# Fire Marshal 1, NFL 0, Fans -1250



## brudgers (Feb 6, 2011)

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/07/sports/football/07fans-super-bowl-dallas.html


----------



## Yankee (Feb 6, 2011)

Yas pays ya monies and yas takes ya chances

No pity here

Good game tho


----------



## cda (Feb 7, 2011)

A little more of the story

ARLINGTON — News 8 began hearing about problems with the temporary seating scheme at Cowboys Stadium three weeks ago.

At that time, many — if not most of the temporary seats designed to increase capacity for Super Bowl XLV — had already been installed.

What we were led to believe three weeks ago, and again last Thursday, is that Arlington city officials were satisfied that the 18,000 temporary seats were being properly installed and were safe.

But on Sunday evening, the NFL and upset fans made it abundantly clear that that apparently was not the case.

It was clear even before the new Dallas Cowboys Stadium was built that Jerry Jones and the NFL would not host a Super Bowl if the venue could seat only 78,000 fans.

That's why the stadium was designed with extra space to accommodate temporary seating — in this case, 18,000 additional seats.

On Sunday afternoon, just a few hours before the game, the NFL issued statements indicating that more than 1,200 ticketholders would not be permitted to sit in those temporary seats, which are located in four lower sections and two upper sections of the colossal sports arena.

No reason was given other than to say the decision was made for "the safety of fans."

Three weeks ago, when most of those seats had been installed, News 8 caught wind of problems. Concerns were raised by the Arlington Fire Marshal and Arlington code inspectors. Records obtained by News 8 at the time confirmed it.

A series of memos and photographs documented numerous safety and code violations, among them:

"Blocked paths of egress" for fans who might need to escape in an emergency.

*

Inspectors found "plans with no engineer seals."

*

But perhaps most glaringly, one set of plans was uncovered with "no information regarding ... structural stability."

*

And this: "Structural elements of one set of stands that are not completely secured and supported."

But six days later, one city official assured Arlington's top building inspector, "I believe that they (the contractors) have addressed our major concerns."

News 8 has learned that the construction of the temporary seats continued right up until the last minute, even though tickets for those temporary seats had been sold by the NFL long ago.

It has become clear that code inspectors on site Sunday declared that seat construction was either not sufficient or was not safe.

We will not know complete details until perhaps Monday,* because the official word from Arlington after Super Bowl XLV is: "No comment."

E-mail bshipp@wfaa.com

http://m.wfaa.com/WFAA8/db_19418/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=hQTHIzuy&src=cat


----------



## cheyer (Feb 7, 2011)

It's awesome to see how the inspector's did not fold under political pressure (or how they were allowed not to fold)...it could have easily gone the other way......go GB!!!


----------



## Coug Dad (Feb 7, 2011)

I hope that these seats were denied for legitimate reasons and not just a egotistical bureaucratic power play.


----------



## Mac (Feb 7, 2011)

"documented numerous safety and code violations" sounds legitimate.


----------



## FM William Burns (Feb 7, 2011)

Agreed, if documented and substantiated by code good for them for as Cda says better safe then "live at 5"


----------



## Coug Dad (Feb 7, 2011)

It just seems odd that approval was reported to be given and the seats installed.  Three weeks before the game and all of a sudden there is a problem?  Something does not pass the smell test.


----------



## brudgers (Feb 7, 2011)

Coug Dad said:
			
		

> It just seems odd that approval was reported to be given and the seats installed.  Three weeks before the game and all of a sudden there is a problem?  Something does not pass the smell test.


My educated guess: the original plans were submitted with the temporary seating shown and were approved.

However, the seats were not fully designed nor were they installed.

The schedule for constructing the temporary seats was dictated by shopping around for the lowest price - and therefore the contract was let at the last minute.

Shop drawings were rushed, engineers and the original AOR may not have been involved (again in an effort to save money).

Low bid had a tight schedule, and the bad weather in Dallas last week set it further behind.

NFL offered the triple face value in an effort to avoid lawsuits - selling seats which don't exist is fraud and potentially racketeering - that's what Jim Baker went to prison for.


