|
I can't imagine carrying the burden that the families have for 25 years. I just hope they get some kind of closure soon. 
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 13:17 |
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:I am a wreck after that. I always thought I understood Hillsbororugh and the calls for justice, I had no clue... Yeah, this. I mean, I knew the facts and sequence of events and all; but when you hear from people who were there, and see the real extent of the coverup, appalling isn't strong enough a word. Totally unfathomable to think of enduring all that for 25 years, I don't think I would have it in me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Here's a link to a stream of the 30 for 30 doco if you're not in the states and wanted to watch it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
Thank you for the stream. Now I can't sleep. Holy gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 09:10
|
|
|
If you just can't get enough of this sort of thing, there's the 1996 Jimmy McGovern docudrama, which he wrote in close cooperation with the families as an apology to them for slightly ignorantly using the disaster as motivation for a serial killer in an episode of Cracker. Focuses on Trevor Hicks (played by Christopher Eccleston) from the 15th to the original inquest. In some ways far more harrowing than a straight documentary can ever be. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wf15PAPnAik
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 10:46
|
|
|
blue footed boobie posted:If anyone hasn't seen the BBC Panorama doc on Hillsborough, you should watch it immediately. I didn't really "get" hillsborough before that, and it's appalling. You can find it on youtube. Agreeing with all of this, including the "didn't get it" bit. Once I saw this I completely changed my mind. This has to be one of the biggest sports-related atrocities ever. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2L_8sj6Wyc
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 11:06
|
|
|
Can somebody explain to me the logic behind putting people into standing room only cages?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 13:09
|
|
|
davecrazy posted:Can somebody explain to me the logic behind putting people into standing room only cages? Standing on terraces was the traditional way of watching football matches and probably all sporting events for that matter. The cages came later, to segregate fans from each other and from the pitch as a response to crowd control problems and hooliganism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 13:17
|
|
|
davecrazy posted:Can somebody explain to me the logic behind putting people into standing room only cages? the logic was simply to stop football fans (all of whom were hooligans back in the 80s) getting onto the pitch, which all football fans wanted to do at all times (we were all hooligans, you see). Hooliganism was a major problem in the 80s, but the way it was dealt with was simple: football fans are hooligans and must all be dealt with as such. So, cages, for all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 13:20
|
|
|
In the 70s there was a spate of pitch invasions with the express purpose of getting the match abandoned if things weren't going well for the team in question - United had a fair few incidents. The fences starting going up around that time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 13:24
|
|
|
I've seen pretty much all of the documentaries about Hillsborough but that 30 for 30 program was particularly brutal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 13:38
|
|
|
I forgot to write about this yesterday but before I traveled back to Merseyside on Monday I in Cambridgeshire and was speaking with my in-laws neighbors, a nice couple one from the continent and the other from S.A., both have been in the uk for over 7 years. The talk turns to football as they both love the game and the husband had been a Liverpool supporter for 25 years, because of the tributes that have been taking place with varied levels of success across the football grounds over the weekend they asked me about Hillsborough and if I knew anything about it. I replied something along the lines of it was shocking at how many people hold mis-conceptions one of the most common of which was it was the fans fault and they where drunk. The reply was ...wait, what? you mean it was not? Who was to blame then? (think he had been fed a load of rubbish from people he works with from a couple of the other things I was asked about) I was really taken aback I told them did a little diagram of the entrance to the ground and said about the emergency response and a few other things, inc how the cops lost control, panicked, and covered up. I didnt want to bombard with information so kept it brief. As I was saying the words it hit me at how crazy I must have sounded to this couple, so felt I had to follow with I know I sound like a conspiracy nut but honestly I am not and offered to send them some links which I will get together over the weekend. What I took away from the conversation was how surprised I was that there is still lingering doubt in peoples minds as to the cause even with the news coverage and even among supporters like this couple who have watched us play for many years. Thanks for the 30 for 30 link I will take a look and if it is as good as you guys are saying include it. jynxed fucked around with this message at 16:10 on Apr 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
