RugbyRebels

There are 2 issues. There is the catastrophic error that was made that contributed to the deaths of almost 100 people. I have some sympathy for the person who made the decision to open the gate and indeed all the people decisions that day. I have little doubt that the officers were doing their best, conditioned as they may have been to regard all football supporters as potential hooligans, and remembering that Heysel would have been pretty fresh in people's memories. Their best clearly wasn't enough. Apportioning blame between stadium design and particular decisions won't be easy but that's for the insurers to worry about and possibly for a jury to decide in due course whether any individual was grossly negligent despite the context.

The second issue is the systematic and pervasive perverting of the course of justice. This has libelled football fans who were blameless and prolonged the agony of families. I have no sympathy whatsoever for those officers who instructed the change of statements or who agreed that their statements could be changed or who kept quiet knowing that lies were being told. I don't think any of those people should keep their jobs. I hope that the CPS do not shy away from casting the net wide in punishing those involved.

Spot on Eugene.

It is worth listening (if you didn't already) to this http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03sf7ps

Apart from anything else, the survivor's description of what he witnessed was utterly chilling. He talks about people being 'popped' up above the crowd, dying or dead but being carried aloft in the crush of people. Grim.

Sandydragon wrote:

UGagain wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Agreed, at a corporate level for putting an under qualified officer in that position. Ditto any other organization with culpability, such as the grounds owners. That said, the incident was seen as a huge wakeup call or English football, which leads me to believe that most stadia wouldn't pass muster. Large volumes of people have a collective mindset, and if you watch crowds they will tend to flow. good infrastructure recognizes that and plans for it to happen safely.

Sorry but when did the cops become a corporation?

Who trains the trainers of the trainers in your never ending abdication of responsibilty?

Referring to corporate responsibility is common place in government today.

You dislike of the police notwithstanding, I'm not keen on hammering a bloke who wasn't suitably trained or experienced for a key role who then screws up. That is the organizations fault for not allocating the right person. It really is that simple, in English law as well as common sense.

You seem to have ignored my earlier posts regarding an investigation over the subsequent lies and coverup, so Im not abdicating responsibility anywhere. Merely assigning the blame where it best sits, rather than with a convenient scapegoat. Its also clear that other organizations were as much at fault as the police, so why in our view should they be absolved of any blame?

None of that is 'clear' at all. It's your opinion.

And frankly, your common sense rarely if ever follows logic or empirical fact.

UGagain wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

UGagain wrote:
Sorry but when did the cops become a corporation?

Who trains the trainers of the trainers in your never ending abdication of responsibilty?

Referring to corporate responsibility is common place in government today.

You dislike of the police notwithstanding, I'm not keen on hammering a bloke who wasn't suitably trained or experienced for a key role who then screws up. That is the organizations fault for not allocating the right person. It really is that simple, in English law as well as common sense.

You seem to have ignored my earlier posts regarding an investigation over the subsequent lies and coverup, so Im not abdicating responsibility anywhere. Merely assigning the blame where it best sits, rather than with a convenient scapegoat. Its also clear that other organizations were as much at fault as the police, so why in our view should they be absolved of any blame?

None of that is 'clear' at all. It's your opinion.

And frankly, your common sense rarely if ever follows logic or empirical fact.

And that of the jury...

onlynameleft wrote:

UGagain wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Referring to corporate responsibility is common place in government today.

You dislike of the police notwithstanding, I'm not keen on hammering a bloke who wasn't suitably trained or experienced for a key role who then screws up. That is the organizations fault for not allocating the right person. It really is that simple, in English law as well as common sense.

You seem to have ignored my earlier posts regarding an investigation over the subsequent lies and coverup, so Im not abdicating responsibility anywhere. Merely assigning the blame where it best sits, rather than with a convenient scapegoat. Its also clear that other organizations were as much at fault as the police, so why in our view should they be absolved of any blame?

None of that is 'clear' at all. It's your opinion.

And frankly, your common sense rarely if ever follows logic or empirical fact.

And that of the jury...

