Let's get this into perspective. On the day lots of mistakes were made and 96 people died. Those 96 certainly weren't to blame. The police and authorities had the responsibility to keep order and they failed. Of course the number of fans was a contribution factor but they weren't to blame. It was the Lack of adequate controlling of these crowds that was to blame. But, accidents do happen, however tragic. But, and here's the rub. The subsequential cover up and deceit to cover up the mistakes and deflect the blame is inexcusable. Those responsible for that from the very top need to be brought to justice.
Also, those pens were dangerously full and people were getting crushed before the exit gate was opened. In other words they were dangerously full before any ticketless fans came in. I'm not aware that ticketless fans got in beforehand.
I don't understand what 'the fans' are supposed to admit to or accept blame for?
Individually (and surely the duty of care and responsibility that's been brought up is only individual, fans aren't an organised collective body, much as the chant would have you believe otherwise - they're not an army!), they are guilty of bunking into a football match, change the context and this could easily be one of those nostalgic threads about how the old timers used to bunk into The Valley that make us all feel so warm and fuzzy.
Are they supposed to come out one by one and apologise for bunking into a game without a ticket, thereby resulting in the death of 96 people? It's a bit ridiculous isn't it? 'I'm sorry that I bunked into the game, resulting in 96 of my fellow fans losing their lives', there's no logical cause and effect there. They're not admitting to an act of terrorism, it wasn't an organised assault, they're admitting to bunking into a football match without a ticket - it's not right but it's a minor misdemeanour and only in a spectacularly screwed up situation does this lead to the deaths of 96 people.
They may be scousers but they are fellow football fans, who've not only been spectacularly let down but then smeared, slandered and libelled for years and rather than focus on the real issues at hand people want them to come out and own up to bunking in?
Rob said: Let's get this into perspective. On the day lots of mistakes were made and 96 people died. Those 96 certainly weren't to blame. The police and authorities had the responsibility to keep order and they failed. Of course the number of fans was a contribution factor but they weren't to blame. It was the Lack of adequate controlling of these crowds that was to blame. But, accidents do happen, however tragic. But, and here's the rub. The subsequential cover up and deceit to cover up the mistakes and deflect the blame is inexcusable. Those responsible for that from the very top need to be brought to justice.
Mate thanks for putting it so succinctly. I posted before the programme on Monday that I didn't think that trying to take people to cout would have any point as it was an accident. Now the real truth has finnaly come out I have chnaged my opinion 100%. If mistakes were made and owned up to that can be forgiven after all we are all human and sometimes we just get it wrong but the subsequent deceit as Rob says is just unforgivable and by the way illegal and those involved should now be bought to book for their perjury.
It won't bring back the dead but it will at least highlight the fact that nobody is above the law and that it important. I apologise for my initial stance and post.
I said I wasn't gouing to comment anymore but it's difficult not to. Imagine you are outside the ground in a crush tonight - you have a ticket but just before kick off you can see you are not going to get in (because the organisation and turnstyles are inadequate for the numbers) - You want to see your team play - somebody opens a big side gate - what do you do? if you decide to take the opportunity which I can't believe anybody wouldn't - you see one entrance to the stand - the game is about to kick off - you have no knowledge of the pens being overcrowded and people being crushed - what do you do?
People at the back of a crowd have no knowledge of the force exerted to the front. It happens at religeous festivals and pop concerts and the responsibility of the organisers is to stop it happening. The crowd has behavoural characteristics and the personalities of some of the people in the crowd is irrelevant. Nobody knows how many people were without tickets- some undoubtably were - some would have been drunk - but the overcrowding was due to the organisation and inadequate turnstyles. People miss the point that there was significant room to the sides of the pens. People had tickets for these areas but were not in the ground! The picture some people are trying to paint was that there were thousands of ticketless people all getting in through that gate - even that they were exclusively ticketless which is nonsense- I would suggest they read the report more carefully. I remember going to a Spurs Enfield FA Cup game many moons ago and despite having a ticket and arriving in good time- I didn't get in until half time- this was because Spurs underestimated how many people would be going and the number of turnstyles were not sufficient. When I did get in the ground was far from full - but th eproblem that night was also that a lot of fans turned up relatively late.