jynxed posted:I forgot to write about this yesterday but before I traveled back to Merseyside on Monday I in Cambridgeshire and was speaking with my in-laws neighbors, a nice couple one from the continent and the other from S.A., both have been in the uk for over 7 years. The talk turns to football as they both love the game and the husband had been a Liverpool supporter for 25 years, because of the tributes that have been taking place with varied levels of success across the football grounds over the weekend they asked me about Hillsborough and if I knew anything about it. Up to about a year ago a very large percentage of the population that still thought it was the drunken fans fault. You can blame the media and the way football fans were thought of in the 80's for that, not to mention the impact Heysel had on peoples impression of Liverpool. You can kind of see how easy it would be to believe that. Most newspapers wouldnt carry stories relating to hillsborough and there was a general sense of 'Are they STILL banging on about that' from the media regarding the families. Now since the reports come out the same media types are falling over themselves to get interviews with them now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Up to about a year ago a very large percentage of the population that still thought it was the drunken fans fault. You can blame the media and the way football fans were thought of in the 80's for that, not to mention the impact Heysel had on peoples impression of Liverpool. You can kind of see how easy it would be to believe that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
I just finished watching the ESPN film, and yeah it's very good. I posted in the MDT on sunday how my father-in-law still held the belief that it was the fans' fault, at least partly, for being drunk and violent and trying to get in without paying (something that happened at every ground especially in cup semis). I wish I could get him to watch that ESPN film, it covers everything very well.serious gaylord posted:Up to about a year ago a very large percentage of the population that still thought it was the drunken fans fault. You can blame the media and the way football fans were thought of in the 80's for that, not to mention the impact Heysel had on peoples impression of Liverpool. You can kind of see how easy it would be to believe that. It wasn't until the independent report was published (which led to this very thread) in 2012 that people started to understand that it wasn't the fans' fault. I have to include myself in that, because I spent a very long time thinking "self-pity city" and "fans, drunk lol" along with everyone else. I posted itt a fair while ago about why I'd felt the way I did up to the report coming out, but it's basically what you say here; the media and the police told us it was so, and we (foolishly) believed it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
Crazy Ted posted:Wasn't Heysel not really Liverpool fans' fault either? There were a lot of mitigating factors but it wasnt exactly their finest moment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
Crazy Ted posted:Wasn't Heysel not really Liverpool fans' fault either? It was definitely (some) Liverpool fan's fault, yes. They tore down a fence to get to Juve supporters, the Juve supporters ended up collapsing a wall onto other fans.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
The main difference between Heysel and Hillsborough is that there wasn't a decades long police cover up behind Heysel where innocent people had their names dragged through the mud due to the incompetence of the authorities, the right people were also punished, why the whole justice for the 39 thing is moronic
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Up to about a year ago a very large percentage of the population that still thought it was the drunken fans fault. You can blame the media and the way football fans were thought of in the 80's for that, not to mention the impact Heysel had on peoples impression of Liverpool. You can kind of see how easy it would be to believe that. Yeah I realise that, I have read stuff over the years that was available testimony and evidence, heared what people I know said who where there. What always annoyed me though was even in the Taylor report the very 1st inquiry it absolved all fans and indeed praise them. I think that I am from the area means I and others from around these parts have most likely been exposed to the stories you dont really hear on the national news until they gather some momentum. The Anne Williams stuff for eg was in our local paper in the early nineties and her having compelling evidence of the police lieing about her sons death, there where many accusations about how to police covered it up over the years, and when you look at the stories that come out that do not fit with the police time line you then begin to question. At the 20th anniversary a guy behind me shouted to burnham during his address: 'we dont want your sympathy we want justice' the crowd turned on him and thats when it began. To his credit he took up the fight and managed to get the HIP report, burnham acknowledged this yesterday and thanked the guy who made approx 30000 people jeer him back them. Thing is it shouldnt have taken so long and even over a year past the HIP report, the coverage that has had, along with both inquiries that praised the fans and still you surprise people with the line it was not the fans. The whole culture of football was different then along with peoples perceptions with regard to football fans especially Liverpool after the eu ban. Crazy Ted posted:Wasn't Heysel not really Liverpool fans' fault either? Whilst I am not really 100% on Heysel I will try and explain from what I know and do a quick check on sauces. Heysel was entirely different, it was a dark day in our clubs history, however it was a time bomb waiting to go off, to be clear I am no way trying to justify Heysel just to explain what happened and some of the factors that lead to the disaster. There was alot of trouble between Italian and British fans back then (not just LFC) and in years past violence would break out. Heysel was a crumbling stadium it was not fit for purpose - literally falling to pieces in places from what I have read. There was a large neutral area set aside for locals to go and watch the game and to separate the Juventus and Liverpool support. Both