Guest Flash Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 1 minute ago, Tynieness said: If memory serves its set by the safety officer. Certainly before Bo'ness played Senior sides in the Scottish we were inspected and capacity was set by them. Basically they provide ground with the ground with a safety license and despite hylothetically the ground being a 5000 they can set it too 3000 or whatever. Apologies for taking the thread off topic, but who employs the safety officer? I’m not questioning the capacity at Glenafton, btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, Tynieness said: He was for us appointed be SFA to ensure ground was safe enough for potentially 2500. Fair enough. I was more wondering about who sets capacities generally, like would it be the same department or whoever who look at both Peterhead and Palmerston, for example. I’ll leave the thread in peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLENAFTON93 Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 We could draw you in the next round Flash, so by then we will have the official capacity sorted out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 2 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said: £5,000 for playing in Rnd 2 this season. £4,000 for playing in Rnd 1. Did they play any preliminary ties, I haven't looked? £3k each round for those too. However, there are no longer any payments at all for tv or radio apart from significantly reduced live match fees from Rnd 4 onwards. The money previously distibuted in such way has been rolled into the prize money pool for fairer distribution. Cheers... So to be precise they received £5,400 (plus their share of the gate) for the Deveronvale tie; and have grossed £15,400 (plus 4 shares of the gate) for the competition as a whole, even without considering their R3 tie at Livingston. Even deducting their apparent £2,000 expense on bus and hotel they came away with £3,400 plus their share of the gate (likely about £1,000). Yet giving out quotes to the papers about being "heavily out of pocket" and having to "back the manager" ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calmac25 Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 We could in draw you in the next round Flash, so by then we will have the official capacity sorted out.[emoji4] The banking on the far side is pretty substantial,there was 400-500 Bonnyrigg fans at last year's semi and there was space for four times that amount so 3500 as a physical capacity sound about right.Overall capacity depends on amount of turnsyles and how many people they can allow in an hour. I'd guess that's 5-600 per turnstile. If you've only 2 or 3 turnstiles capacity might be limited to 1800 despite physical size being bigger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 1 hour ago, Flash said: Is there a single body that sets capacities for Scotland? Or how does it work? 1 hour ago, Tynieness said: If memory serves its set by the safety officer. Certainly before Bo'ness played Senior sides in the Scottish we were inspected and capacity was set by them. Basically they provide ground with the ground with a safety license and despite hylothetically the ground being a 5000 they can set it too 3000 or whatever. Ground capacities are set by the local Council that is responsible for issuing the Safety Certificate, something which falls under the remit of Building Standards / Building Control. There may be some discussion and consultation but it's fundamentally the responsibility of the issuing authority to define the capacity. Tynecastle presumably already has a safety certificate, that's quite a distinct process from whoever assessed what they would deem capacity for Bo'ness in borrowing the stadium, whoever may have done that. 35 minutes ago, calmac25 said: The banking on the far side is pretty substantial,there was 400-500 Bonnyrigg fans at last year's semi and there was space for four times that amount so 3500 as a physical capacity sound about right. Overall capacity depends on amount of turnsyles and how many people they can allow in an hour. I'd guess that's 5-600 per turnstile. If you've only 2 or 3 turnstiles capacity might be limited to 1800 despite physical size being bigger Capacity will take into account both the entrances AND exits to the stadium, the latter being the more important. Capacity is ultimately limited by the number of people who can be safely evacuated quickly in the event of an incident. You can have vast wide plains of terraces but if the only exit is a couple of narrow doorways the capacity will be very low. Equally of course you could have multiple wide exits and numerous entry points, if the terrace itself is fundamentally not very big then it's not going to have a large capacity. Basically the size of the terrace is an equal factor with the number and size of entrance and exit points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 1 hour ago, HibeeJibee said: Cheers... So to be precise they received £5,400 (plus their share of the gate) for the Deveronvale tie; and have grossed £15,400 (plus 4 shares of the gate) for the competition as a whole, even without considering their R3 tie at Livingston. Even deducting their apparent £2,000 expense on bus and hotel they came away with £3,400 plus their share of the gate (likely about £1,000). Yet giving out quotes to the papers about being "heavily out of pocket" and having to "back the manager" ! Yes, the suggestion of being "out of pocket" on the tie is a little poetic though I'm sure they'd make the point they got the £5k for being in the round and would have got it whether they'd been home or away or away in Ayrshire or the Highlands. It's income for reaching the round in effect. Incidentally if they got an overnight bus and hotel for a full squad and even a skeleton crew of coaches and officials for £2k, then they were working to a pretty tight budget. I would have expected it to cost a bit more than that presuming they paid for an evening meal the night before also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mantis Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 I was there when Whitehill's capacity was set. Although the SFA guys visited for the license, it was actually 2 guys from Midlothian Council who set the capacity. They had never done a football ground before as there were no other licensed clubs in Midlothian. They allocated 700 to the uncovered terracing and the covered terrace would've been similar except it was recently seated so it was about 130. However for the grass banks they allocated only 2 rows of spectators all the way round even though one goes back pretty far. final capacity 2640. Previously it was always reported as 4000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 45 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said: Ground capacities are set by the local Council that is responsible for issuing the Safety Certificate, something which falls under the remit of Building Standards / Building Control. There may be some discussion and consultation but it's fundamentally