If you are determined to blame the Liverpool fans you could say - well they should have tried to get in the ground early - I'll make a mental note of all the evil reckless so and so's tonight who don't get to the ground in good time. The fact is, it was a nice day and they weren't expecting the incompetence they encountred. The fact is, nobody is a) saying that all Liverpool fans are angels, b) that there were not some ticketless fans there and c) there were not some drunk fans there - if there weren't it wouldn't have been a representative semi final football crowd - but reasonable people can and should acknowledge that the report has clearly said the fans were not to blame for what happened.
So you're saying if no fans turned up without tickets the situation would have panned out in exactly the same way?
Stu, its your legal training that leaves you holding onto an argument just for the arguments sake.
The deaths were caused by failures in crowd safety. The Report does not consider ticketless fans had any bearing on the outcome.
This issue of ticketlessness has been dealt with in this report. The reason why people died was that there was no control exercised over how many people were allowed into the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace because they did not have a safe system of controlling it. It relied on the judgement call of police and stewards to decide when the area was full, and when to shut the gates to this area and channel people to the side.
Here is what the Report actually says:
"20. There was clear evidence in the build-up to the match, both inside and outside the stadium, that turnstiles serving the Leppings Lane terrace could not process the required number of fans in time for the kick-off. Yet the growing danger was ignored. When the request to delay the kick-off eventually was made, it was considered too late as the teams were on the pitch.
21. For a considerable period inside the Police Control Box it was clear from the near view of the central pens below, and the CCTV coverage of the turnstiles 9 and pens, that serious problems of overcrowding were occurring at the turnstiles and in the pens. Senior police officers’ decision-making was hampered by poor communications, a malfunctioning radio system and the design of the Control Box.
22. Superintendent Roger Marshall was responsible for policing outside the stadium at the Leppings Lane end. As the crush at the turnstiles became severe he requested the opening of exit gates to allow fans into the stadium and relieve crowd pressure. He had no knowledge of the uneven distribution of fans on the Leppings Lane terrace. Similarly, the ground commander inside the stadium, Chief Superintendent Roger Greenwood, had no knowledge of the extreme situation developing outside the stadium.
23. The overview of both sites was the Control Box, with CCTV monitors and a near view of the central pens. Chief Superintendent Duckenfield acceded to Superintendent Marshall’s request and authorised the opening of Gate C. Despite a clear view from the Control Box and CCTV monitors, neither Chief Superintendent Duckenfield nor his assistant, the experienced Superintendent Bernard Murray, anticipated the impact on the already packed central pens of fans descending the tunnel directly opposite Gate C.
24. On opening Gate C there was no instruction given to the SYP officers inside the stadium to manage the flow and direction of the incoming crowd.
25. From the documents provided to the Panel it is clear that the crush at the Leppings Lane turnstiles outside the stadium was not caused by fans arriving ‘late’ for the kick-off. The turnstiles were inadequate to process the crowd safely, and the rate of entry insufficient to prevent a dangerous build-up of people outside the ground."
Later on it says
"153. Consistent with Lord Justice Taylor’s findings, the Panel found no evidence among the vast number of disclosed documents and many hours of video material to verify the serious allegations of exceptional levels of drunkenness,ticketlessness or violence among Liverpool fans. There was no evidence that fans had conspired to arrive late at the stadium and force entry and no evidence that they stole from the dead and dying. Documents show that fans became frustrated by the inadequate response to the unfolding tragedy. The vast majority of fans on the pitch assisted in rescuing and evacuating the injured and the dead"
From this and my reading of other parts of the Report it is all pretty clear in my view:
- the ground was inherently unsafe due to inadequate turnstiles for the capacity of the Leppings Lane end. The capacity of the Leppings Lane terrace was set too high. Indeed the area where the deaths occurred was subsequently reduced to about half of the capacity on that fateful day.