What?

Sandy says it is clear the police weren't the only culpable party, you say that's just his opinion, I just point out that the jury found that the stadium design, SWFC, engineers, ambulance service also contributed.

The fuck ups on the day I can forgive. The corruption and systematic cover up can't be forgiven. And Ingham is a cunt of the highest order too

onlynameleft wrote:Sandy says it is clear the police weren't the only culpable party, you say that's just his opinion, I just point out that the jury found that the stadium design, SWFC, engineers, ambulance service also contributed.

He didn't use the word 'culpable'.

UGagain wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

UGagain wrote:
Sorry but when did the cops become a corporation?

Who trains the trainers of the trainers in your never ending abdication of responsibilty?

Referring to corporate responsibility is common place in government today.

You dislike of the police notwithstanding, I'm not keen on hammering a bloke who wasn't suitably trained or experienced for a key role who then screws up. That is the organizations fault for not allocating the right person. It really is that simple, in English law as well as common sense.

You seem to have ignored my earlier posts regarding an investigation over the subsequent lies and coverup, so Im not abdicating responsibility anywhere. Merely assigning the blame where it best sits, rather than with a convenient scapegoat. Its also clear that other organizations were as much at fault as the police, so why in our view should they be absolved of any blame?

None of that is 'clear' at all. It's your opinion.

And frankly, your common sense rarely if ever follows logic or empirical fact.

I think you have jumped into this row without doing your research. Do some reading into the state of the stadium and come back when you have something sensible to say.

Sandydragon wrote:

UGagain wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Referring to corporate responsibility is common place in government today.

You dislike of the police notwithstanding, I'm not keen on hammering a bloke who wasn't suitably trained or experienced for a key role who then screws up. That is the organizations fault for not allocating the right person. It really is that simple, in English law as well as common sense.

You seem to have ignored my earlier posts regarding an investigation over the subsequent lies and coverup, so Im not abdicating responsibility anywhere. Merely assigning the blame where it best sits, rather than with a convenient scapegoat. Its also clear that other organizations were as much at fault as the police, so why in our view should they be absolved of any blame?

None of that is 'clear' at all. It's your opinion.

And frankly, your common sense rarely if ever follows logic or empirical fact.

I think you have jumped into this row without doing your research. Do some reading into the state of the stadium and come back when you have something sensible to say.

I was commenting on your commentary. You're merely an apologist for the organs of state.

What is 'sensible' to you may be morally repugnant to me.

onlynameleft wrote:Sandy says it is clear the police weren't the only culpable party, you say that's just his opinion, I just point out that the jury found that the stadium design, SWFC, engineers, ambulance service also contributed.

And if you can provide a link to the jury's report confirming your assertion, that would be good.

My experience is that juries don't provide opinions of that kind.

UGagain wrote:

onlynameleft wrote:Sandy says it is clear the police weren't the only culpable party, you say that's just his opinion, I just point out that the jury found that the stadium design, SWFC, engineers, ambulance service also contributed.

And if you can provide a link to the jury's report confirming your assertion, that would be good.

My experience is that juries don't provide opinions of that kind.

It's all here:
https://hillsboroughinquests.independen ... 4274_1.pdf

Whatever your "experience"

UGagain wrote:

onlynameleft wrote:Sandy says it is clear the police weren't the only culpable party, you say that's just his opinion, I just point out that the jury found that the stadium design, SWFC, engineers, ambulance service also contributed.

And if you can provide a link to the jury's report confirming your assertion, that would be good.

My experience is that juries don't provide opinions of that kind.

You have a lot of experience of inquests I assume. It's not a criminal trial, it's not simply guilty or not guilty m'lud, they do make multiple findings. The jury were asked to answer 14 questions, with the exception of whether SWFC were culpable on the day itself (and even in that case they said they MAY have been) and were the fans to blame all were answered in the affirmative. To be honest I'd have thought you might have read some of this before launching in.

Here's a bit of background not many know (or not many knew before last week).