teams objected as they realised it would provide an opportunity for both sets of fans to acquire tickets thus becoming a volatile mix. Uefa disagreed only to be proved wrong as Juventus supporters did indeed get hold of the tickets, the lfc end and Juve support in the neutral area where separated by a thin chain link divide and some police in a thin no-mans land. The supporters began to trade missiles picking up stones from the falling to pieces stadium this went both ways and was not uncommon back then. The Liverpool 'support' moved closer to the neutral area with its high italian population and 3 charges ensued. When people tried to escape the 3rd thats when the wall collapsed killing 39 people as they tried to flee. There was then a riot in the Juventus end. After the the Belgium inquiries a comprehensive report was published indicating it was not just the fans at blame although they did play a part and that there where other factors eg state of stadium, neutral area policing. I think there where 26 arrests for Manslaughter and 14 of who where jailed for involuntary manslaughter. Also the police captain at the time who was in charge of stadium security was also charged and convicted of involuntary manslaughter, with many other officials also named in the report. Forgive me if I miss something important or made a mistake its something that was before a time when I was old enough to really understand, so my knowledge is made up from reading and a few people who where there. Sources: http://tomkinstimes.com/2013/05/heysel-25-years-on-book-extract/ & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heysel_Stadium_disaster We should not really make this thread about Heysel though whilst it should be remembered it is done - lessons learn with accountability to those at fault, fans and officials alike. Noone has been held accountable for Hillsborough even after 25 years and its shocking the cover up and hatchet job done on those who where there that day. edited: some dyslexic errors altered jynxed fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Apr 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
A big part of people not understanding Hillsborough is that it's very difficult to work out mechanically how a crush occur. I still have trouble working it out in my mind, even knowing that the Liverpool fans weren't at fault. A bunch of drunk assholes is an easy way to connect the dots between a bunch of people standing around and a crush occurring.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
stickyfngrdboy posted:the logic was simply to stop football fans (all of whom were hooligans back in the 80s) getting onto the pitch, which all football fans wanted to do at all times (we were all hooligans, you see). don't forget, crazy old Ken Bates wanted to electrify the fences at Stamford Bridge
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
I've watched the Panorama Doc and also the 30/30 one. I think I must have watched the tragedy unfold on TV when I was a kid, and it's amazing how at the time John Motson could tell what was going on when it was happening, but that Duckenfield who had a better view, got it so wrong. Anyone who saw the footage of fans helping knew that the outrageous claims must have been false. As the copper in the 30/30 documentary says, it certainly there was a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. With regard crowds and crushes, the closest I've been to experiencing what that might be like was when I was 13 and went to watch the Smashing Pumkins at Glastonbury's main stage and we were in middle near the front and it was absolutely heaving, and it was muddy underfoot. When there are hundreds, or thousands, of people involved it's not like being in a crowded bar or at a small gig like that idiot Stuart Campbell suggested (been catching up on the thread that might have been discussed a couple of years back for all I know) you just don't have control. No matter what you may wish to do, if the crowd lurches ten feet to the left, you're going with them. Moving in any meaningful way of your own volition is not possible. The 30/30 documentary has some sobering and brutal images of exactly how people ended up, once you see that, it's quite easy to understand how people could get killed pressed up against the cages and other bodies. jynxed posted:At the 20th anniversary a guy behind me shouted to burnham during his address: 'we dont want your sympathy we want justice' the crowd turned on him and thats when it began. To his credit he took up the fight and managed to get the HIP report, burnham acknowledged this yesterday and thanked the guy who made approx 30000 people jeer him back them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z3mBIi084Q Fair play to Andy Burnham, this clearly moved him and he ended up doing something positive - not just offering platitudes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
Do EU/UK stadia not have dedicated security staffs? I've been going to events since the late 1980's here in the US with 80k+ and nowhere does the crowd control et all fall on the local PD to handle. It's up to the venue owners to provide ushers/security supplemented by uniformed police. From the outside looking in, it seems like at least in this case they decided on the stupidest, least efficient way of running a venue and managing crowd control and went with that. If storming the field was such a problem in the 1970s why didn't they just put security on the field and arrest anybody who climbed onto the field? Instead everybody gets stuck in an animal pen. There some sort of class thing at work here? Were football fans considered some sort of low class scum and the cages deemed suitable? The documentary really bothered me, and I'm trying to wrap my brain arround it and having a hard time. In 25+ years of going to sporting events with 50-80k+ people I've never ever seen something even close to those kinds of conditions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
