Hillsborough
Comments
-
The moment I heard about what was happening at the Lepping Lane end that fateful day when Liverpool lost 96 fans my thoughts immediately went to the '81 semi final Wolves against Spurs.
I remembered sitting in the seats watching hundreds/thousands of Spurs fans being led around the pitch because there were too many for the stand. That day the police were almost sensible, they may have let too many people into one area, but at least they did something about it. How close was that to being the Hillsborough tragedy?
Every time someone mentions Hillsborough, I think back to what might have been in '81 and the tragedy in '89. I now hope that justice can be done. It's taken far too long. It will never bring back loved ones, or repair the lives of those affected, but at least now they can get closure. RIP0 -
I'll always remember the day because i'd gone up to Old Trafford to watch Derby play United, i can remember the crowd slowly starting to cheer this got louder and louder, the United fans were all facing the executive boxes looking up at the tv screens clapping and cheering....... what the hell was going on?
It wasn't until we stopped off at Knutsford for a pint on the way back that we found out what had happened.0 -
I remember that I could have gone to the game but my older cousin would not take me (I was 17) as he felt there would be trouble - there was a bit of trouble at the Forest v Liverpool game earlier in the season back in Oct/Nov and we had been caught up in it briefly when we were on our way back to the car after leaving the City Ground. My cousin was always very cautious about these things - I really wanted to go and was so angry with him at the time.
He has of course told me what he saw, of the trance he drove home in - twice driving past his junction on the M1, and of the sleepless nights it caused him. Very very glad now that I wasn't there.You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.0 -
Too many contributions to the topic in many online forums from people who are blissfully ignorant of what football hooliganism was like in the 70's and 80's. Too many really know so very little about what football and its supporters were like in the 80's and how many factors contributed to the deaths.
People who say that fences should not have been put up show their complete ignorance of how some of their uncles, fathers, cousins and other relatives behaved as football supporters in the 70's and 80's. People died in stadiums, people died on the streets outside, people died on coaches and trains en route and people died in pubs before and after the games. Something had to be done and this was one consequence. People were being beaten to death, knifed and attacked every weekend.
20:20 hindsight and second guessing the choices of how supporters were penned in isn't smart - it just shows your ignorance.
No excuses for what the police did on the day however - thats a matter of fact and for juries, but pretending these was an alternative to the measures taken at football stadiums only comes from those who have no idea what they are talking about.0 -
tiredofwhiners wrote:Too many contributions to the topic in many online forums from people who are blissfully ignorant of what football hooliganism was like in the 70's and 80's. Too many really know so very little about what football and its supporters were like in the 80's and how many factors contributed to the deaths.
People who say that fences should not have been put up show their complete ignorance of how some of their uncles, fathers, cousins and other relatives behaved as football supporters in the 70's and 80's. People died in stadiums, people died on the streets outside, people died on coaches and trains en route and people died in pubs before and after the games. Something had to be done and this was one consequence. People were being beaten to death, knifed and attacked every weekend.
20:20 hindsight and second guessing the choices of how supporters were penned in isn't smart - it just shows your ignorance.
No excuses for what the police did on the day however - thats a matter of fact and for juries, but pretending these was an alternative to the measures taken at football stadiums only comes from those who have no idea what they are talking about.
was it really that bad?
i attended home and away matches throughout the 70's and 80's apart from one or two occasions i didnt feel in peril. the current situation in our towns and cities every friday and saturday nights fills me with more dread. do you think that drinkers should be put behind fences and crammed in until they are crushed to death?'dont forget lads, one evertonian is worth twenty kopites'0 -
NapoleonD wrote:I hope those that fabricated evidence are absolutely squirming and I hope they will be prosecuted.
That should begin with:-
immediate dismissal of Norman Bettison from the West Yorkshire Force and subsequent criminal investigation for, at least, peverting the course of justice;
-
instigation of criminal invesigations of corporate manslaughter against at least the South Yorkshire Force and individually certain officers for their role a well as, potentially, the FA for holding the game at a ground they knew didn't meet then current safety requirements;
-
instigations into various police officers, Dr Stefan Popper (the coroner who sat at what will now almost certainly be the first of two inquests into the deaths), journalists and several previous and current MPs and ministers into, variously, criminally perverting the course of justice and tampering with evidence, as well as professional misconduct.
