LOLiverpooLOL - Next Season

[Hoop Blah]

Absolutely, the events of that day, the Taylor Report, and all the following fall out has significantly changed the lives of all football fans up and down the country.

[John Madejski's Wallet]

The question I think these verdicts answered is whether the behaviour of 'going to a football match' can be considered to be contributing towards anything that subsequently occurs. Indeed hasn't that been the primary learning and pleasing development from HIllsborough, that football crowds are no longer treated as 'braying mobs', but rightly as large groups of people attending an event, groups that by their nature are unpredictable, and so plans by minute detail are required to safely manage and control them.

It's a shame it took a tragedy for the cops/authorities/clubs to cotton on to this.

It was all so preventable......not least by having better barriers on the terraces. Christ i even remember as a kid being in a bad crush (and eventually loads of kids being pulled out over the fences) at Elm Park FFS.... and the turnstiles were at the side instead of the back

however, my feelings are along the lines of papes'. The police are totally accountable for the poor decisions (and all the dreadful coverups), there are after all there to control unpredictable crowds.... however a friend who lives by hillsborough had a very damning view of the liverpool fans' behaviour surrounding the ground leading up to the game. Some of them should take some blame forcing the f*ck-ups in the first place.

[Sanguine]

The question I think these verdicts answered is whether the behaviour of 'going to a football match' can be considered to be contributing towards anything that subsequently occurs. Indeed hasn't that been the primary learning and pleasing development from HIllsborough, that football crowds are no longer treated as 'braying mobs', but rightly as large groups of people attending an event, groups that by their nature are unpredictable, and so plans by minute detail are required to safely manage and control them.

It's a shame it took a tragedy for the cops/authorities/clubs to cotton on to this.

It was all so preventable......not least by having better barriers on the terraces. Christ i even remember as a kid being in a bad crush (and eventually loads of kids being pulled out over the fences) at Elm Park FFS.... and the turnstiles were at the side instead of the back

however, my feelings are along the lines of papes'. The police are totally accountable for the poor decisions (and all the dreadful coverups), there are after all there to control unpredictable crowds.... however a friend who lives by hillsborough had a very damning view of the liverpool fans' behaviour surrounding the ground leading up to the game. Some of them should take some blame forcing the f*ck-ups in the first place.

Has the inquiry not concluded that there is no blame attached to the fans?
400,000 pages of evidence. No evidence to support any view that this was anything but a normal football crowd - right down to photographs of the bins, which were full of Sprite and Vimto.

[Sutekh]

Yep, had he been in uniform, he might've been deployed elsewhere in the ground......or were you implying he wouldn't have been so humane?

Sadly, the word "Police" in this sad tale seems to be the generic word for all that was wrong that day........however like the medical services that were finally tasked to attend.....there were a lot of good guys who have been let down by their superiors

I can't remember if he was even South Yorks police or not. But no I don't believe he would've acted any differently. But by being off duty he was where he was and able to act without having to wait for orders.

Made a similiar comment to Mrs K about those police and ambulance men and women who did do their utmost to help are unfairly tarred with the actions of their superiors before, during after the tragedy.

Absolutely. There were those members of the constabulary and medical services who could see what was happening and acted all they could but were prevented by the idiot superiors they had.

In addition to that, when they made their statements on the event they later found that their superiors had doctored and censored many of them so that those superiors would not be found to have their "arses in a sling".

I've also heard stories of members of the South Yorks constabulary having pressure applied to them to write statements that fitted in with what the top echelons wanted to hear.

So many good people trying to save lives on the day and thwarted by those useless halfwits.

[Sanguine]

Agreed - some of the most enduring images of the disaster are as it unfolded. Grobbelaar helpless and watching from the goal as fans start streaming on to the pitch. A lot of policemen are clearly stood up on the railings trying to help fans escape - in an almost surreal juxtoposition from other images that show colleagues stood idle.

[Ouroboros]

Nobody is slandering the dead.

Imagine making out somebody is slandering the dead to gain a few brownie points with fellow nobbers.

Slandering the innocent dead was what I said.

Of course you had to take that word out

[6ft Kerplunk]

A lot of policemen are clearly stood up on the railings trying to help fans escape - in an almost surreal juxtoposition from other images that show colleagues stood idle.

This is the bit that I still really can't comprehend. People are dying, some of the emergency services are doing everything they can to help, the camera pans back and you see hundreds of police standing in a line to keep the fans segregated. You see fans pushing past them to get bits of advertising hoarding to carry people away on and still that line of police aren't told to go and help.

[6ft Kerplunk]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36147964

Mamadou Sakho has decided not to challenge the results of his failed drugs test and is not expected to play for Liverpool again this season.

Should be a two year ban.