- there was no way of telling the precise number of the fans who had entered the ground and had made their way to the central pens because there were no dedicated turnstiles purely for this confined central area. This was despite the recommendation that there should be which was not acted upon due to the costs involved.
- the Police commander outside the ground was unaware of the level of crowd in the central pens, and the Police commander inside the ground was unaware of the ensuing crush outside the ground
- when the overall commander Dukinfield made the decision to open the gates to relieve the crush outside the ground, he failed to ensure that the gates to the tunnel were closed stopping those coming in going straight down the tunnel and crushing those in the central pens
- exactly the same scenario occurred in 1981 and fans were crushed on that terrace. The only difference was that the pens had been installed subsequently and that made the crush worse because there was no lateral movement able to take place allowing fans to move away from the crush directly behind the goal.
- Safety of fans in the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace, whether some, all or none had tickets, relied on police and stewards deciding that the area was full and shutting the gates to the tunnel. That was a operational decision. The overall commander said he relied on those officers in the vicinity to exercise some control. Unfortunately at the critical time there were no police or steward manning the gates or patrolling the central pens. The Police thus on the day were unable to control the numbers of fans in that central area.
The Police role here was to minimise harm to those visiting the ground. Some fans did arrive without tickets hoping to get in. That happens in every sell out crowd in my experience and is not confined to Liverpool fans. Even if every fan in the Leppings Lane terrace had no ticket (which is absolutely not true), this tragedy would have been avoided if the Police had shut the tunnel when it became full, like they had done in the two previous years. It was this failure that was the primary cause which lead directly to the deaths of 96 innocent fans.
Good post Mutley. The problem is that some people are just determined to blame the Liverpool fans and will continue to do so, despite the overwhelming well reasoned arguments to the contrary. It's good to see that some people have changed their stance following revelations of the cover up.
A stadium without an upto date safety certificate with incorrect stated capacities was used for an event. Where, the owners of the stadium and the police were at odds over crowd control at the ground. On at least four previous occasions there were overcrowding problems at that end of that ground. Emergency exits at that end of the ground were reduced over time by alterations made by the owners and proposed by SYP, despite objections from local fire services. The owners of the stadium wanted the event at the venue and campaigned for it after losing it in 1982 despite knowledge of issues above. The FA who hired the venue (for their event), were aware of the venues previous near misses but declined a meeting on crowd safety that fateful year “stating same as last year". SYP gave a high profile game to an inexperienced officer. SYP lost control on the day. Disaster plans were not planned properly or executed resulting in some avoidable deaths. MOST disturbingly afterwards the SYP embark on an orchestrated cover up with solicitors and local politicians (one later knighted), Many Government officials are aware of the cover up. There are previous connections between these people and SYP with regards miners strike. Coroner clearly doesn’t do a great job. National Paper gets involved in cover up. Initial inquiry primarily blames SYP. Subsequent inquiry finds no new evidence (what a waste of time) 23 year later more information is released.
With all this information now on the table my heart goes out to all those people who have been treated so wrongly by so many individuals and organisations. And respect to those who took on the fight for “The Truth”. I do struggle to see however how they can ever obtain true Justice and fear now that this is the start of another painful chapter.
96 people died attending a football match. It could have been fans of many teams at the time in any of the antiquated stadiums around then. It happened to LFC fans at SWFC. They were innocent victims, May they RIP.
- Safety of fans in the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace, whether some, all or none had tickets, relied on police and stewards deciding that the area was full and shutting the gates to the tunnel. That was a operational decision. The overall commander said he relied on those officers in the vicinity to exercise some control. Unfortunately at the critical time there were no police or steward manning the gates or patrolling the central pens. The Police thus on the day were unable to control the numbers of fans in that central area.
Thanks Bing. I think that really should end all the discussion.