I'm sure I'm not the only person to have read the people and felt the cold chill of reality run down their spine as they realise that the implications of the panel's findings go substantially farther than the into our society than the disaster itself.
It's publication undermines the sheer fabric of our society.
The report shows that the public's trust of the police, which they rely on to operate, was undermined to such an extent that not only confidence in the then South Yorkshire Force but, 23 years later, each of the current forces and the home secretary to whom they report, should be tested to ensure that they indeed achieve the level integrity and independence required. It also shows that confidence in the mechanisms of power we all accede, inlcuding the government, the coroner's court and the judiciary has again to be tested for the same reasons.
Without such verificationthat the controlling powers that shape our society are indeed true, fair and independent, we cannot place reliance on any decision presented to us regarding investigation or subsequent prosecutions for any potentially criminal event from the issuance of the most trival fine to significant incidents such as the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes and the death of Ian Tomlinson.
The families now have the truth. We now all need justice.
Bob0 -
Iwent to a few games in the 70's and worked at many in the 80's and 90's. I think football grounds were fairly hostile places back in the 70's and 80's. By contrast I wouldn't have any problem going today but thankfully that will never happen.0
-
There was a kind of ritualised hostility at football in the 70s and 80s which did spill over into real violence quite often but the post earlier about people being beaten to death on a weekly basis is a gross exaggeration. The truth is that a great many young men found it exciting, yes the fences were a reaction to all of that and those fences coupled with other factors such as stadium design, police incompetence etc led to a tragedy.
What happened afterwards is absolutely unforgivable and if yesterday's report doesn't lead to prosecutions that will be equally unforgivable. I don't share the faith that Cameron's statement indicates he is committed to putting right the cover up but time will tell. What needs to happen is people in authority decide to do the right thing rather than what is most expedient.
edit - with reference to the argument over how the pens got so crowded - a guy I used to play football with was at the match with his dad - they had tickets for a seated area of the ground. As they walked past the entrance to the terrace where crush took place the police tried to physically push them into the crush - just wanting fans off the streets and inside the ground. Now having seated tickets they resisted and lucky they did - but if you had tickets for another terrace you'd just think well one terrace is as good as another if the police say go in there let's go.
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
What this exposes is how the state operates at different levels, some of us have been accused of being paranoid lefties etc, but the truth occasionally is revealed for all who want to look.
After 23 years it is safe enough for the state to cough, in other cases it is not ready to , The Shrewsbury Pickets is still on going-- MI5 and govt of the day,involved in a political conspiracy to smear and undermine the striking workers, instead they were set up and jailed.Even now they use national security as a smokescreen--40 years later, it will be another view inside pandora's box.
Scapegoats will now be found, but you can be sure that the real culprits will evade responsibility.
Those silly posts on here about 'hooliganism' , somehow trying to attach blame in this case, just do not want to accept the findings of an independent and thorough enquiry. It also is an insult to those who died that day in sheffield.0 -
pinarello001 wrote:Thatcher who wanted the police to look good 'cos she needed them to fight the unions and ba$tard lefties. There is no doubt she pulled political strings to help cover this up ?
.
My take on that chimes with what NapD posted, the Government of the day should be able to take their own police chiefs words as truth. That they couldn't says more about SYP than them.
This isn't a party political issue."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
Not at all. There is no doubt who failed on that day.dylanfernley wrote:Those silly posts on here about 'hooliganism' , somehow trying to attach blame in this case, just do not want to accept the findings of an independent and thorough enquiry. It also is an insult to those who died that day in sheffield.