There is no comparing it to US sports. For a myriad of reasons. The biggest security concern at an NFL stadium is that someone might sneak in a six pack in an attempt to avoid buying 14 dollar beers. There is a huge difference between standing terraces and seats, ticket prices for football were far more accessible which meant younger, excitable crowds instead of say, an MLB game where the average age is like 60. The factors that contributed to completely different atmospheres and security concerns go on and on and on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
davecrazy posted:Do EU/UK stadia not have dedicated security staffs? I've been going to events since the late 1980's here in the US with 80k+ and nowhere does the crowd control et all fall on the local PD to handle. It's up to the venue owners to provide ushers/security supplemented by uniformed police. all clubs supply stewards to ostensibly do this, but tbh the standard of training is variable now and often really bad - wouldn't surprise me if it was even worse back in the 70s and 80s. Police presence at most games is very low but they increase it - sometimes a LOT - for games that are traditional rivalries, that are very high-profile (i.e an FA Cup semi final) or that have ever had any hint of crowd trouble (and the clubs cover the majority of the cost). There almost certainly was some sort of class thing going on, the late 80s was the very early stages of football becoming fashionable with the middle classes and it was still perceived as very working class. Many in Thatcher's government were complaining about Hooligans and Thugs as a sort of performative thing, knowing it'd entrench an 'us vs them' narrative where 'us' is their traditional and targeted vote. The sole source for all the disgusting, false smears that many papers reported and the Sun ran with as fact was Irvine Patnick, a Tory MP trying to win points with his party leadership.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 03:45
|
|
|
Stinky Pit posted:There is no comparing it to US sports. For a myriad of reasons. The biggest security concern at an NFL stadium is that someone might sneak in a six pack in an attempt to avoid buying 14 dollar beers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 04:41
|
|
|
davecrazy posted:Do EU/UK stadia not have dedicated security staffs? I've been going to events since the late 1980's here in the US with 80k+ and nowhere does the crowd control et all fall on the local PD to handle. It's up to the venue owners to provide ushers/security supplemented by uniformed police. As another dirty American, this is what I have always struggled to understand about the disaster (and Euro football in general). I've been to games at Michigan Stadium where it is 110,000 people mostly standing (there are benches, not seats but most fans stand) and never felt unsafe. The culture is just so different. Even in one of the biggest rivalry games in American sports (OSU vs Mich) fans will intermingle in the stands and be respectful win or lose (save the random drunk idiot). For the record, I first learned about Hillsborough years ago from a History channel show about sports disasters. That show made was very well done and it was very clear exactly what happened and that it was the fault of the crowd control, not the fans. So again, I was very surprised to learn just recently about the coverup and how this was still unresolved.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
I guess its more appropriate to say "most common" instead of "biggest" but the point still stands, the security concerns at mild mannered US sports have no relation at all to the kind of things that contributed to tragedies like Heysel and Hillsborough or even more recent tragedies like the Estadio Mateo Flores crush, or the stampedes in South Africa involving the Kaizer Cheifs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
Zero One posted:As another dirty American, this is what I have always struggled to understand about the disaster (and Euro football in general). I've been to games at Michigan Stadium where it is 110,000 people mostly standing (there are benches, not seats but most fans stand) and never felt unsafe. The culture is just so different. Even in one of the biggest rivalry games in American sports (OSU vs Mich) fans will intermingle in the stands and be respectful win or lose (save the random drunk idiot). I've never personally been to Hillsborough but I have been to other grounds and can definitely see how crushes could form. While a typical Sheffield Wednesday division 1 match would be ok (excepting maybe a local derby), this was an FA Cup semi-final between 2 of the biggest teams in the country at the time. It was a repeat of the previous year's semi, and it should be noted that the same thing very nearly happened that year too. Basically, it's not just that the crowds were standing, there were a whole bunch of mitigating factors. You have to remember too that they were effectively standing in cages. I don't think I'd ever feel safe in that situation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 09:02
|
|
|
I've been in a few situations where there are so many people that the best thing to do is just not try and fight the force of the crowd. Field rushes, the tunnel leading to the infield at the Kentucky Derby (I even told a person that went with me that thing was a death trap). It's something that maybe you have to experience before you truly get it. I watched both the 30/30 and BBC documentaries and they are great. I knew the nutshell of what happened but not how bad the cover up was
Bishop fucked around with this message at 09:38 on Apr 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 09:36
|
|
|