- Safety of fans in the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace, whether some, all or none had tickets, relied on police and stewards deciding that the area was full and shutting the gates to the tunnel. That was a operational decision. The overall commander said he relied on those officers in the vicinity to exercise some control. Unfortunately at the critical time there were no police or steward manning the gates or patrolling the central pens. The Police thus on the day were unable to control the numbers of fans in that central area.
Thanks Bing. I think that really should end all the discussion.
Irvine Patnick has now accepted that what he told the media 23 years ago was totally wrong .Remember ,he was the main 'source' for the story.
ITV News report below :
A former Conservative MP named as one of the sources behind The Sun's controversial coverage of the Hillsborough tragedy has said he is "deeply and sincerely sorry" for the part he played in the scandal.
Sir Irvine Patnick said he had been given "wholly inaccurate" information by some members of the police and was "appalled" at the extent of the cover-up surrounding the disaster.
But the former Tory MP for Sheffield Hallam said he "totally" accepted responsibility for repeating the information, which led to the tabloid newspaper's notorious front page story headlined The Truth.
In a statement issued through the Conservative Party, Sir Irvine said: "I would like to put on the record how appalled and shocked I was to discover the extent of the deceit and cover-up surrounding these events. It is now clear that the information I received from some police officers at the time was wholly inaccurate, misleading and plain wrong.
"However, I totally accept responsibility for passing such information on without asking further questions. So, many years after this tragic event, I am deeply and sincerely sorry for the part I played in adding to the pain and suffering of the victims' families."
Sir Irvine, 82, was named by the Hillsborough Independent Panel as one of the sources who briefed journalists that Liverpool fans were "drunk and aggressive" and forced entry into the football ground, contributing to the deadly crush.
The panel found the origin of The Sun's story, along with negative coverage in other newspapers, was a Sheffield-based news agency, which had been briefed by officers from South Yorkshire Police (SYP), a local Police Federation spokesman and Sir Irvine.
Their allegations were reported by White's News Agency and were based on meetings with police officers and interviews with Sir Irvine and Paul Middup, the secretary of the South Yorkshire Police Federation. The report states: "Mr Patnick based his comments on a conversation with police officers on the evening of the disaster while the officers were in considerable distress."
Former Sun editor Kelvin MacKenzie, who wrote the headline, apologised and said he had been "totally misled".
After the revelations emerged a Labour MP wrote to Prime Minister David Cameron calling for the former government whip to be stripped of his knighthood over his "shameful" role in the aftermath of the disaster. Backbencher John Mann said: "The shameful and disgusting behaviour of Sir Irvine Patnick is a significant feature in the Hillsborough independent panel report and his knighthood should be removed immediately."
Of course it opens up a much wider area of concern, namely that as a Government whip, he would be well used to dirty tricks. I wonder if the trail that led to him, might lead to others in the Government with an anti football axe to grind?
2.2.23 He advised that ‘generally speaking if things are going well for Liverpool supporters crowd management should be reasonably well achieved, however should things in any way not go well [with] them then they had proved extremely difficult to contain and moods would easily change’.
Irvine Patnick has now accepted that what he told the media 23 years ago was totally wrong .Remember ,he was the main 'source' for the story.
ITV News report below :
A former Conservative MP named as one of the sources behind The Sun's controversial coverage of the Hillsborough tragedy has said he is "deeply and sincerely sorry" for the part he played in the scandal.
Sir Irvine Patnick said he had been given "wholly inaccurate" information by some members of the police and was "appalled" at the extent of the cover-up surrounding the disaster.
But the former Tory MP for Sheffield Hallam said he "totally" accepted responsibility for repeating the information, which led to the tabloid newspaper's notorious front page story headlined The Truth.
In a statement issued through the Conservative Party, Sir Irvine said: "I would like to put on the record how appalled and shocked I was to discover the extent of the deceit and cover-up surrounding these events. It is now clear that the information I received from some police officers at the time was wholly inaccurate, misleading and plain wrong.
"However, I totally accept responsibility for passing such information on without asking further questions. So, many years after this tragic event, I am deeply and sincerely sorry for the part I played in adding to the pain and suffering of the victims' families."
