Safety at Sports Stadia A

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Procedia Engineering Procedia Engineering 00 (2011) 000–000 Procedia Engineering 14 (2011) 2205–2211 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

The Twelfth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction Safety at Sports Stadia A. MELROSEa, P. HAMPTONa, and P. MANUa

aSchool of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, WV1 1SB, UK.

Abstract

Following the human tragedies in football stadia in Great Britain, several safety legislative requirements have been passed to ensure spectator safety. Among such requirements is the requirement for seated accommodation for all spectators. Since the introduction of this requirement, there is however growing concern over the prolonged standing of spectators in seated areas as seated accommodation are not designated for standing and could thus poses risk to the safety of spectators. This study therefore investigated how spectator standing in seated accommodation affects the safety of spectators, and why spectators stand in seated accommodation by the use of semi-structured interviews. The interview participants included football club safety managers, a safety officer responsible for issuing safety licences at designated grounds and a spectator. The study indicates that the safety risk posed by spectator standing in seated areas include a spectator falling over a seat or guard rail and the obstruction of access for emergency services. The study further indicates that spectator standing is influenced by factors such as the fixture of the game, moments of excitement, spectator comfort, and the atmosphere of the crowd. The findings of the study provide valuable insight to stimulate proactive thinking towards implementing measures in relation to football stadia design and management to ensure safety.

Keywords: safety, stadia, legislation

1. Introduction Leisure events are increasingly becoming popular around the world and the organisation of the large crowd events occurs globally every year with approximately 2000 deaths (Zhen et al., 2007). The safety of spectators at sports grounds has thus become a hugely important matter world-wide during the design, construction and the occupancy of sports facilities with measures being put in place to ensure safety at sports grounds.

In England and Wales where approximately 17 million people attended the premiership football matches in just 2007 (Grailey, 2009), spectator safety is similarly a hugely important consideration during the pre- construction, construction and the occupancy phases of stadia. This has largely been influenced by legislation which also has been triggered by stadia tragedies such as the 1989 Hillsborough stadium disaster (Taylor, 1989, 1990). This tragedy marked a government inquiry which recommended (with

particular reference to the design of sport stadia and spectator safety) the introduction of “all seater” stadia for all teams in the top two leagues i.e. the Premiership and the Coca-Cola Championship. This recommendation informed the Football Spectators Act 1989 which requires that a designated football match must be licensed, and for a football ground to be licensed the stadium must have all seated accommodation for all spectators. Since the introduction of the all seated stadia, stadia for the top two leagues have all been “all seater” since the 1994/1995 season. However, a situation that has progressively gained momentum is the standing of spectators within seated areas for prolonged periods. This situation poses risk to spectator safety as seated areas are not designated for standing (Building, 2004). Given the increasingly large number of football spectators and the need to ensure their safety, it has become imperative to investigate the safety implications of spectator standing in seated areas in stadia and why spectators stand in seated accommodation. This study therefore set out to investigate these as a contribution to efforts aimed at addressing spectator standing in seated accommodation. In the sections that follow, a historical review of football stadia tragedies and their resulting legislation/measures is presented to provide the underpinning and the focus of the study. The research design enabling the addressing of the research questions is subsequently outlined and the findings from the analysis of the collected data is presented and discussed.

2. Background literature That stadium tragedy is neither a local phenomenon (i.e. observed in only a part of the world) nor a just a present-day phenomenon needs no argument. Several countries over the world have had one or more experiences of stadium disaster which often leaves people dead and others injured (cf. Johnson (2001)). Similarly, the UK has also experienced several sad incidents of stadium disaster and these have from a positive perspective yielded several legislative measures to prevent the recurrence of such incidents. Notably among the stadium disaster incidents are the Ibrox Stadium disaster, the Valley Parade Football Stadium disaster and the Hillsborough Stadium disaster (Wheatley, 1972; Popplewell, 1986; Taylor, 1989). The following section presents a chronological review of these disasters, the government inquiries that followed, and the legislative measures that were introduced in response to the recommendations from the inquiries.