[Muskrat]

I'm a bit uncomfortable about this verdict tbh. As others have said it is a nonsense to suggest that the behaviour of the Liverpool fans didn't contribute to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane end of the ground. By any measure of consistency and objectivity, not to mention common sense, it must have done. If the fans hadn't all rushed in a once then the crush would never have happened. That's not to belittle the scale of the tragedy but we must be even handed about reaching conclusions especially where blame is being attributed. All of the other questions where "blame " was aimed - Police and Ambulance services, Hillsborough Stadium and officials for example were all returned as "yes", yet this one's stands alone as a "no". Am I the only one that finds that strange?

The other thing to note is that the Unlawful Killing verdict was a 7-2 majority. I would have thought that considering the potential ramifications of that verdict that it would have demanded a unanimous decision. In a jury of 12 that would equate to just less than 9-3, which I don't think many Courts would accept for an equivalent charge.

[paultheroyal]

They went to watch a football match.

They were queuing quite orderly waiting to get in.

No footage has been shown of rowdy behaviour, throwing objects, fighting or pick pocketing.

Game is about to start. Someone decides to open the gates. Fans naturally rush in like anyone else would in that given situation in order to get best view.

The rest is history.....

And yet fellow football supporters are still struggling with the verdict and willing to push some blame onto them.

Incredible.

[AthleticoSpizz]

......and as yet......we are yet to see a ticketless attendee come out with any statements.

[Ouroboros]

I'm a bit uncomfortable about this verdict tbh. As others have said it is a nonsense to suggest that the behaviour of the Liverpool fans didn't contribute to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane end of the ground. By any measure of consistency and objectivity, not to mention common sense, it must have done. If the fans hadn't all rushed in a once then the crush would never have happened. That's not to belittle the scale of the tragedy but we must be even handed about reaching conclusions especially where blame is being attributed. All of the other questions where "blame " was aimed - Police and Ambulance services, Hillsborough Stadium and officials for example were all returned as "yes", yet this one's stands alone as a "no". Am I the only one that finds that strange?

The other thing to note is that the Unlawful Killing verdict was a 7-2 majority. I would have thought that considering the potential ramifications of that verdict that it would have demanded a unanimous decision. In a jury of 12 that would equate to just less than 9-3, which I don't think many Courts would accept for an equivalent charge.

It's almost as if quickly walking into a football ground doesn't make you responsible for the death by crushing of your fellow attendees. Mad world.

[Ian Royal]

What I've said and been consistent about is people think football is a licence to act in a manner you wouldn't normally do in every day life.

Yes, you have been consistently wrong on this.

No I haven't. Have you not been on the tube in London when several London teams are home on the same day? Yes - you will get loads of boozed up blokes intimidating people -pushing and shoving to get on the tube train after the game irrespective of anyone else's safety.

You're pretty naive if you think this sort of stuff doesn't happen. Do you get chauffeured to games whilst wrapped in cotton wool or something?

maybe around Chelsea

[From Despair To Where?]

This was 1989, the prevelant culture was to turn up 10 minutes before the game. That was something that the match organisers should have had a contingency for. There was no live broadcast so the logical step to take would be to delay kickoff by 30 minutes to allow everyone to gain safe access. It was done all the time in the 80's. There possibly should also have been better filtering of fans towards the turnstiles, there should have been better organisation and Hillsborough should have had a valid safety certificate but this was 1989 and the preceding culture was to ignore these things because you'd got away with it 100 times before.

The fatal error was to open the gate, especially when there were other options. Without that 1 action, 96 people would not have died. It was a negligent decision taken without reasonable consideration.

The bigger crime was to cover up the truth for 27 years, compounded even more by the fact that certain organisations still seem incapable of giving an unqualified and unequivocal apology for their actions on the day and in the following 27 years.

[Ian Royal]

I get where paps and, to a lesser extent kes, are coming from here.

Fans getting into the game weren't responsible for the deaths but their actions surely contributed to the circumstances that caused such a tragedy.

As a father I find it hard to read some of the accounts, especially Trevor Hicks', and the pain of his and his fellow bereaved is incomprehensible.

Personally, having read that article and other information, I think it's perfectly clear that whether some tiny minority of fans may have had a bit too much to drink, or tried to get in without tickets, these tiny minority of probable but hypothetical fans in no way contributed to the disaster or deaths. And that even raising any point that some few dozen people may have been a bit drunk or tried to 'jib' in is utterly irrelevant and to be perfectly honest somewhat offensive.