Babby Thatcher posted:all clubs supply stewards to ostensibly do this, but tbh the standard of training is variable now and often really bad - wouldn't surprise me if it was even worse back in the 70s and 80s. A quick Google says that the stewards aren't required to be SIA licensed or qualified at all. Apparently the person in charge should be and about 5 others to do any real work like babysitting a manager who's been sent to the stands, but otherwise they're just kids in coats getting minimum wage to sit/stand between fans and pitch. As anyone who's been to a game in England will have seen, if anyone invades the pitch the stewards generally only make a cursory effort at stopping them. One guy will get handled by the licensed fellas but if loads go in then the police take over and organise it all and the stewards just do the chain of hands thing and walk you back into a corner. I did once see a Plymouth fan get rugby tackled by a steward which was quite fun but it's definitely not the norm. They're there for an illusion of security but they aren't going to get involved if anything major kicks off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 10:29
|
|
|
Leeds fans recount their experiences of being in the Leppings lane end two years prior to the diaster
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 12:42
|
|
|
Corrode posted:A quick Google says that the stewards aren't required to be SIA licensed or qualified at all. Apparently the person in charge should be and about 5 others to do any real work like babysitting a manager who's been sent to the stands, but otherwise they're just kids in coats getting minimum wage to sit/stand between fans and pitch. As anyone who's been to a game in England will have seen, if anyone invades the pitch the stewards generally only make a cursory effort at stopping them. One guy will get handled by the licensed fellas but if loads go in then the police take over and organise it all and the stewards just do the chain of hands thing and walk you back into a corner. Yep this is 100% true. When I was 18-20 I stewarded at Carrow Road, got literally zero training, just got given an orange jacket and occasionally told where to stand. If anyone had tried to invade the pitch I would have just stood and watched. Most stewards were like me, just using it as a way to get paid to watch the games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 12:50
|
|
|
irlZaphod posted:You have to remember that a lot of football grounds are very old, and typically are just in the middle of streets surrounded by houses. I think Fenway is one of the few stadiums in the US which is in any way like that. The entrances are incredibly narrow turnstiles and, at the time, I think the tickets were for a stand, but no specific section. Hillsborough was the result of some pretty bad decisions combined with bad luck. Because of the lack of police control outside, a crush started forming due to the bottleneck caused by the turnstiles, and the fans flooding to the ground from the surrounding streets. If they had some checkpoints prior to that to check tickets and control the flow of people, it would have alleviated things. Of course, what they did instead was throw open an exit gate and let all those people flow in, but with no-one directing people most just flooded into the central pen because that was the most obvious way to go (plus the crowds were effectively sweeping people along at that point). I'm not sure if it would have helped at that point, but the SYP should have directed people to the upper tier, or to the flanking pens (if access to them was possible, but I think it was). This is the other thing that needs to be remembered. It was lucky that it didn't happen before Hillsborough, but even if it hadn't happened when it did, it absolutely was going to happen sometimes. All of the conditions existed for it in quite a lot of stadiums. It wasn't like Hillsborough was unique in its design and how they handled crowds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
TelekineticBear! posted:Leeds fans recount their experiences of being in the Leppings lane end two years prior to the diaster Spurs in 1981 also experienced a crush at Leppings Lane end, seems there was a few warning signs. Only broken ribs and bruises though nothing deemed serious enough to actually do something about it. An account can be seen here. The year before there the same thing nearly occured when the same teams played a semi there to. davecrazy posted:Do EU/UK stadia not have dedicated security staffs? I've been going to events since the late 1980's here in the US with 80k+ and nowhere does the crowd control et all fall on the local PD to handle. It's up to the venue owners to provide ushers/security supplemented by uniformed police. We do now and we did then have stewards provided by the clubs as others have said the standards can vary considerably, along with police, even have mounted police still today present at some stadiums, with the cops in over all command. Hillsborough, SYP police used to have a filter system leading up to the stadium in previous years to help prevent crushing outside. There where not overly many turn styles to deal with the amount of people showing up prior to kick off at the ground without some sort of filter system in place. This year a new match day commander decided to dispense with the filter system, leading to the crush outside. As a previous poster pointed out it tickets back then for the terraces didnt have a space allocated, some would say turnstiles a to d, or whatever, but no specific area allocated to you like now. A lot of people blame fans showing up late, however, on the tickets it said please show up 15 mins prior to kick off, with huge numbers showing up even earlier than that, so this is another false accusation used to beat supporters with. As for the problems of the 70's and early 80's you have to understand it was a completely different culture in then at football matches, dont get me wrong you had alot of true supporters who just wanted to watch their team play and have fun. Standing on the terraces when I was a kid was absolutely terrifying but in a way I remember as being amazingly fun with the atmosphere. Adults couldnt withstand