2.1. The 1971 Ibrox Stadium Disaster, Glasgow. The disaster at Ibrox Stadium in 1971 consisted of a structural failure of a stairway which resulted in 66 deaths and about 145 injuries (Frosdick and Walley, 1999). The principal cause of the disaster was overcrowding of spectators within a staircase enclosure which arose from the lack of crowd management (Wheatley, 1972). It is revealing to note that prior to this disaster, similar incidents had occurred which also resulted in deaths and injuries as shown in table 1 below. Following the 1971 disaster the British government commissioned the Lord Wheatley investigation (Wheatley, 1972) the result of which was the enactment of The Safety at Sports Grounds Act 1975 with the principal aim of providing guidance on spectators egress from sports ground and crowd control (Wheatley, 1972; Elliot and Smith, 1993).

Table 1: Accidents at the Ibrox Stadium (Frosdick and Walley, 1999) Year Disaster/Incident Fatalities/Injuries 1902 Collapsed temporary stand 26 deaths & 550 injured 1961 Crowd crush on stairway 2 deaths & 50 injured 1969 Crowd crush on stairway 24 injured 1971 Crowd crush on stairway 66 deaths & 145 injured

Prior to The Safety at Sports Grounds Act 1975, a guidance document called the “Green guide” was introduced in 1973 by the Department for Culture Media and Sports (DCMS) on the basis of the Wheatley report (Wheatley, 1972) as an aid to sports ground operators to help manage safety at sport grounds (DCMS, 2003). A. MELROSE et al. / Procedia Engineering 14 (2011) 2205–2211 2207 Author name / Procedia Engineering 00 (2011) 000–000 3

2.2. The 1985 Valley Parade Football Stadium Disaster, Bradford. This disaster was a fire incident which occurred during a football match between Bradford City and Lincoln City on the 11th May 1985 (Popplewell, 1986). The incident which resulted in 56 deaths was followed by a government investigation under Lord Oliver Popplewell (Popplewell, 1986). The report by Lord Oliver Popplewell recommended the provision of non-combustible stands and a no smoking policy in all existing stands (Popplewell, 1985; 1986). The first edition of the “Green guide” was subsequently amended to include the recommendations of the Popplewell Report. Among the major revisions were the control of stewards at football games, the control of alcohol at and around football game, the building of new terraces/stands out of non-combustible materials, and restricting smoking in stands made of combustible materials (Popplewell, 1986). The amendment of the “Green guide” gave the government incentive to update the Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975, and hence the introduction of the Fire Safety and Safety of Places Act 1987. This Act was introduced to ensure that sports stadia had sufficient fire safety features and sufficient management to provide and maintain safe conditions as the Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975 was deemed insufficient to deal with fire safety issues.

2.3. The 1989 Hillsborough Stadium Disaster, Sheffield. On the 15th April 1989 at the Hillsborough stadium, there were 96 deaths and almost 400 people received medical care at a Football Association (FA) Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest (Taylor, 1990). This disaster also triggered a government investigation which was carried out by Lord Justice Taylor (Taylor, 1990). Taylor (1990) identified the following to be the factors that caused the disaster: poor communication between the police that were outside the ground and the police that were inside the ground; weakness in the design and management of the spectators access; the provision of barriers which restricted access onto the pitch; and structurally defective crush barriers which resulted in people been crushed and trampled through overcrowding. Taylor (1990) made recommendations on the maximum capacities for terraces, filling and monitoring of terraces, gangways, fences and gates, and recommendation on crush barriers among others. A controversial recommendation made by Taylor (1990) was that the football clubs within the top two divisions of the England and Wales leagues (i.e. the Premiership and Coca-Cola Championship) were to become all seated stadia by the 1994/1995 season. The Football Spectators Act 1989 was introduced to enforce the recommendations through the control of the admission of football spectators to a designated football game in England and Wales. This control was to be administered via a national membership scheme which required a licence to admit spectators. The Football Spectators Act 1989 empowered the licensing authority to require a designated football match to have all seated accommodation (Football Supporters Federation (FSF), 2007).