Sir Irvine, 82, was named by the Hillsborough Independent Panel as one of the sources who briefed journalists that Liverpool fans were "drunk and aggressive" and forced entry into the football ground, contributing to the deadly crush.
The panel found the origin of The Sun's story, along with negative coverage in other newspapers, was a Sheffield-based news agency, which had been briefed by officers from South Yorkshire Police (SYP), a local Police Federation spokesman and Sir Irvine.
Their allegations were reported by White's News Agency and were based on meetings with police officers and interviews with Sir Irvine and Paul Middup, the secretary of the South Yorkshire Police Federation. The report states: "Mr Patnick based his comments on a conversation with police officers on the evening of the disaster while the officers were in considerable distress."
Former Sun editor Kelvin MacKenzie, who wrote the headline, apologised and said he had been "totally misled".
After the revelations emerged a Labour MP wrote to Prime Minister David Cameron calling for the former government whip to be stripped of his knighthood over his "shameful" role in the aftermath of the disaster. Backbencher John Mann said: "The shameful and disgusting behaviour of Sir Irvine Patnick is a significant feature in the Hillsborough independent panel report and his knighthood should be removed immediately."
So will he be stripped of his knighthood now? I wonder hmmm...
2.2.23 He advised that ‘generally speaking if things are going well for Liverpool supporters crowd management should be reasonably well achieved, however should things in any way not go well [with] them then they had proved extremely difficult to contain and moods would easily change’.
Surely that's just common sense and basis crowd management?
Of course this report does not blame the fans. It was written by a panel from Liverpool. They were independent (indeed possibly anti) police. They certainly were not independent of Liverpool.
To draw conclusions from this report on the impact of fans, ticketless or otherwise is short-sighted.
The only thing that surprised me about this report is that it could not find evidence of government collusion in a cover-up and could not hold Maggie Thatcher personally accountable for murder.
It has been proved time and time again that one you get a crowd of sufficient size then the individual members no longer act independently. The crowd acts as a single organism, which can be predicted and managed, much like fluid dynamics. Now we all wish the people would engage their brains more, but anyone pushing is unfortunately no different from those who try to squeeze onto a packed train, etc.
It's also unfortunate how much people belief that the authorities, etc. will sort it out. There were undoubtedly those in the tunnel who thought at some stage "this is too packed, we must be going the wrong way or something", but another part of their brain responded with "but the police wouldn't open the gate if it was too packed" or "the signs say standing this way, there must be enough standing space, otherwise they wouldn't have let us in", etc.
So, no, you can't blame any individual Liverpool supporters, and you can't blame the crowd as a whole, as the way it acted was entirely predictable. Those at the back wouldn't even need to push, they just join the back of the pack, people gets closed in, they move around, this creates waves in the crowd, and as we know the results of these waves of force can be magnified to a devastating level.
Of course this report does not blame the fans. It was written by a panel from Liverpool. They were independent (indeed possibly anti) police. They certainly were not independent of Liverpool.
To draw conclusions from this report on the impact of fans, ticketless or otherwise is short-sighted.
The only thing that surprised me about this report is that it could not find evidence of government collusion in a cover-up and could not hold Maggie Thatcher personally accountable for murder.
What on earth are you talking about? Are you suggesting that the City of Liverpool has become an independent state which produces, biased, self-interested investigations, and that the British Prime Minister then unquestioningly accepts all their findings?
Of course this report does not blame the fans. It was written by a panel from Liverpool. They were independent (indeed possibly anti) police. They certainly were not independent of Liverpool.
To draw conclusions from this report on the impact of fans, ticketless or otherwise is short-sighted.
The only thing that surprised me about this report is that it could not find evidence of government collusion in a cover-up and could not hold Maggie Thatcher personally accountable for murder.
What on earth are you talking about? Are you suggesting that the City of Liverpool has become an independent state which produces, biased, self-interested investigations, and that the British Prime Minister then unquestioningly accepts all their findings?
