Safety Structures and Systems in Adams Park and Wembley Stadium - Essay Example

Large crowds are normal occurrences in public places like parks and stadiums. This is especially so if there is an event that is underway. If the event is commercially motivated, the bigger the crowd the better. However, overcrowding can lead injuries and deaths of the people in the venue. This is especially so if the organizers used poor crowd management measures. That is the reason why when public venues like stadiums and parks are been designed, the authorities take precautions to include safety systems and structures. These includes enough entrances and exit points. This makes it possible to ensure security of those who are in attendance. This paper will be looking at the safety structures and systems in two stadiums, comparing and contrasting them. These will be Adams Park and Wembley Stadium. The security systems and structures in each will be analyzed critically. The writer will also be interested in looking at the impacts of these structures and systems on those people who are attending events in these venues. Introduction It is the duty of an event organizer to provide security for the crowd present. To this end, many organisers put in place safety management systems that are aimed at providing safety for the crowd and at the same time managing it. The risks that are anticipated should be monitored and managed. The event organisers are helped to a great length by safety structures and systems that are already incorporated in the venue, be it a stadium or a park. Adams Park is one of the largest football stadiums in London. It is located in Buckinghamshire. Since it was opened to the public in 1990, the park has been renovated and expanded periodically. The first expansion was in 1996 while the second was in the year 2001. It was designed to hold approximately eleven thousand fans when full to capacity. Waycombe Wanderers, the resident club, is planning to expand the park to hold 20,000 fans. Been such a huge stadium, crowd security and control is of the utmost concern. This is considering that many of the events that take place here are football and rugby, two sports associated with riotous and violent fans. Likewise, Wembley is a large and famous stadium. Security systems and structures are a very important part of these two stadiums. These systems and structures will be compared and contrasted. Their impacts to the people attending events at these two stadiums will be analysed. All along, the writer will be referring to the developments that are taking place in the sporting events industry. These developments will include security standards, capacity limits of stadiums and crowd control measures. Objectives The study will have the broad objective of looking at the safety structures and systems of Adams Park and Wembley stadium. To achieve this, the study will be guided by several specific objectives. These are as listed below: Identifying the safety structures and systems in the two stadiums A critical appraisal of the security structures and systems in these stadiums A comparison between the two venues, especially in terms of their safety structures and systems A critical analysis of the possible impacts of these structures and systems to the people who will be attending events in these two venues Status of England's Stadia Safety Before embarking on the task of analysing the safety structures and systems of the two venues, it is perhaps important to look at the status of the safety measures that are carried out in England's stadia. In 1989, 96 people were trampled to death in Hillsborough football stadium (Sheard & Geraint 2009). This led to the constitution of a committee led by Lord Taylor of Gosforth (Jeffrey 2008). The committee was tasked with finding out the causes of the stampede and make recommendations as to the future of crowd safety in stadia. The committee came up with recommendations and the full report on the January of 1990 (Jeffrey 2008). Some of the recommendations that the team came up with were adopted by many sporting bodies and are adhered to by the managements of stadia in England. Large stadia were to be turned into all seaters (Darby et al 2008). This means that all fans are supposed to be sitting. No fan that has a ticket will be allowed to stand. Also, alcohol was not to be sold within the stadium (Darby et al 2008). These rules were especially to be adhered to by the clubs who were in the top divisions. Waycombe Wanderers, been in league two of the English football system, have to adhere to these rules as far as their stadium is concerned. The provision of such safety structures as crush barriers and fences was also recommended. These were in addition to turnstiles to check the flow of the spectators into the stadium. To this day, these are the safety rules that stadia should adhere to. But there is also an act in the constitution that provides for the safety of stadia in England. This is the "Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975" (Jeffrey 2008). The local authorities where the stadia are located are the ones that should ensure that all the stadia adhere to these provisions. This act applied to all stadia that had stands which were covered or enclosed and which could accommodate at least 500 people (Jeffrey 2008). This act has been amended several times since 1975. The stadia are supposed to acquire a safety certificate before they can be allowed to open their doors to the public. This act provides for, amongst others, the formation of a safety advisory group in each of these stadia which has more than 500 spectators (Jeffrey: 2008). There are also provisions for fire fighting equipments and other security systems and structures. This overview on the safety measures of England's stadia will give the reader a good grasp of what is about to be introduced in this paper. Safety Structures and Systems at Wembley Stadium Wembley stadium was commissioned in mid-2007. It has 90,000 seats, which means it can accommodate that number of spectators (Sheard & Geraint 2009). Been such a huge stadium, security measures are very important to enforce. This was started when the stadium was been