From the above review, a revealing observation that is made is that, as common with other legislation, the government reacted to events in lieu of being proactive. Despite the usefulness of learning from previous events, it is undoubtedly better to implement proactive measure to prevent harm once signs/indicators of harm are known. Since the introduction of “all seater” accommodation, a phenomenon that has progressively gained momentum is the persistent standing of spectators in seated areas (Birmingham City Council, 2005). The FSF (2007) mentions how the Taylor report did not anticipate this persistent standing of spectators in seated areas, and hence how that the Football Spectators Act 1989 does not deal with this phenomenon. The persistent standing of spectators in seated accommodation poses safety risk to spectators (Eggington, 1995; FSF, 2007; Nixdorf, 2008) and hence need for it to be addressed. For instance, it has been documented that a standing spectator fell over safety guarding within a seated area due to the guarding design being suitable to restrict a seated spectator but not a spectator in a standing position (Building, 2004). To help the resolution of persistent standing of spectators in seated areas, The Football Licensing Authority (FLA) conducts inspections on clubs which require a licence under the Football Spectators Act 1989 (FSF, 2007). In addition, the FLA provides help and guidance to the local authorities who are responsible for issuing licences. Where the local authority deems the constant standing in seated areas a potential risk to safety, the Football Spectators Act 1989, empowers the local 2208 A. MELROSE et al. / Procedia Engineering 14 (2011) 2205–2211 4 Author name / Procedia Engineering 00 (2011) 000–000

authority to reduce the allowable stadium capacity (FSF, 2007; DCMS, 2008). This possible reduction in capacity is an issue for football clubs as capacity generates revenue.

To be able to adequately address the problem of persistent standing of spectators in seated areas, there ought to be a detailed insight of the reasons as to why spectators stand and how this growing phenomenon affects the safety of spectators. With several millions of spectators attending premiership matches amidst the growing problem of persistent spectator standing, adequate efforts toward addressing this phenomenon is much needed and it will be despicable to act after a major disaster has occurred. As an effort towards redressing this potentially disastrous phenomenon, this research sought to elicit deeper insight regarding the why of the phenomenon and how it affects spectator safety.

3. Research design

This study had an interpretive, as well as an explanatory, and an exploratory focus as it sought to examine why spectators stand in seated areas, also and how spectator standing affects the safety of spectators. Evidently such a focus favours qualitative research design as qualitative research design is suitable for: finding out why things happen; determining the meanings which people attribute to events, processes and structures, etc (Fellows and Lui, 2008). Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted to obtain data that would enable the answering of the research questions:

z Why do spectators stand in seated areas? z How does spectator standing affect the safety of spectators?

The interview participants consisted of two safety managers each from separate football clubs, a licensing officer, and a football spectator The participants where questioned on their experience of spectator standing in seated areas, how it affects the safety of spectators within the area, and why spectators stand in seated accommodation areas.. The interviews were face-to-face and they were audio-taped. The audio- taped interviews were transcribed verbatim. Creswell’s (2009) steps for analysing data in qualitative research were followed. These steps are: organising and preparing the data for analysis; reading through all the data; coding the data, which was done manually; generating themes or categories; interrelating themes; and interpreting themes (Creswell, 2009).

Table 1 Experience of spectator standing Participant Statement demonstrating the experience of spectator standing “This (i.e. spectator standing) goes back especially since the club (i.e. the participant’s club) Participant 1 (Football has been in the premiership this last year…Early on in the season in the stand that I stood in, Spectator) virtually 100% of us stood to watch the game.” Participant 2 (Safety manager “I have seen people leap across their friend front of the seats on their back” of a football club) Participant 3 (Safety officer responsible for issuing safety “All supporters apart from very, very small pockets…it is mainly the away supporters…” licences at designated grounds) Participant 4 (Safety manager “...we have the south stand that regularly stands…probably a good 80% of them that visit us of a football club) will stand up…”

4. FINDINGS & DISCUSSION

4.1. Experience of spectator standing in seated areas A. MELROSE et al. / Procedia Engineering 14 (2011) 2205–2211 2209 Author name / Procedia Engineering 00 (2011) 000–000 5

As shown in Table 1 all the participants have experienced standing in seated accommodation although their experiences have been different as indicated below.

4.2. Reasons for spectator standing in seated areas

As identified from the interviews, the reasons why spectators stand in seated areas are as illustrated in Figure 1. Five new factors (i.e. comfort, weather, fixture of game, atmosphere, and moments of excitement) were identified in addition to those available in literature (i.e. sightline, preference, and other spectators standing (FLA, 2002)).