Of course this report does not blame the fans. It was written by a panel from Liverpool. They were independent (indeed possibly anti) police. They certainly were not independent of Liverpool.
To draw conclusions from this report on the impact of fans, ticketless or otherwise is short-sighted.
The only thing that surprised me about this report is that it could not find evidence of government collusion in a cover-up and could not hold Maggie Thatcher personally accountable for murder.
If you've read the report and you have specific criticisms of it, fair enough.
You haven't though, otherwise you would have read the biographies of the nine panel members and would know that the panel isn't from Liverpool. Two of them are and one works there as Bishop of Liverpool.
Two of the panel were former police including a former chief constable.
Actually one thing I've just read in the report is that the tunnel leading to the pens is a 1 in 6 slope, a significantly steep entryway, and would mean that absolutely zero pushing would ever be require to cause a considerable force to be exerted on those at the front of the crowd. With the crowd as dense as it was, those in the tunnel would inevitably find themselves leaning on those in front due to the slope.
Of course this report does not blame the fans. It was written by a panel from Liverpool. They were independent (indeed possibly anti) police. They certainly were not independent of Liverpool.
To draw conclusions from this report on the impact of fans, ticketless or otherwise is short-sighted.
The only thing that surprised me about this report is that it could not find evidence of government collusion in a cover-up and could not hold Maggie Thatcher personally accountable for murder.
Dear God - there none so blind as them that will not see.
Having now almost finished reading through the report, and digging into a lot of the documents the panel examined I have no issue with the view of the panel that the fans were not at fault and that poor stadium design, maintenance and management. Alongside failures by the police obsessed with crowd control and not with crowd safety.
That said, there is evidence in my view of what I have read amongst the many many documents viewed by the panel that do indicate that there were issues with Liverpool fans that day. Mainly centred around a number (unspecified) with tickets for the forest end that were turned away sometime after 2pm that then headed directly towards the Leppings Lane end. I will re-iterate that I do no think this had a significant impact on the outcome of the day simply because there were so many people trying to cram through too few turnstiles already.
Just had this lovely inbox from Draizetrain. Thought I'd share it. For the record, this is the guy earlier in the thread who blamed Hillsborough on the Liverpool fans.
Right Reverend James Jones, Bishop of Liverpool = Liverpool bias Raju Bhatt, law firm specialising in civil service negligence = anti police bias Katy Jones Journalist with strong links to Liverpool = Liverpool bias Professor Phil Scraton, from Merseyside = Liverpool Bias Peter Sissons Journalist from Liverpool = Liverpool bias
Two were included for their knowledge of how public records are kept and how to interrogate them, so I personally doubt they played much part in reaching the conclusions.
Sorry but for me that is a clear and massive bias towards the people of liverpool. If they wanted a purely independent panel it should arguably have had no-one connected with Liverpool or Sheffield involved, but certainly not a heavy majority.
As I say, if you've actually got anything specific in the report you think indicates bias than go ahead and say what it is. You've just reached a conclusion without bothering with the evidence. Which is ironic.
Time for this to stop now. The fact that the people who died were not drunk or causing trouble or that the polis cocked it up then lied were kind of evident the week after it happened. The report has stated - and society as a whole seems to think - that individuals fans bear no responsibility wether they were trying to bunk in or not. Nobody on here is capable of having a debate it is always just a series of individuals spouting their own concrete set view, so don't for one second imagine that any of you will be converting anyone with your observations. Maybe everyone should STFU and let the 96 poor sods that died because they went to a football match have a bit of peace.
Comments
Yet no one knows any numbers. So how can we categorically say they were partly to blame, if we don't know ?
There must have been hundreds in there without tickets to cause that extra crush, but we don't know that there were, do we ?
Individually (and surely the duty of care and responsibility that's been brought up is only individual, fans aren't an organised collective body, much as the chant would have you believe otherwise - they're not an army!), they are guilty of bunking into a football match, change the context and this could easily be one of those nostalgic threads about how the old timers used to bunk into The Valley that make us all feel so warm and fuzzy.