Appreciate it is Wiki but it is accurate as I recall:

Hillsborough hosted five FA Cup semi-finals in the 1980s. A crush occurred at the Leppings Lane end of the ground during the 1981 semi-final between Tottenham Hotspur and Wolverhampton Wanderers after hundreds more spectators were permitted to enter the terrace than could safely be accommodated, resulting in 38 injuries, including broken arms, legs and ribs. Police believed there had been a real chance of fatalities had swift action not been taken, and recommended the club reduce its capacity. In a post-match briefing to discuss the incident, Sheffield Wednesday chairman Bert McGee remarked: "Bollocks—no one would have been killed". The incident nonetheless prompted Sheffield Wednesday to alter the layout at the Leppings Lane end, dividing the terrace into three separate pens to restrict sideways movement. The terrace was divided into five pens when the club was promoted to the First Division in 1984, and a crush barrier near the access tunnel was removed in 1986 to improve the flow of fans entering and exiting the central enclosure. Its capacity remained unaltered and the safety certificate was not updated. After the crush in 1981, Hillsborough was not chosen to host an FA Cup semi-final for six years until 1987.

Serious overcrowding was observed at the 1987 quarter-final between Sheffield Wednesday and Coventry City and again during the semi-final between Coventry City and Leeds United at Hillsborough. A Leeds fan described disorganisation at the turnstiles and no steward or police direction inside the stadium, resulting in the crowd in one enclosure becoming so compressed he was at times unable to raise and clap his hands. Other accounts told of fans having to be pulled to safety from above.

Liverpool and Nottingham Forest met in the semi-final at Hillsborough in 1988, and fans reported crushing at the Leppings Lane end. Liverpool lodged a complaint before the match in 1989. One supporter wrote to the Football Association and Minister for Sport complaining, "The whole area was packed solid to the point where it was impossible to move and where I, and others around me, felt considerable concern for personal safety". After changes to the ground's layout in 1981, its safety certificate became invalid and was not renewed. At the time of the disaster, the ground had no safety certificate.

UGagain wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

UGagain wrote:
None of that is 'clear' at all. It's your opinion.

And frankly, your common sense rarely if ever follows logic or empirical fact.

I think you have jumped into this row without doing your research. Do some reading into the state of the stadium and come back when you have something sensible to say.

I was commenting on your commentary. You're merely an apologist for the organs of state.

What is 'sensible' to you may be morally repugnant to me.

Oh dear. No sensible argument and reporting to insults this early. Don't waste my time.

onlynameleft wrote:Here's a bit of background not many know (or not many knew before last week).

Appreciate it is Wiki but it is accurate as I recall:

Hillsborough hosted five FA Cup semi-finals in the 1980s. A crush occurred at the Leppings Lane end of the ground during the 1981 semi-final between Tottenham Hotspur and Wolverhampton Wanderers after hundreds more spectators were permitted to enter the terrace than could safely be accommodated, resulting in 38 injuries, including broken arms, legs and ribs. Police believed there had been a real chance of fatalities had swift action not been taken, and recommended the club reduce its capacity. In a post-match briefing to discuss the incident, Sheffield Wednesday chairman Bert McGee remarked: "Bollocks—no one would have been killed". The incident nonetheless prompted Sheffield Wednesday to alter the layout at the Leppings Lane end, dividing the terrace into three separate pens to restrict sideways movement. The terrace was divided into five pens when the club was promoted to the First Division in 1984, and a crush barrier near the access tunnel was removed in 1986 to improve the flow of fans entering and exiting the central enclosure. Its capacity remained unaltered and the safety certificate was not updated. After the crush in 1981, Hillsborough was not chosen to host an FA Cup semi-final for six years until 1987.

Serious overcrowding was observed at the 1987 quarter-final between Sheffield Wednesday and Coventry City and again during the semi-final between Coventry City and Leeds United at Hillsborough. A Leeds fan described disorganisation at the turnstiles and no steward or police direction inside the stadium, resulting in the crowd in one enclosure becoming so compressed he was at times unable to raise and clap his hands. Other accounts told of fans having to be pulled to safety from above.