the forward surge when Liverpool way attacking and looked like scoring, I am in no doubt it was like this in every terrace of well attended clubs. I am surprised when I look back there where not common place injuries as I remember it being nuts but then again I was just a kid. My brother tried to pre prepared me for going in the terraces the 1st time, telling me what it would be like and the surges but you dont really get it until you experience it I think. However,from what I have read and heard over the years - there was an element of people who would show up with other ideas than watching the games; basically to cause trouble. There was something akin to a gang subculture eg headhunters; urchins and service crew where a few from what I understand, but most clubs had this element. So yeah while there where impromptu pitch invasions there would also be organised ones, the pens where there also to try and keep these groups separate because all hell would break loose if they managed to get to each other either inside the ground. Alot of the violence would be outside too away from the ground in pre arranged fights from what I gather. So it was not a case of simply arresting one or 2 people getting on to the pitch, you are talking skirmishes with gangs of people taking part. I think also there where other far right groups that would use matches as an excuse to kick off too. This is my opinion from reading about the subject and the firms (gangs) are well documented. I am painting a nasty picture, but I stress that not everyone was like this, if they where as I child in the late 80's I would not have been allowed to go, the vast majority where people just there to watch their team. You mentioned a class war I would not have thought of it this way until I saw your post but in a sense I think you might be correct. You see a large portion of people who populated terraces where working class, although there was apparently a class mix according to my parents. However I believe and they agree; had there have been a majority of middle class in attendance I am sure that more would have been done to find the bad elements and ban them from attending, like happens now. Also if football fans where scum to the authorities and establishment Liverpool was at the bottom of the heap. Not just due to Hyesel, but we where the working class city that lost alot of jobs during the Thatcher era. The city who voted in a very left wing council to oppose the government, a government who even talked about a 'managed decline' for Liverpool as we where a constant headache. Anyway hope this answers your questions some of it is opinion based, other bits well documented. Others may disagree but thats how I see it looking back. edit: usual dyslexic mistakes and to make read better. jynxed fucked around with this message at 10:23 on Apr 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 15:05
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:When there are hundreds, or thousands, of people involved it's not like being in a crowded bar or at a small gig like that idiot Stuart Campbell suggested...  Stu Campbell is the ultimate in liberal double-think "common sense" bullshit. gently caress him. EDIT: christ I just realised I was the one who posted his cack in the first place in this thread, uuuhhh Chocolate Teapot fucked around with this message at 22:15 on Apr 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
irlZaphod posted:I'm not sure if it would have helped at that point, but the SYP should have directed people to the upper tier, or to the flanking pens (if access to them was possible, but I think it was). I dont know about the upper tiers but there was certainly access to the side pens, however it was not as obvious as the way in to the central pens. I have heard people say they where in the side pens but only because they knew the way from previous years and it was natural to head towards the tunnel if you had not been there before. found a picture of the layout and second one from the cctv, showing people arriving early as it has a timestamp. Diagram helps make more sense of the photos. jynxed fucked around with this message at 10:00 on Apr 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
The way a crush of people works is almost like shockwaves. I've been in a couple. Nothing nearly as dangerous as what happened at Hillsborough but there is this sense of panic that moves like a wave through a tight crowd when you realize you can't really move back and the only choice is to kind of push forward. Now obviously I'm not saying my life was on the line. But it was still scary. And I'm not going to talk like I'm an expert here but having just gone to two matches in the UK but being a life long US resident and sports fan it was quite eye opening. I happened to attend both a Man City match and also a Tottenham match and the stadiums stand in stark contrast. Etihad is obviously a very new stadium where as White Hart Lane has been on the same grounds for over a century. It was quite amazing for me to see how tight and narrow everything at White Hart Lane was. The narrow concourses, the extremely narrow turnstiles, and the obstructed views. Now, I knew this going in but it was still very weird in a way for me. A disconnect. You've got this insanely lucrative league with international tv rights and then to attend a match in person and realize that yes, improvements have occurred but the underlying skeleton to the entire thing is over a 100 years old is both awe inspiring and somewhat crazy. But in some slim small way it does give me insight in to how such a thing like HIllsborough could happen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:Fair play to Andy Burnham, this clearly moved him and he ended up doing something positive - not just offering platitudes. Andy Burnham is an awesome MP and we need more like him.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 13:17 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 19:06
|
|