[Ian Royal]

I'm a bit uncomfortable about this verdict tbh. As others have said it is a nonsense to suggest that the behaviour of the Liverpool fans didn't contribute to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane end of the ground. By any measure of consistency and objectivity, not to mention common sense, it must have done. If the fans hadn't all rushed in a once then the crush would never have happened. That's not to belittle the scale of the tragedy but we must be even handed about reaching conclusions especially where blame is being attributed. All of the other questions where "blame " was aimed - Police and Ambulance services, Hillsborough Stadium and officials for example were all returned as "yes", yet this one's stands alone as a "no". Am I the only one that finds that strange?

The other thing to note is that the Unlawful Killing verdict was a 7-2 majority. I would have thought that considering the potential ramifications of that verdict that it would have demanded a unanimous decision. In a jury of 12 that would equate to just less than 9-3, which I don't think many Courts would accept for an equivalent charge.

It's almost as if quickly walking into a football ground doesn't make you responsible for the death by crushing of your fellow attendees. Mad world.

Indeed, the entire thing was a massive funnel. Once you don't regulate entry to the top of the funnel, everything just escalates from there and by the time you know there's an issue you're caught in the press and pushed forward into the crush.

[Tony Le Mesmer]

This was 1989, the prevelant culture was to turn up 10 minutes before the game. That was something that the match organisers should have had a contingency for. There was no live broadcast so the logical step to take would be to delay kickoff by 30 minutes to allow everyone to gain safe access. It was done all the time in the 80's. There possibly should also have been better filtering of fans towards the turnstiles, there should have been better organisation and Hillsborough should have had a valid safety certificate but this was 1989 and the preceding culture was to ignore these things because you'd got away with it 100 times before.

The fatal error was to open the gate, especially when there were other options. Without that 1 action, 96 people would not have died. It was a negligent decision taken without reasonable consideration.

The bigger crime was to cover up the truth for 27 years, compounded even more by the fact that certain organisations still seem incapable of giving an unqualified and unequivocal apology for their actions on the day and in the following 27 years.

1st paragraph well put, put the 2nd i very much disagree with.

If you'd tried to guide someone through a minefield, got it wrong and they died, who's to blame? You, or the people that put the mines down in the first place?

No fences/pens = no deaths, no matter how many mistakes were made in crowd control. That was the overwhelming single biggest factor in the disaster.

Opening the gates was a clear error, but that must have happened so many times before. Its just that the death trap wasn't waiting at the end of the tunnel. I'm reliably told they allegedly did similar at Elm Park for the Simod Cup Semi Final. Delayed the KO & eventually just opened the gates, hence why the Southbank was so badly overcrowded that night and why people say the gate was way in excess of the 15k.

The cover up wasn't that, It was a smear campaign against football fans because we were banned from European competition. The government wanted ID cards and this was a good opportunity to justify it.

[No Fixed Abode]

I get where paps and, to a lesser extent kes, are coming from here.

Fans getting into the game weren't responsible for the deaths but their actions surely contributed to the circumstances that caused such a tragedy.

As a father I find it hard to read some of the accounts, especially Trevor Hicks', and the pain of his and his fellow bereaved is incomprehensible.

Personally, having read that article and other information, I think it's perfectly clear that whether some tiny minority of fans may have had a bit too much to drink, or tried to get in without tickets, these tiny minority of probable but hypothetical fans in no way contributed to the disaster or deaths. And that even raising any point that some few dozen people may have been a bit drunk or tried to 'jib' in is utterly irrelevant and to be perfectly honest somewhat offensive.

"A few dozen people may have been a bit drunk" . A massively naive post Ian. But I'm sure you believe they were all on the Vimto that day too which begs the question. Have you ever been to a football match, a big away day such as a semi-final?

*I'm not saying it massively contributed to what happened

[From Despair To Where?]

The opening of the gate was the one action that allowed all the other factors to fall into place, innefective matchday control, fencing , poor stadium design etc. There's nothing they could do about the stadium design and layout but there were individual decisions that were made or not made on the day that could have prevented it from happening, of which opening the gate 2 minutes before kickoff was the biggest IMO. It brought all the other factors, over which they had no control, into effect. The whole inquest was to establish who did what on that particular day, how that decision was come to and how it contributed to the deaths of 96. As I said, it was decision made out of complacency because they'd got away with making that decision countless times before and they knew they had failed young time, otherwise why try to bury the truth.

[No Fixed Abode]

No mention of Hillsborough on the front of the Sun or Times this morning...

The silence from the Sun, and the lack of contrition in the statement last night by the current head of South Yorks police, leave a very bad taste in the mouth.

The Sun's political editor Trevor Kavanagh (he's been there for donkeys years) whining yesterday that it wasn't their fault and they (Kelvin MacKenzie and the Thatcher government) took what South Yorks police said in good faith. "They lied to us all" .

What a prick.

With some respect to The Sun - there was a double page on the court findings yesterday and an apology (for the third or fourth time) on page 10.