Liverpool and Nottingham Forest met in the semi-final at Hillsborough in 1988, and fans reported crushing at the Leppings Lane end. Liverpool lodged a complaint before the match in 1989. One supporter wrote to the Football Association and Minister for Sport complaining, "The whole area was packed solid to the point where it was impossible to move and where I, and others around me, felt considerable concern for personal safety". After changes to the ground's layout in 1981, its safety certificate became invalid and was not renewed. At the time of the disaster, the ground had no safety certificate.

In many respects, most of the stadia in use at the time were death traps to some extent. So many people from that era can remember crowd surges which lifted them off their feet. Previously, the crowd could surge onto the pitch to escape, but with the fences in place the poor sods were trapped.

If not Liverpool at hillsborough, it would have happened somewhere else at some point.

Sandydragon wrote:

onlynameleft wrote:Here's a bit of background not many know (or not many knew before last week).

Appreciate it is Wiki but it is accurate as I recall:

Hillsborough hosted five FA Cup semi-finals in the 1980s. A crush occurred at the Leppings Lane end of the ground during the 1981 semi-final between Tottenham Hotspur and Wolverhampton Wanderers after hundreds more spectators were permitted to enter the terrace than could safely be accommodated, resulting in 38 injuries, including broken arms, legs and ribs. Police believed there had been a real chance of fatalities had swift action not been taken, and recommended the club reduce its capacity. In a post-match briefing to discuss the incident, Sheffield Wednesday chairman Bert McGee remarked: "Bollocks—no one would have been killed". The incident nonetheless prompted Sheffield Wednesday to alter the layout at the Leppings Lane end, dividing the terrace into three separate pens to restrict sideways movement. The terrace was divided into five pens when the club was promoted to the First Division in 1984, and a crush barrier near the access tunnel was removed in 1986 to improve the flow of fans entering and exiting the central enclosure. Its capacity remained unaltered and the safety certificate was not updated. After the crush in 1981, Hillsborough was not chosen to host an FA Cup semi-final for six years until 1987.

Serious overcrowding was observed at the 1987 quarter-final between Sheffield Wednesday and Coventry City and again during the semi-final between Coventry City and Leeds United at Hillsborough. A Leeds fan described disorganisation at the turnstiles and no steward or police direction inside the stadium, resulting in the crowd in one enclosure becoming so compressed he was at times unable to raise and clap his hands. Other accounts told of fans having to be pulled to safety from above.

Liverpool and Nottingham Forest met in the semi-final at Hillsborough in 1988, and fans reported crushing at the Leppings Lane end. Liverpool lodged a complaint before the match in 1989. One supporter wrote to the Football Association and Minister for Sport complaining, "The whole area was packed solid to the point where it was impossible to move and where I, and others around me, felt considerable concern for personal safety". After changes to the ground's layout in 1981, its safety certificate became invalid and was not renewed. At the time of the disaster, the ground had no safety certificate.

In many respects, most of the stadia in use at the time were death traps to some extent. So many people from that era can remember crowd surges which lifted them off their feet. Previously, the crowd could surge onto the pitch to escape, but with the fences in place the poor sods were trapped.

If not Liverpool at hillsborough, it would have happened somewhere else at some point.

Wouldn't like to comment but imagine you are right. Only ever went to one D1 match and that was Sheffield Derby, I lived in Hillsborough at the time but 'followed' SUFC. Hated it and never went back. It was the lack of safety certificate for 8 years that was the point. I am not sure why questions were not asked of the FA at the inquest.

onlynameleft wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

onlynameleft wrote:Here's a bit of background not many know (or not many knew before last week).