However we should also consider what led to that day - to the culture of treating fans like animals and as said in the report - the default position of the police on the day was to treat the crowd as something to be controlled. All the focus was in controlling the "animals" rather than ensuring their safety. "The management of the crowd was viewed exclusively through a lens of potential crowd disorder, and this ambiguity was not resolved despite problems at previous semi-finals." Sadly football fans were treated like animals because a sizable minority behaved like animals for years and years across the whole of the UK. This is of course not to excuse the police for their attitude to football fans at the time - and in this case it is clear there was criminal negligence.
I would hope that there is now too much "truth" out there for this to happen.natrix wrote:NapoleonD wrote:I hope those that fabricated evidence ....... will be prosecuted.
Get real, the police will close ranks and protect their own like they always do. (e.g. Simon Harwood getting away with killing Ian Tomlinson)You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.0 -
Bang -Head-Wall-- this was not about hooliganism, why do you D555 keep using the issue0
-
The 96 were the victims of weak and ineffectual police command which was then compounded by lies and deceit.
As much as they may train for these situations more often than not in the stress and heat of incidents such as riots police command and effective decision making quite often fails.0 -
Sorry, to clarify, by "It is clear who failed on that day" I mean the police/authorities.dylanfernley wrote:Bang -Head-Wall-- this was not about hooliganism, why do you D555 keep using the issueYou only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.0 -
natrix wrote:NapoleonD wrote:I hope those that fabricated evidence ....... will be prosecuted.
Get real, the police will close ranks and protect their own like they always do. (e.g. Simon Harwood getting away with killing Ian Tomlinson)
Harwood didnt 'get away' with the killing- as perverse as the verdict may have been- he was cleared by a jury who heard all the evidence.'dont forget lads, one evertonian is worth twenty kopites'0 -
Daz555-
All this predates the Hillsborough tragedy but make no mistake that is where the seeds were sewn. All these "hero hooligan" fans from every club in the land who glory in their 'golden' days of the 70s and 80s should be ashamed of themselves.
You seem to be confused, this is a thread about the lies, deceit, and criminal behaviour of the state via its agencies, not about 'hooliganism'-- the report is very clear on that issue. Please don't keep banging your drum0 -
All Daz is doing is saying that the causes of the tragedy go deeper than just poor policing - not casting aspersions on anyone that was there that day.
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
fast as fupp wrote:was it really that bad?
Yes, when football 'supporters' went to war almost literally with each other, arranged to ambush each other and carried clubs, knives and weapons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_h ... ed_Kingdom
Have a look at the Uk section and understand why UK cities were like war zones on match day.
None of this excuses the actions at Hillsborough one bit but it does explain for younger readers what the 70's and 80's were like - so utterly unlike today.0 -
dylanfernley wrote:Bang -Head-Wall-- this was not about hooliganism, why do you D555 keep using the issue
I think it was 1965, at a London "derby game 65,000 people on the terraces, NO segregating fences let alone perimiter fences. ONE POLICEMAN in the ground.
You keep having a go at D555 saying hooliganism had nothing to do with it, the very reason the "pens" were there were to segregate opposing hooligan elements which many if not all teams had. I'll draw a parallel and no doubt get a verbal kicking on here answer this. How many would have died at HEYSEL had there been proper segregation and policing. People died there because there was poor policing and the ground was antiquated and totally unsuitable for the occasion, but, if everyone in that ground had behaved as people should there wouldn't have been an issue.
I used to go to the city ground in the seventies and eighties and hooliganism was an issue.I didn't do away games but my bro did and by and large it wasn't a very pleasent experience wherever you visited.
I suppose I could have just asked.
What came to the football grounds first, hooligans or segregating/perimeter fences.Answer that honestly and there's the root cause of the Hillsborough disaster which was then made a disgrace by what has now been revealed as a massive cover up. How far up government it went hopefully all will be revieled in time (hopefully not too long a time).Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
natrix wrote:NapoleonD wrote:I hope those that fabricated evidence ....... will be prosecuted.
Get real, the police will close ranks and protect their own like they always do. (e.g. Simon Harwood getting away with killing Ian Tomlinson)
Well, I'm not closing ranks on anyone...Insta: ATEnduranceCoaching
ABCC Cycling Coach0 -
fast as fupp wrote:Harwood didnt 'get away' with the killing- as perverse as the verdict may have been- he was cleared by a jury who heard all the evidence.