Figure 1: Reasons for spectator standing in seated accommodation

4.2.1. Sightlines As reported in literature by the FLA (2002), sightline emerged as a reason for spectator standing. The sightline view is the ability of each spectator to see the pitch or area of activity over the top of the persons head immediately in front (British Standard Institution, 2003). The difference between the sightline and the persons behind/in front is expressed as ‘C’ value. The Department of Culture, Media and Sports (DCMS) (2008) suggests that the ‘C’ value should be a minimum of 90mm. The larger the ‘C’ value, the better the sightline of the activity area. Participant 1 and 2 both made reference to the sightline. For instance Participant 2 mentioned that, “…I think that (i.e. an inadequate C-value) can encourage standing at times because the sightline is obstructed.”

4.2.2. Other spectators standing This particular factor emerged from all the four interviews. All the four participants confirmed that a spectator standing in front of others is one of the reasons why spectators stand in seated areas. This is detailed by participant 1 who said, “…if you don’t stand up yourself and you are sitting in the seat you don’t see much of the game.” With regards to other spectators standing, participant 3 also said, “…you’ve got choice but to stand…I’ve seen children standing on seats because they can’t see.” Participant 4 also confirmed that spectator standing in seated accommodation is caused by the fact that other people (i.e. spectators) are standing. The emergence of this factor corroborates the findings of the FLA (2002).

4.2.3. Preference The personal preference of spectators was highlighted as a factor by both safety managers (i.e. participant 2 & 4). Again, this corroborates present finding in literature by the FLA (2002). 2210 A. MELROSE et al. / Procedia Engineering 14 (2011) 2205–2211 6 Author name / Procedia Engineering 00 (2011) 000–000

4.2.4. Fixture of the game Participant one, two and four all highlighted the fixture of the game as a reason for spectator standing in seated areas. As an indication of this, participant 2 for example mentioned that, “every European game, one of the stands will always stand and that’s 12, 500 people”. Participant 4 also confirmed this: “the level of anticipation and impact of the fixture really can make a big difference”. Games such as local derby, European matches, high profile matches with large/successful teams, and promotion games were highlighted as fixtures that influenced spectator standing.

4.2.5. Atmosphere This emerged from the interviews with participant one and participant four. Participant 1 recounted: “…this was a high profile game against XYZ (i.e. the name of a football team) where its’ fair to say that 90% of the game majority of people were standing”. In response to whether the stewards attempted to get the spectators back in their seat, participant 1 said: “I don’t recall, being honest. I think it was an atmosphere that was a good atmosphere”. This clearly suggests that the atmosphere can influence spectator standing, and that the atmosphere is also related to the fixture of the game.

4.2.6. Comfort The comfort of the spectators was identified as a possible reason for spectator standing in seated area. This was only illustrated by participant two who explained that: “smaller people can be affected if they are in a seat and you have three 6-feet-2inches people because of the mass of their body”. Participant two therefore suggested that standing for some spectators is the only option where there is insufficient space in a seated position.

4.2.7. Weather This was raised by participant four who mentioned that the weather can play a part in spectator standing, especially where it is an exposed terrace causing the seats to be wet by rain.

4.2.8. Moments of excitement This factor was highlighted by participant one, two, and four. The main moments of excitement included a corner, play in the air, players walking out onto the pitch and when a team is about to score. For example participant one explained that: “…for certain times of the game I don’t think it (i.e. spectator standing) is bad. I don’t see any problem with that (i.e. spectator standing) especially when the teams come out onto the pitch, everyone stands up and cheers their team and claps and then during specific moments throughout the game… maybe when your team is approaching the goal to score a goal you do get that little bit of excitement”.

5. How spectator standing affects the health and safety of spectators As indicated by the Building (2004), the principal safety risk which exist when spectators stand in seated accommodation is a spectator falling over safety guarding which have not been designed for standing spectators. In addition, spectator standing restricts access for the emergencies and imposes difficulty on crowd management (Eggington, 1995; FSF, 2007). From the interviews, these issues once again emerged. Participant two, three and four showed concern about seats and handrails not being of sufficient height to restrict a standing spectator from falling. Should a spectator fall against a seat or handrail whilst standing, the design would thus be inadequate to prevent a fall over the seat and handrail. Participant two, three and four again indicated the risk of falling over a seat or handrail is exacerbated when spectators suddenly stand in a moment of excitement as spectators could loose their balance in such acts. Additionally, this could trigger a domino effect where a spectator falls over other spectators resulting in serious injuries or even fatalities. A. MELROSE et al. / Procedia Engineering 14 (2011) 2205–2211 2211 Author name / Procedia Engineering 00 (2011) 000–000 7