Appreciate it is Wiki but it is accurate as I recall:

Hillsborough hosted five FA Cup semi-finals in the 1980s. A crush occurred at the Leppings Lane end of the ground during the 1981 semi-final between Tottenham Hotspur and Wolverhampton Wanderers after hundreds more spectators were permitted to enter the terrace than could safely be accommodated, resulting in 38 injuries, including broken arms, legs and ribs. Police believed there had been a real chance of fatalities had swift action not been taken, and recommended the club reduce its capacity. In a post-match briefing to discuss the incident, Sheffield Wednesday chairman Bert McGee remarked: "Bollocks—no one would have been killed". The incident nonetheless prompted Sheffield Wednesday to alter the layout at the Leppings Lane end, dividing the terrace into three separate pens to restrict sideways movement. The terrace was divided into five pens when the club was promoted to the First Division in 1984, and a crush barrier near the access tunnel was removed in 1986 to improve the flow of fans entering and exiting the central enclosure. Its capacity remained unaltered and the safety certificate was not updated. After the crush in 1981, Hillsborough was not chosen to host an FA Cup semi-final for six years until 1987.

Serious overcrowding was observed at the 1987 quarter-final between Sheffield Wednesday and Coventry City and again during the semi-final between Coventry City and Leeds United at Hillsborough. A Leeds fan described disorganisation at the turnstiles and no steward or police direction inside the stadium, resulting in the crowd in one enclosure becoming so compressed he was at times unable to raise and clap his hands. Other accounts told of fans having to be pulled to safety from above.

Liverpool and Nottingham Forest met in the semi-final at Hillsborough in 1988, and fans reported crushing at the Leppings Lane end. Liverpool lodged a complaint before the match in 1989. One supporter wrote to the Football Association and Minister for Sport complaining, "The whole area was packed solid to the point where it was impossible to move and where I, and others around me, felt considerable concern for personal safety". After changes to the ground's layout in 1981, its safety certificate became invalid and was not renewed. At the time of the disaster, the ground had no safety certificate.

In many respects, most of the stadia in use at the time were death traps to some extent. So many people from that era can remember crowd surges which lifted them off their feet. Previously, the crowd could surge onto the pitch to escape, but with the fences in place the poor sods were trapped.

If not Liverpool at hillsborough, it would have happened somewhere else at some point.

Wouldn't like to comment but imagine you are right. Only ever went to one D1 match and that was Sheffield Derby, I lived in Hillsborough at the time but 'followed' SUFC. Hated it and never went back. It was the lack of safety certificate for 8 years that was the point. I am not sure why questions were not asked of the FA at the inquest.

I have wondered why the FA allowed a match to take place there at all, any match for that matter. I think it demonstrates that h&s were just words to many clubs back then.

I was never a football fan, but I did go to a few top flight games. I definitely remember crowd surges in standing pens. It rarely got that exciting in the Newport stands but it did happen and what seemed exciting at the time was actually, in hindsight, pretty dangerous.

Lolz.

Sent from my XT1033 using Tapatalk

I'm hoping some of the "fans hold some responsibility" brigade watched last night's documentary on BBC2, which unequivocally put to bed the myths and lies that began to spread from the moment the gate was opened.

Lord Llandaff wrote:I'm hoping some of the "fans hold some responsibility" brigade watched last night's documentary on BBC2, which unequivocally put to bed the myths and lies that began to spread from the moment the gate was opened.

It was a good docco, yes. It does add to the question of whether Dukenfield or anyone else involved could ever receive a fair trial though and no doubt their defence teams will pounce on that in due course.

onlynameleft wrote:

Lord Llandaff wrote:I'm hoping some of the "fans hold some responsibility" brigade watched last night's documentary on BBC2, which unequivocally put to bed the myths and lies that began to spread from the moment the gate was opened.

It was a good docco, yes. It does add to the question of whether Dukenfield or anyone else involved could ever receive a fair trial though and no doubt their defence teams will pounce on that in due course.

They'll try but the Court of Appeal has pretty much shut that avenue down.

1 thing I hope that comes from all this is the stupid situation where a senior police officer
avoids investigation/discipinary action by taking early retirement (with the bonus of
keeping their pension unchanged). They shouldn't be allowed to retire until after the investigation
& have served/recieved any punishment

Surprised nobody has mentioned this yet...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-me ... e-40419819