the responsibility of the issuing authority to define the capacity. I suspected as much. So, although the guidelines will be prepared nationally, individuals working for local councils are the ultimate decision makers. And they will all have different experience and/or interpret the guidelines is more generous or restrictive ways. Imo, there should be some national body looking at safety in sports grounds and interpreting the rules in a consistent manner. Or, at least, some national body that could deal with disputes between clubs and local authorities over what the safe capacity should be. I appreciate that it isn’t a subject that is likely to trouble Queens too much in the foreseeable future, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLENAFTON93 Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 2 hours ago, HibeeJibee said: Cheers... So to be precise they received £5,400 (plus their share of the gate) for the Deveronvale tie; and have grossed £15,400 (plus 4 shares of the gate) for the competition as a whole, even without considering their R3 tie at Livingston. Even deducting their apparent £2,000 expense on bus and hotel they came away with £3,400 plus their share of the gate (likely about £1,000). Yet giving out quotes to the papers about being "heavily out of pocket" and having to "back the manager" ! Jeezo, Why dont you contact the club about your gripe with the interview, it seems to be upsetting you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 2 hours ago, Flash said: I suspected as much. So, although the guidelines will be prepared nationally, individuals working for local councils are the ultimate decision makers. And they will all have different experience and/or interpret the guidelines is more generous or restrictive ways. Imo, there should be some national body looking at safety in sports grounds and interpreting the rules in a consistent manner. Or, at least, some national body that could deal with disputes between clubs and local authorities over what the safe capacity should be. I appreciate that it isn’t a subject that is likely to trouble Queens too much in the foreseeable future, though. I'm not sure how practical that would be. Even if you had a national body (another layer of bureaucracy to pay for) it's unlikely the same individual would do all the inspections so you'd be subject to individual interpretations of rules anyway. It's not really relevant to the bigger clubs as all seater grounds have a very obvious capacity. The calculations will be at the smaller clubs, most of whom will seldom come near to a capacity gate though I appreciate it's those once in a blue moon cup ties that bring the issue. The point I'm clumsily trying to make is that given the number of times this is in practice going to be relevant to anything the costs associated with setting up a national body to govern it seem likely to be of the "sledgehammer cracking a nut" variety. I don't recall seeing any great discussion about safety certificate capacities being a matter of much dispute anyway. Smaller grounds with unlicensed SFA clubs don't even need to have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 23 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said: I'm not sure how practical that would be. Even if you had a national body (another layer of bureaucracy to pay for) it's unlikely the same individual would do all the inspections so you'd be subject to individual interpretations of rules anyway. It's not really relevant to the bigger clubs as all seater grounds have a very obvious capacity. The calculations will be at the smaller clubs, most of whom will seldom come near to a capacity gate though I appreciate it's those once in a blue moon cup ties that bring the issue. The point I'm clumsily trying to make is that given the number of times this is in practice going to be relevant to anything the costs associated with setting up a national body to govern it seem likely to be of the "sledgehammer cracking a nut" variety. I don't recall seeing any great discussion about safety certificate capacities being a matter of much dispute anyway. Smaller grounds with unlicensed SFA clubs don't even need to have one. Seems to be 2 arguments - wouldn’t be needed often enough to justify a national body and yet it would need to be undertaken by a group of people who would all have different views. It can’t be both, so I assume that the first argument is the more realistic one. If it isn’t going to be needed all that often, then one person employed by the government could do all the inspections. And if it needed more than one, then there would be a reduced workload for the people currently employed to deal with this, so they could do other things. Don’t really think it would cost that much to centralise it in order to ensure that there is consistency. They body/person could also deal with things like the number of stewards required etc for each attendance level. Or if this still isn’t practical, there should be some mechanism whereby the attendance limit and steward numbers set by the council could be subject to appeal if necessary. I appreciate that it isn’t a top priority, just looking for consistency across the country which there doesn’t appear to be currently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, Flash said: Seems to be 2 arguments - wouldn’t be needed often enough to justify a national body and yet it would need to be undertaken by a group of people who would all have different views. It can’t be both, so I assume that the first argument is the more realistic one. If it isn’t going to be needed all that often, then one person employed by the government could do all the inspections. And if it needed more than one, then there would be a reduced workload for the people currently employed to deal with this, so they could do other things. Don’t really think it would cost that much to centralise it in order to ensure that there is consistency. They body/person could also deal with things like the number of stewards required etc for each attendance level. Or if this still isn’t practical, there should be some mechanism whereby the attendance limit and steward numbers set by the council could be subject to appeal if necessary. I appreciate that it isn’t a top priority, just looking for consistency across the country which there doesn’t appear to be currently. I don't see that as two arguments and I didn't say it wasn't going to be needed all that often. I said it wouldn't be an issue often which is not the same thing. Every (licensed) club in the country needs a safety certificate but there must only be a small handful for whom the marginal capacity is particularly relevant and who regularly fill their grounds. Does it really matter if Palmerston isn't calculated on the same basis that Balmoor is for the terracing part? Presuming that it isn't of course, I don't work for building control, I would have thought there was a standard formula for that sort of thing? If Palmerston is 100 more or 100 less, it's not really affecting us. The home end hasn't been near capacity in