----------



## incognito (Feb 7, 2011)

IF the seating area is not found to be structurally deficient or egress substantially different than originally submitted the nitwit inspectors should be fired. No room for egotistical jerks in this profession.


----------



## texasbo (Feb 7, 2011)

Coug Dad said:
			
		

> I hope that these seats were denied for legitimate reasons and not just a egotistical bureaucratic power play.


Politically, that would be virtually impossible. You can bet that the issue was discussed at many levels before the final decision was made. My guess is that any approval was made in general terms, and much like brudgers described, the actual installation just didn't cut it.

However, I tend to doubt that a quest for low bid had anything to do with it.


----------



## cda (Feb 7, 2011)

The last big event at the stadium was 1/7. There was a smaller event on 1/13

Cannot remember but thought the NFL got control of the stadium around 1/8


----------



## Yikes (Feb 7, 2011)

<< Asked who made the final decision to close the four sections, Grubman said the Arlington fire and police departments were responsible for certifying the temporary structures.

“They made the decision as to what the certification was, and from there it was very easy: those seats were not going to be in play,” he said.

But last night, Arlington police spokeswoman Tiara Richard said the city’s fire marshal “played no role” in deciding that the unfinished seats would not be used because the NFL never asked the city to inspect those seats.

“That was all the NFL’s call,” she said. “The fire marshal had no participation in the seats that were not completed. The fire marshal only inspected the seats that were completed.”  >>

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/super-bowl/local/20110207-nfl-knew-last-week-that-temporary-super-bowl-seats-might-be-unusable.ece


----------



## MarkRandall (Feb 7, 2011)

There's really no excuse for Jerry Jones not to have been on top of this long before game day. From what I've read, it sounds like structural capacity for these extra seats were figured in the original design, but for some moronic reason, they could not finish the actual design, construction and installation of the seats in time for the game. You can't blame it on bad weather. All the details should have been worked out months ago for an event like this one.


----------



## brudgers (Feb 7, 2011)

incognito said:
			
		

> IF the seating area is not found to be structurally deficient or egress substantially different than originally submitted the nitwit inspectors should be fired. No room for egotistical jerks in this profession.


It was the fire marshal.

They usually base their calls on their body of experiences ... and their experiences of bodies.


----------



## packsaddle (Feb 7, 2011)

we all know that the entire stadium could have been non-compliant and the game would have been played anyway.

there isn't an inspector on planet earth that could have stopped a super bowl from being played.

no inspector, fire marshal, policeman, city manager, mayor, governor, or president would have prevented the event from taking place.

anybody who thinks a building code issue could trump a super bowl game is living in fantasyland.

we all want to feel important and think we are making a difference, but certain realities cannot be denied.


----------



## Yankee (Feb 7, 2011)

I have to agree that it was probably the building owner's own engineering firm that said "no way are WE going to be responsible for these seats" and the building owner's insurance company who said "no way are WE gonna cover you for this" that made the final decision. BUT it very well coulda been the lowly Building official or Fire Marshal who brought it to the engineers and/or insurance company's attention . . . .


----------



## AegisFPE (Feb 8, 2011)

In the first Wildcard game, seismographs recorded activity from Qwest Field corresponding to the apparent crowd reaction to Marshawn Lynch's touchdown run for the Seahawks against the Saints.

Fortunately, being in Washington State, earthquakes are a standard structural design consideration.


----------



## cda (Feb 8, 2011)

Hay.   Texas has earthquakes!!!!

http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/101310-earthquake-rattles-north-texas


----------



## FyrBldgGuy (Feb 8, 2011)

Fire Marshal or no Fire Marshal, someone in the city had enough strength to disagree or at least to say they would not approve the use.  News stories are frequently wrong about who said what.  Jerry Jones should have stood up and said it was his decision not to use the unsafe bleachers.

So the next time they have a big event will he try this again.

But I want to know who was the stupid city official (fire chief or other) that had the fire fighters scrap the snow from the roof.  That is not an emergency activity!  After putting their lives on the line for the staduim did they get to watch the game inside?


----------



## Coug Dad (Feb 8, 2011)

FBG

Sounds like a great high angle training exercise ;-)


----------



## High Desert (Feb 8, 2011)

A statement from the constrcution company's vice-president:

"Suprina told KDFW-TV that he personally told the fire marshal the seats were unsafe and that he encouraged officials to shut the sections down."