Depends what you mean by all the evidence, they weren't informed that he quit the Met on health grounds in 2001 shortly before a planned disciplinary hearing. Incredibly he was then able to join another force, (Surrey) before returning to serve with the Met in 2005.
He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents.~~~~~~Sustrans - Join the Movement~~~~~~0 -
He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents
So they weren't proven? Like it or not, they aren't relevent and prior convictions/accusations are not admissable in a trial."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
disgruntledgoat wrote:He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents
So they weren't proven? Like it or not, they aren't relevent and prior convictions/accusations are not admissable in a trial.
[Pedant mode] in certain circumstances they are [Pedant mode]0 -
My mistake.
Those kind of things always set my alarm bells ringing though. I remember when the media were out to paint Ian Huntley as history's greatest monster, following his conviction, the BBC had a report including the fateful line "He was accused of a rape in Hull in (can't remember the year) and only aquitted when CCTV showed he was elsewhere at the time of the incident". Utter nonsense."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
tiredofwhiners wrote:fast as fupp wrote:was it really that bad?
Yes, when football 'supporters' went to war almost literally with each other, arranged to ambush each other and carried clubs, knives and weapons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_h ... ed_Kingdom
Have a look at the Uk section and understand why UK cities were like war zones on match day.
None of this excuses the actions at Hillsborough one bit but it does explain for younger readers what the 70's and 80's were like - so utterly unlike today.
as you have to look it up on wiki- i take it you weren't around then?'dont forget lads, one evertonian is worth twenty kopites'0 -
I was around from 1972 onwards on the terraces, it was and mostly is handbags , sure there were more organised stuff, but as anyone who knows will tell you,it was between like minded people.Biggest thing that altered that behaviour was ecstasy.
Heysel-- a wall gave way , Hampden park --many killed coming out of the ground, just going home, in the belgian case, poor policing and even poorer infrastructure, crowd behaviour and its control are specialist things, predictable but do need input.
Again , in sheffield NO blame can be attached to the fans
have you read the findings of the inquiry???0 -
fast as fupp wrote:tiredofwhiners wrote:fast as fupp wrote:was it really that bad?
Yes, when football 'supporters' went to war almost literally with each other, arranged to ambush each other and carried clubs, knives and weapons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_h ... ed_Kingdom
Have a look at the Uk section and understand why UK cities were like war zones on match day.
None of this excuses the actions at Hillsborough one bit but it does explain for younger readers what the 70's and 80's were like - so utterly unlike today.
as you have to look it up on wiki- i take it you weren't around then?
Not at all - I am more than old enough to remember such things first hand but saying to someone 'read my brain' for evidence isn't really convincing is it ? Providing a link to something does not mean that one was not there.
Why would you ask - a crude attempt to suggest my recollections are not true because I provided a link which younger folks would recognise ? Seems a strange question .....0 -
your link implies there was mayhem- there wasnt!
pray tell me of your experiences of such mayhem?'dont forget lads, one evertonian is worth twenty kopites'0 -
natrix wrote:fast as fupp wrote:Harwood didnt 'get away' with the killing- as perverse as the verdict may have been- he was cleared by a jury who heard all the evidence.
Depends what you mean by all the evidence, they weren't informed that he quit the Met on health grounds in 2001 shortly before a planned disciplinary hearing. Incredibly he was then able to join another force, (Surrey) before returning to serve with the Met in 2005.
He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents.
Off topic but this works both ways. I've put an absolute vile piece of work before the court for theft from shop and assault. As part of the file I had to prepare bad character. This piece of excrement had 54, yes 54 prior CONVICTIONS for similar offences. In court I wasn't allowed to mention them or how it was I knew him (had nicked him 3 times for theft from shop). Despite witnesses and CCTV putting him in the shop at the time and photos of injuries of the victims he was found not guilty.
End of rant...
0