Are they supposed to come out one by one and apologise for bunking into a game without a ticket, thereby resulting in the death of 96 people? It's a bit ridiculous isn't it? 'I'm sorry that I bunked into the game, resulting in 96 of my fellow fans losing their lives', there's no logical cause and effect there. They're not admitting to an act of terrorism, it wasn't an organised assault, they're admitting to bunking into a football match without a ticket - it's not right but it's a minor misdemeanour and only in a spectacularly screwed up situation does this lead to the deaths of 96 people.
They may be scousers but they are fellow football fans, who've not only been spectacularly let down but then smeared, slandered and libelled for years and rather than focus on the real issues at hand people want them to come out and own up to bunking in?
Mate thanks for putting it so succinctly. I posted before the programme on Monday that I didn't think that trying to take people to cout would have any point as it was an accident. Now the real truth has finnaly come out I have chnaged my opinion 100%. If mistakes were made and owned up to that can be forgiven after all we are all human and sometimes we just get it wrong but the subsequent deceit as Rob says is just unforgivable and by the way illegal and those involved should now be bought to book for their perjury.
It won't bring back the dead but it will at least highlight the fact that nobody is above the law and that it important. I apologise for my initial stance and post.
People at the back of a crowd have no knowledge of the force exerted to the front. It happens at religeous festivals and pop concerts and the responsibility of the organisers is to stop it happening. The crowd has behavoural characteristics and the personalities of some of the people in the crowd is irrelevant. Nobody knows how many people were without tickets- some undoubtably were - some would have been drunk - but the overcrowding was due to the organisation and inadequate turnstyles. People miss the point that there was significant room to the sides of the pens. People had tickets for these areas but were not in the ground! The picture some people are trying to paint was that there were thousands of ticketless people all getting in through that gate - even that they were exclusively ticketless which is nonsense- I would suggest they read the report more carefully. I remember going to a Spurs Enfield FA Cup game many moons ago and despite having a ticket and arriving in good time- I didn't get in until half time- this was because Spurs underestimated how many people would be going and the number of turnstyles were not sufficient. When I did get in the ground was far from full - but th eproblem that night was also that a lot of fans turned up relatively late.
If you are determined to blame the Liverpool fans you could say - well they should have tried to get in the ground early - I'll make a mental note of all the evil reckless so and so's tonight who don't get to the ground in good time. The fact is, it was a nice day and they weren't expecting the incompetence they encountred. The fact is, nobody is a) saying that all Liverpool fans are angels, b) that there were not some ticketless fans there and c) there were not some drunk fans there - if there weren't it wouldn't have been a representative semi final football crowd - but reasonable people can and should acknowledge that the report has clearly said the fans were not to blame for what happened.
The deaths were caused by failures in crowd safety. The Report does not consider ticketless fans had any bearing on the outcome.
This issue of ticketlessness has been dealt with in this report. The reason why people died was that there was no control exercised over how many people were allowed into the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace because they did not have a safe system of controlling it. It relied on the judgement call of police and stewards to decide when the area was full, and when to shut the gates to this area and channel people to the side.
Here is what the Report actually says:
"20. There was clear evidence in the build-up to the match, both inside and outside the stadium, that turnstiles serving the Leppings Lane terrace could not process the required number of fans in time for the kick-off. Yet the growing danger was ignored. When the request to delay the kick-off eventually was made, it was considered too late as the teams were on the pitch.
21. For a considerable period inside the Police Control Box it was clear from the
near view of the central pens below, and the CCTV coverage of the turnstiles 9
and pens, that serious problems of overcrowding were occurring at the turnstiles
and in the pens. Senior police officers’ decision-making was hampered by poor
communications, a malfunctioning radio system and the design of the Control Box.