constructed. It was built by among others, Multiplex Construction (Stewart 2008). The contractor hired specialists who were able to construct a stable and safe stadium. They include PCE Ltd., who was responsible for ensuring that the frame of the stadium was stable. The stadium was built with top quality materials which ensured that there were no defects in the complete structure. The roof was constructed with fire resistant steel, which is lightweight and strong to ensure that it does not collapse on the spectators (Sanford 2009). This was important considering that Wembley stadium is roofed. For safety systems and structures, Wembley contracted Honeywell Building Solutions Company (Darby et al 2008). This company installed security management systems in the stadium as it was been built. The stadium is linked via the internet and other intelligence devices to the London Metropolitan Police (Darby et al 2008). The whole of the stadium is also connected with fire resistant communication cables. This means that the security agents at different locations of the large stadium are in touch. Communication is very important in times of safety threats, for this allows for coordination of rescue efforts and organised response to a crisis (Jeffrey 2008). This means that in case of an emergency that involves threat to the safety of the fans, the administration can respond effectively. As stated earlier, the stadium is wired to the London Metropolitan Police. This is together with other emergency authorities like the ambulance, fire department amongst others (Sheard & Geraint 2009). In fact, every time there is an event underway, there is constant communication between the control room of Wembley Stadium and these authorities. This ensures that in case of an emergency, external reinforcement and response is rapid (Sanford 2009). The police and the bomb squad can be called in within a short time. The ambulance, always in a standby mode when there is an event, can be summoned within no time. Other safety systems include fire detectors and alarms. Fire has been known to be the cause of many deaths in stadia, especially roofed ones like Wembley (Sanford 2009). This means that a fire can be detected before it spreads to other parts of the stadium and can thus be controlled. Crowd behaviour specialists have found that panic and hysteria tends to be contagious in a large crowd, especially when they are enclosed somewhere (Stewart 2008). In fact, many of the deaths that occur in stadia can be attributed to panic and hysteria spreading among the crowd. For crowd safety managers, the first course of response is to control the panic and hysteria of the crowd in case of an emergency (Sanford 2009). To this end, Wembley stadium have installed public address voice announcement system as one type of a safety system (Sheard & Geraint 2009). This ensures that in case of an emergency, the crowd can be calmed down, thus averting panic and stampede. The crowd can be advised on how to safely evacuate the stadium without further incidences. One means of managing a crowd is to monitor it (Darby et al 2008). To achieve this, Wembley have installed closed circuit television cameras around the stadia, within and without the premises (Jeffrey 2008). This ensures that the security agents are able to monitor the behaviour of the crowd, the way they are moving around. This makes it possible to detect signs of a possible threat. The individuals who are deemed to be potential threats can be ferreted out of the stadium. The access to the stadium is also controlled. This achieved via turnstiles and designated entry and exit points. This ensures that spectators are screened as they enter the venue. Those carrying instruments that are potential threats to others using the venue are denied access (Darby et al 2008). Those with fire arms, sharp objects like knives and glass bottles, flares and those drunk are denied access. These people and their tools can cause panic and injuries to their fellow fans (Darby et al 2008). The only way this can be achieved is through use of turnstiles and designated entry points. This also ensures that the stadium is not overcrowded on one side. That is why there are several access points to various stands of the stadium. The staffs of Wembley stadium are trained frequently on how to use and operate the safety systems and structures installed in the stadium (Sanford 2009). This is done by Honeywell Building Solutions, who are one of the security consultants for the stadium (Sanford 2009). This ensures that every staff working here is able to use the equipments in case of an emergency, leading to a faster and effective response to a crisis. Prior to a game or any event, the equipments in the stadium are tested to make sure that they are in operative status (Sanford 2009). This includes testing the cameras, phones and other communication devices. When the event is underway, there is a team of engineers and other crisis response teams throughout to ensure that there is no incidence that interrupt the event and pose danger to the spectators. These include police, medical staff and technicians. Safety Structures and Systems at Adams Park Authorities at Adams Park have realised that overcrowding, not only within the stadium, but also outside, is a danger to the safety and wellbeing of the spectators. To this end, they try to control the congestion of traffic when getting into the park for a game and when leaving (Sanford 2009). They encourage fans to use train and free buses to get into the park to reduce congestion. Safety of fans as they depart the venue is also ensured by holding the car in the parking lot for a period of forty minutes (Sanford 2009). This ensures that people and vehicles do not interfere with one another in the roads after the game. The cars are not allowed to leave at a go. Rather, they are released using a rotation system, ensuring that traffic snarl up, a recipe for anger especially when ones team has been defeated, are avoided (Darby et al 2008). Like Wembley, Adams Park is fitted with closed circuit cameras to ensure that activities of the fans can be monitored effectively, both within and without (Darby et al 2008). The