, D.S. and Albaum, G 1993, Research For Marketing Decisions, 5th edition, Prentice-Hall. Gulati, P.M., 2009. Research Management: Fundamental and Applied Research. Global India Publications. Inglis, S., 1987. The Football Grounds of Britain. London: HarperCollins Willow. Johnes, M., 2001. “‘Heads in the Sand’: Football, Politics and Crowd Disasters inTwentieth- Century Britain”. Soccer and Disaster: International Perspective. Routledge. Johnson, B. R., 1997. Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Education, 118(3). Keeler, T. E. and Foreman, S. E., 1998. “Regulation and deregulation”. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and the Law. vol. 3. London: P. Newman. Kerlinger, FN 1994, Foundations of Behavioural Research, 1st edition, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p. 174. King, A., 1998. The End of the Terraces: The Transformation of English Football in the 1990s. Leicester: Leicester University Press. Kolb, B., 2008. Marketing Research: A Practical Approach. California: Sage Publications Inc. Krishnaswamy, K.N., and et.al, 2009.Management Research Methodology. New Delhi: Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd. Lofland, J. et.al, 2006. Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis. Canada: Thomson Wadsworth. Malhotra, N. K. and Dash, S., 2009. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation. 5th ed. India: Dorling Kindersley India Pvt. Ltd. McBurney, D.H. and White, T.L., 2009. Research Methods. Eighth Edition. USA: Cengage Learning. McDaniel, C.D and Gates, R.H., 1998. Marketing Research Essentials. USA: South – Western College Publishing. McLean, I. & Johnes, M., 2000. “Regulation runs mad”.The Board of Trade, Public Administration. 78, 4. Minichiello, V. et.al, 1990. In-depth Interviewing: Researching people. Hong Kong: Longman Cheshire Pty Limited. Monette, D. R., Sullivan, T. J., and DeJong, C. R., 2005. Applied Social Research. A Tool for the Human Services. 6th edition. Mullins, L. 2005. Management and Organizational Behavior Edinburgh: Pearson Education. Mundy, S., 2013. Fan Groups want a return of standing at football games. [Online]. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/25526329. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Murphy, P. et.al, 1984. All Seated Football Grounds and Hooliganism, Coventry City Experience, 1981 -84. Department of Sociology. University of Leicester. Orlikowski, W.J., Markus, M.L. and Lee, A.S., 1991. A Workshop on Two Techniques for Qualitative Data Analysis: Analytic Induction and Hermeneutics. Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Information Systems. Patton, M.Q., 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Pelissier, R., 2008. Business Research Made Easy. Juta & Co. Porter, G., 2014. Only One Premier League Club Is Against Safe Standing According To Survey. [Online]. Available at: http://www.themag.co.uk/the-mag-articles/one-premier-league- club-safe-standing-according-survey. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Practice, 39(3). Punch, K.F., 1998. Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Russell, S., 2014. Norwich City fans invited to attend safe standing debate at Carrow Road. [Online]. Available at: http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/norwich_city_fans_invited_to_attend_safe_standing_debat e_at_carrow_road_1_3424007. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Safe standing road show, n.d. Myth: ‘Rail seats mean an obstructed view’. [Online]. Available at: http://www.safestandingroadshow.co.uk/myths/obstructed-view. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Safe standing road show, n.d. Myth: ‘Standing is unsafe’. [Online]. Available at: http://www.safestandingroadshow.co.uk/myths/standing-is-unsafe. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Safe standing road show, n.d. Myth: ‘Standing would put off women’. [Online]. Available at: http://www.safestandingroadshow.co.uk/myths/standing-would-put-off-women. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Saunders, M, Lewis, P., and Thornville, A., 2009. Research Methods for Business Students, 5th Edition, New Jersey: Financial Times/Prentice Hall, p.160-162 Sharratt, J., 2013. Stand and deliver: Bristol City's rail seat plans. [Online]. Available at: http://www.fsf.org.uk/blog/view/Stand-and-deliver-Bristol-City-s-rail-seat-plans. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Shiels, R., 1998. “The Fatalities at The Ibrox Disaster Of 1902”. The Sports Historian, No. 18, 2. London. The British Society of Sports History. Siegfried, J, and Zimbalist, A., 2000. “The Economics of Sports Facilities and Their Communities”. Journal of Economic Perspectives. Volume 14, Number 3. Skelton, D., 2014. Why it's time for football clubs to reintroduce standing areas. [Online]. Available at: http://www.newstatesman.com/lifestyle/2014/02/why-its-time-football- clubs-reintroduce-standing-areas. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Sky sports, 2014. Football League: Clubs keen to re-introduce safe standing areas. [Online]. Available at: http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11669/9154235/football-league- clubs-keen-to-re-introduce-safe-standing-areas. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Slater, M., 2013. Standing at football: Will terraces return to Britain's top stadiums? [Online]. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/25269939. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Smith, K., and et.al, 2009. Doing Your Undergraduate Social Science Dissertation. USA: Routledge. Snieder, R, & Larner, K., 2009. The Art of Being a Scientist: A Guide for Graduate Students and their Mentors. Cambridge University Press Taylor, R., 1991. “Walking alone together, Football supporters and their relationship with the game”. British Football and social change, getting into Europe. Leicester University Press, Leicester. teamtalk.com, 2014. Bristol City eye safe standing. [Online]. Available at: http://www.teamtalk.com/league-one/9162785/Bristol-City-leading-way-in-bringing- Safe-Standing-to-English-football. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. The Football Supporters' Federation, 2014. Safe Standing Myth buster. [Online]. Available at: http://www.fsf.org.uk/campaigns/safe-standing/safe-standing-mythbuster/. [Accessed on March 19, 2014]. thefa.com, No date. Crowd Management Measure: FA Good Practice guide for Football Clubs. [Pdf]. Available at: http://www.thefa.com/~/media/files/thefaportal/governance- docs/stadium-safety/stadium-safety-good-practice-guide.ashx. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Whetstone, S., 2014. David Gold Says Standing At Football Is Both Unsafe And Unsocial. [Online]. Available at: https://www.westhamtillidie.com/posts/2014/03/03/david-gold- says-standing-at-football-is-both-unsafe-and-unsocial. [Accessed on March 21, 2014]. Appendices Questionnaire: Questions for Football Fans 1. Should standing areas be allowed in football matches? Yes No 2. Do you feel comfortable in standing during the match? Yes No 3. Do you feel rail seats create obstructed view? Yes No 4. Do you feel standing during the match unsafe? Yes No 5. Do you think standing creates better atmosphere? Yes No 6. Can you watch a game with your family members while standing? Yes No 7. Do you think women will dislike standing during match? Yes No 8. Don’t you think current stands in stadium cannot be changed? Yes No 9. Can you move while standing during the match? Yes No 10. Do you feel football authorities are quite stringent on their views on allowing standing? Yes No Questions for Football Authorities 1. Should standing areas be allowed in football matches? Yes No 2. Do you think standing during the match is safe? Yes No 3. Are you aware of the fact that people prefer standing during the matches? Yes No 4. Do you think medical staffs will find it difficult to reach ill fans? Yes No 5. Is safe standing areas difficult for the police to control? Yes No 6. Do you think clubs prefer to build all seated because of revenue only? Yes No 7. Can you guarantee even distribution of fans while standing? Yes No 8. Do you think standing increase confrontation among opposition fans? Yes No 9. Do you prefer a mix of standing and seating in your stadium? Yes No 10. Do you think rail seats serve as an alternative of seating? Yes No Interview 1. Indicate is you male or female Male female 2. How many times in year would you attend a stadium based football match 0-10 11-20 20 and above 3. Do you feel safe in the standing section as you would feel in the sitting section? 1-10 4. Do you agree that standing section would increase the view of the pitch and therefore the football atmosphere? 1-10 5. Do you think children would be safe in the standing area of the stadium? 1-10 6. Should children be allowed to use the standing are of the stadium when viewing games? 1-10 Read More