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/super-bowl/20110208-construction-firm-says-it-tried-to-salvage-super-bowl-seat-effort-at-cowboys-stadium.ece


----------



## FyrBldgGuy (Feb 9, 2011)

And now there is a class action lawsuit... LA Lawyers


----------



## Yankee (Feb 9, 2011)

If someone bought tickets on the secondary (or third-ary) market that far out paces the face price, then you take your chances. Tough. The offered compensation seems adequate to me.


----------



## brudgers (Feb 9, 2011)

Yankee said:
			
		

> If someone bought tickets on the secondary (or third-ary) market that far out paces the face price, then you take your chances. Tough. The offered compensation seems adequate to me.


The NFL offered nominal compensation while the fans were under duress as a way to preclude paying fair damages.


----------



## Yikes (Feb 10, 2011)

Guys, I've seen questionably safe facilities utilized under political pressure... they simply pay some firefighters to stand there on a "fire watch" to provide the veneer of respectability to the situatin, and to reduce the "live at 5" response time by emergency personnel.  Without a doubt, there were already such safety personnel present at the game anyway.

Clearly, this option was not available to them, so it must have been much more serious than a merely questionable safety matter.


----------



## Yankee (Feb 10, 2011)

brudgers said:
			
		

> The NFL offered nominal compensation while the fans were under duress as a way to preclude paying fair damages.


Seems like 3 times $900 would pay for someone's travel and hotel for one trip and one night. You think they deserve "pain and suffering"?


----------



## High Desert (Feb 10, 2011)

Yankee said:
			
		

> Seems like 3 times $900 would pay for someone's travel and hotel for one trip and one night. You think they deserve "pain and suffering"?


Only if they were Steeler fans!


----------



## brudgers (Feb 10, 2011)

Yankee said:
			
		

> Seems like 3 times $900 would pay for someone's travel and hotel for one trip and one night. You think they deserve "pain and suffering"?


First, $900 of that is just refunding the face value of the ticket.

Second, although the $1800 would probably cover transportation and one night's hotel accommodations under normal circumstances, the SuperBowl week is not normal circumstances. Hotels not only charge significantly higher rates but also typically have three or four or five night minimum stays - restaurants and other services also charge more because of scarcity.

In addition, many people will take vacation from work resulting in lost wages, pay for boarding of pets, and incur other expenses back home based on the reasonable expectation that a ticket will get them into the game.

Finally, the NFL is well aware that SuperBowl tickets cost more than face value and their basing the refund on face value is disingenuous.

Do they deserve pain and suffering - how the hell should I know. What I do know is that people who feel that the NFL's offer was insufficient have legitimate access to the courts and there is nothing wrong with their availing themselves of the judicial processes.



> "This telecast is copyrighted by the NFL for the private use of our audience. Any other use of this telecast or any pictures, descriptions, or accounts of the game without the NFL's consent is prohibited."


----------



## FredK (Feb 10, 2011)

Seems to me it would be pretty hard to convince a judge what one paid a scalper for tickets without a receipt of some kind.  And I don't remember the last time I saw a guy selling tickets with a register.


----------



## Yankee (Feb 10, 2011)

Agreed to the lack of receipt. Also the "vacation" time surrounding the super bowl game is not part of the investment lost. It is/was still available to those who planned it. If they let their several hours of missing the game "in person" ruin their 4 or 5 or 6 days, that is their own fault.


----------



## brudgers (Feb 11, 2011)

FredK said:
			
		

> Seems to me it would be pretty hard to convince a judge what one paid a scalper for tickets without a receipt of some kind.  And I don't remember the last time I saw a guy selling tickets with a register.


http://www.stubhub.com/


----------



## brudgers (Feb 11, 2011)

Yankee said:
			
		

> Agreed to the lack of receipt. Also the "vacation" time surrounding the super bowl game is not part of the investment lost. It is/was still available to those who planned it. If they let their several hours of missing the game "in person" ruin their 4 or 5 or 6 days, that is their own fault.


If it costs the NFL more money to solve the problem, that is there fault as well.


----------