park is currently accessed via one entrance. This makes it possible to search the fans that are entering the venue. Those who are armed with objects that can compromise the safety of the fans are denied access to the venue. This includes those who refuse to be searched by the officials if such a demand is made (Stewart 2008). The denied objects include anything that can be used as a weapon. For example knives, bottles and smoke canisters are not allowed. Items that can be used to cause panic are also not allowed in. these are for example flares and air horns (Stewart 2008). This came as a realisation was made that flares and excessive blowing of the horns causes panic amongst the crowd. The panic is contagious and this may lead to stampede, resulting in death and injuries. There is a fence that surrounds the field of play. This fence ensures that the spectators are kept away from the field, making sure that the players are not interrupted or injured by irate fans (Sanford 2009). Use of racial language and abusive verbatim may lead to ejection from the venues. This is because this can provoke violence, leading to safety threats. Movement of people from one stand to the other is also prohibited. This ensures that there is no obstruction of the others view and also, it makes it easier to control the crowd, if movement is minimised (Sanford 2009). Segregation of the fans have been known to be an effective way of controlling crowds (Darby et al 2008) that is why Adams Park is divided into different segments or stands ensuring that the fans are separated and can be controlled. Smoking and alcohol consumption is banned in some parts of the park (Sanford 2009). This ensures that the health of the fans is protected from secondary smoke and violence behaviour associated with drunken fans. Threat to fans does not always come from within the stadium. It can also come from without (Jeffrey 2008). That is the reason why Adams Park bans unauthorised vehicles and people from accessing the park. The access via undesignated means like service entrance is also banned. This ensures that people with ill motives, like terrorists, can be averted from the stadium. A Comparison between Wembley's and Adams Park Safety Structures and Systems Wembley has a capacity of 90,000 fans while Adams Park has about 15,000 (Sanford 2009). This means that their structures and measures will also differ, in accordance with the number of fans to be handled. Wembley is more modern than Adams Park. Whereas Wembley is roofed, Adams Park is open. Only the stands are covered in Adams Park, there is no roof enclosing the whole stadium. Wembley is accessible via various roads and entrances. However, this is not the case for Adams Park. The park is accessible through a single route, Hillbottom road (Stewart 2008). This is a narrow road and there is constant congestion during events. The park also has one single main entrance, making it impossible for the people to enter and leave with ease. Both stadia are fitted with closed circuit television cameras for security purposes. The fans in both venues are also screened before they enter the venues. The stands are built in such a way that fans are always sitted thorough out the game in both stadia. The spectators are separated from the field in both instances. For example in Adams Park, there is a perimeter fence around the field. Implications of the Safety Structures and Systems in both Venues The closed circuit television cameras infringes on the privacy of the fans. They are always under observation by the security agents. This makes the fans feel like they are been treated as criminals (Sanford 2009). The designated entrance and exit points lead to long queues as fans are accessing the venue. This is made worse by the use of turnstiles, which ensures that only one person at a time enters the venue. This is very inconveniencing to the fans. The fans are also affected psychologically by the limited exit points. They experience claustrophobic feelings due to the enclosed space (Jeffrey 2008). This is the reason why there is panic and stampede in case of fire or bomb scares. But the security structures and systems in place at both venues ensure that the safety of the fans is ensured. As a result, fans can be at ease as they enjoy the game, knowing that their security is in capable hands. The fans can concentrate on the game instead of worrying about their security (Stewart 2008). This is very important in today's risk society, with the increase in terrorist activities in London (for example the recent bombing of train in London). As a result, fans will only attend events in places that they are assured of their safety. Conclusion When a crowd congregates around one spot, security becomes a top priority. This is not only for riotous crowds. Even peaceful crowds needs to be controlled and their safety monitored, if only to avert tendencies of it turning riotous. This is especially so for crowds attending sporting events, who have been known to turn violent at the slightest provocation. That is the reason why sports grounds are issued with security certificates. For this certificate to be issued, the grounds must meet security regulations that safeguard the safety of the fans. This paper has looked at the security systems and structures at Adams Park and Wembley stadium. It has been seen that these two venues have put in place measures and structures that are aimed at safeguarding the safety of the fans. The similarities and the differences between the two venues were noted. Most important, the covert and overt effects of these measures as far as the fans are concerned were examined. References Darby D, Stuart F & Irwin K. 2008. An Exploration of Sporting Disasters in Europe. 1st Ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jeffrey X. 2008. Ground Regulations in London's Stadia. 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sanford A. 2009. Soccer and Disasters in Europe. 2nd Ed. California: Routledge. Sheard G & Geraint D. 2009. Safety of Stadia, Arenas and Grandstands in Europe. 3rd Ed. London: Taylor & John. Stewart V. 2008. Stadia Design and Development. 2nd Ed. London: Architectural Press. Read More