years. The away terrace granted has been capacity sales (though not attendance) for I think all five Rangers games at League level recently. Those are the only ones though. If you are advocating that this be a national government issue then presumably it's not limited to football. I expect any sports stadium will require the same licensing (though I'm just presuming that). Therefore rugby, ice hockey, athletics, etc would all need annual certification. I wouldn't have thought one person could do all that but maybe they could, or maybe just a couple could. Stewards (and police) depend on number of exits and entrances in use and also the risk level associated with each fixture, not per se what the capacity is, . Neither stewarding nor policing levels are set by the Council currently. They aren't directly related to the Safety Certificate. The police effectively decide for themselves how many police are needed, though not everyone you see in uniform at matches is a paid police officer. They take into account the number of stewards which is the responsibility of the Safety Officer who will take advice and discuss with police where necessary. For instance the Dunfermline game on Saturday was the first game this season we've had a police presence at I think. They were happy to allow the other games to date to be police free with the requisite number of stewards. It just seems an awful lot of bureaucracy you want to install to achieve not very much really. I don't hear any great unrest over national inconsistencies with safety certificate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 50 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said: I don't see that as two arguments and I didn't say it wasn't going to be needed all that often. I said it wouldn't be an issue often which is not the same thing. Every (licensed) club in the country needs a safety certificate but there must only be a small handful for whom the marginal capacity is particularly relevant and who regularly fill their grounds. Does it really matter if Palmerston isn't calculated on the same basis that Balmoor is for the terracing part? Presuming that it isn't of course, I don't work for building control, I would have thought there was a standard formula for that sort of thing? If Palmerston is 100 more or 100 less, it's not really affecting us. The home end hasn't been near capacity in years. The away terrace granted has been capacity sales (though not attendance) for I think all five Rangers games at League level recently. Those are the only ones though. If you are advocating that this be a national government issue then presumably it's not limited to football. I expect any sports stadium will require the same licensing (though I'm just presuming that). Therefore rugby, ice hockey, athletics, etc would all need annual certification. I wouldn't have thought one person could do all that but maybe they could, or maybe just a couple could. Stewards (and police) depend on number of exits and entrances in use and also the risk level associated with each fixture, not per se what the capacity is, . Neither stewarding nor policing levels are set by the Council currently. They aren't directly related to the Safety Certificate. The police effectively decide for themselves how many police are needed, though not everyone you see in uniform at matches is a paid police officer. They take into account the number of stewards which is the responsibility of the Safety Officer who will take advice and discuss with police where necessary. For instance the Dunfermline game on Saturday was the first game this season we've had a police presence at I think. They were happy to allow the other games to date to be police free with the requisite number of stewards. It just seems an awful lot of bureaucracy you want to install to achieve not very much really. I don't hear any great unrest over national inconsistencies with safety certificate. I’m not advocating introducing more bureaucracy, just centralising the existing administration to achieve consistency around the country. I additionally don’t think it should be up to the police to specify how many of them there should be. Or, if it is, this should be done centrally as well so that all grounds are policed on the same basis, taking into account crowd numbers and the teams involved etc. I’m not really all that sure why centralising something like this to ensure the same rules are applied consistently across the country would be a big deal or why it would result in more red tape. It would just be the same rules as at present, only it would be national governement rather than local who would be enforcing it. At the moment, if some unreasonable crowd limit or policing level was imposed, it would be impossible to use the position at other clubs to argue the case. Whereas if the same rules were applied nationwide, all the clubs would be treated in the same way. Anyway, I didn’t intend to derail the thread to this extent and we probably aren’t going to agree. For a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tongue_tied_danny Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 10 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said: £5,000 for playing in Rnd 2 this season. £4,000 for playing in Rnd 1. Did they play any preliminary ties, I haven't looked? £3k each round for those too. However, there are no longer any payments at all for tv or radio apart from significantly reduced live match fees from Rnd 4 onwards. The money previously distibuted in such way has been rolled into the prize money pool for fairer distribution. Has anyone got the exact prize money figures for each round? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 1 hour ago, tongue_tied_danny said: Has anyone got the exact prize money figures for each round? Yes, but not in front of me at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lichtie78 Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 See the draw is at 4.45 on Monday afternoon, awful time. Why couldn’t they have just kept it the same as last round and had the draw after the game when everyone is in the pub/on way home and is buzzing to see who they get in the next round Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salvo Montalbano Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 The English cup draw is on a Monday and we have to copy everything they do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 At least the English one is on at a time when most people can watch it. We'll overlook the Carabao Cup farce... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laughing gravie Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 4 hours ago, Lichtie78 said: See the draw is at 4.45 on Monday afternoon, awful time. Why couldn’t they have just kept it the same as last round and had the draw after the game when everyone is in the pub/on way home and is buzzing to see who they get in the next round Let's be honest, the only thoughts they come up with is to copy the FA - Premiership, Championship etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.