Access for the emergency services was an additional safety risk which was identified. If all spectators are standing, it causes difficulty for the emergency services to gain access within a seated area due to blocking of the isles. This was discussed by participant 2 who acknowledged that persistent standing of spectators in seated areas introduced crowd management problems. Spectators standing on seats to gain a better view of the pitch were also raised by the participants as something that poses risk to safety as a spectator standing on a seat could fall off the seat. Participant two explained that injuries to spectators who had fallen through or off the seat were a common complaint.

6. Conclusion Since the introduction of all seated accommodation in football stadia for football clubs in the top two divisions in England and Wales, the growing phenomenon of spectator standing in seated area continues to raise concern for spectator safety. A step towards addressing this phenomenon is to have in-depth knowledge of its drivers and also how the phenomenon affects the safety of spectators. Apart from resounding the known drivers, which is a demonstration of their persistence, this study has also provided fresh insight concerning the drivers of spectators standing in seated accommodation. Concerning how spectator standing poses risk to spectator safety, the study has largely corroborated existing knowledge and by that further strengthened what is known. Indeed, the freshly identified insights coupled with the buttressing of existing insights provide a means of augmenting efforts towards addressing spectator standing. These findings are therefore useful in stimulating proactive thinking and action with regards to policy and other measures in relation to stadia design and management. Unlike previous measures which were introduced after dire stadium disasters, acting proactively in the case of spectator standing should not be overlooked nor underestimated.

References [1] Birmingham City Council. Safety update. Association of Building Engineers, 2005, 11 (1), p.22. [2] British Standard Institution. Spectator facilities- Part 1: layout criteria for spectator viewing Area, 2003, BS EN 13200-1: 2008. London: BSI. [3] Building. Safety fears trigger stadium redesigns. Building, 2004, 13 (1), p.23. [4] Creswell, J. W. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches, 3rd Edition. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications; 2009. [5] DCMS. Guide to safety at sports grounds. London: DCMS; 2003. [6] DCMS. Guide to safety at sports grounds. London: DCMS; 2008. [7] Eggington, N. P. How safe are football grounds post Taylor? MBEng. Dissertation, Association of Building Engineers; 1995. [8] Elliot, D. and Smith, D. (1993) Football stadia disasters in the United Kingdom- learning from tragedy? Industrial and Environmental Crisis Quarterly, 1993, 7 (3), pp. 205-217 [9] Fellows, R. & Lui, A. Research methods for construction, 3rd Edition. Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2008. [10] FLA. Standing in seated areas at football grounds. London: FLA; 2002. [11] FSF. The case for safe standing at major football stadia in England and Wales- A 21st century solution. London: Steven Powell; 2007. [12] Frosdick, S and Walley, L. Sport and safety management, 2nd Edition. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinmann; 1999. [13] Grailey, D. Training safe hands. Stadium and Arena Management, 2009, 6 (1), pp. 18-19. [14] Johnson, T. One hundred and thirty people die in Ghana football disaster. World Socialist Web Site; 2001. [Available at http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/may2001/gana-m12.shtml , accessed on 05/08/2010]. [15] Nixdorf, S. Stadium atlas. Berlin: Ernst and Sohn; 2008. [16] Popplewell. Inquiry into crowd safety and control at sports ground- Interim report.. Cmnd. 9585. London: HMSO; 1985. [17] Popplewell. Inquiry into crowd safety and control at sports ground- Final report. Cmnd. 9710. London: HMSO; 1986. [18] Taylor. The Hillsborough stadium disaster 15th April 1989- Interim report. Cm. 765. London: HMSO; 1989. [19] Taylor. The Hillsborough stadium disaster 15th April 1989- Final report. Cm. 962. London: HMSO; 1990. [20] Wheatley. Report of the inquiry into crowd safety at sports grounds. Cmnd. 4952. London: HMSO; 1972. [21] Zhen, W., Mao, L. and Zhao, Y. Analysis of trample disaster and a case study-Mihong bridge fatality in China 2004. Safety Science, 2007, 46 (1), pp. 1255-1270.