22. Superintendent Roger Marshall was responsible for policing outside the stadium at the Leppings Lane end. As the crush at the turnstiles became severe he requested the opening of exit gates to allow fans into the stadium and relieve crowd pressure. He had no knowledge of the uneven distribution of fans on the Leppings Lane terrace. Similarly, the ground commander inside the stadium, Chief Superintendent Roger Greenwood, had no knowledge of the extreme situation developing outside the stadium.
23. The overview of both sites was the Control Box, with CCTV monitors and a
near view of the central pens. Chief Superintendent Duckenfield acceded to
Superintendent Marshall’s request and authorised the opening of Gate C. Despite a
clear view from the Control Box and CCTV monitors, neither Chief Superintendent
Duckenfield nor his assistant, the experienced Superintendent Bernard Murray,
anticipated the impact on the already packed central pens of fans descending the
tunnel directly opposite Gate C.
24. On opening Gate C there was no instruction given to the SYP officers inside the stadium to manage the flow and direction of the incoming crowd.
25. From the documents provided to the Panel it is clear that the crush at the Leppings Lane turnstiles outside the stadium was not caused by fans arriving ‘late’ for the kick-off. The turnstiles were inadequate to process the crowd safely, and the rate of entry insufficient to prevent a dangerous build-up of people outside the ground."
Later on it says
"153. Consistent with Lord Justice Taylor’s findings, the Panel found no evidence among the vast number of disclosed documents and many hours of video material to verify the serious allegations of exceptional levels of drunkenness,ticketlessness or violence among Liverpool fans. There was no evidence that fans had conspired to arrive late at the stadium and force entry and no evidence that they stole from the dead and dying. Documents show that fans became frustrated by the inadequate response to the unfolding tragedy. The vast majority of fans on the pitch assisted in rescuing and evacuating the injured and the dead"
From this and my reading of other parts of the Report it is all pretty clear in my view:
- the ground was inherently unsafe due to inadequate turnstiles for the capacity of the Leppings Lane end. The capacity of the Leppings Lane terrace was set too high. Indeed the area where the deaths occurred was subsequently reduced to about half of the capacity on that fateful day.
- there was no way of telling the precise number of the fans who had entered the ground and had made their way to the central pens because there were no dedicated turnstiles purely for this confined central area. This was despite the recommendation that there should be which was not acted upon due to the costs involved.
- the Police commander outside the ground was unaware of the level of crowd in the central pens, and the Police commander inside the ground was unaware of the ensuing crush outside the ground
- when the overall commander Dukinfield made the decision to open the gates to relieve the crush outside the ground, he failed to ensure that the gates to the tunnel were closed stopping those coming in going straight down the tunnel and crushing those in the central pens
- exactly the same scenario occurred in 1981 and fans were crushed on that terrace. The only difference was that the pens had been installed subsequently and that made the crush worse because there was no lateral movement able to take place allowing fans to move away from the crush directly behind the goal.
- Safety of fans in the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace, whether some, all or none had tickets, relied on police and stewards deciding that the area was full and shutting the gates to the tunnel. That was a operational decision. The overall commander said he relied on those officers in the vicinity to exercise some control. Unfortunately at the critical time there were no police or steward manning the gates or patrolling the central pens. The Police thus on the day were unable to control the numbers of fans in that central area.
The Police role here was to minimise harm to those visiting the ground. Some fans did arrive without tickets hoping to get in. That happens in every sell out crowd in my experience and is not confined to Liverpool fans. Even if every fan in the Leppings Lane terrace had no ticket (which is absolutely not true), this tragedy would have been avoided if the Police had shut the tunnel when it became full, like they had done in the two previous years. It was this failure that was the primary cause which lead directly to the deaths of 96 innocent fans.
Where, the owners of the stadium and the police were at odds over crowd control at the ground.
On at least four previous occasions there were overcrowding problems at that end of that ground.
Emergency exits at that end of the ground were reduced over time by alterations made by the owners and proposed by SYP, despite objections from local fire services.
The owners of the stadium wanted the event at the venue and campaigned for it after losing it in 1982 despite knowledge of issues above.
The FA who hired the venue (for their event), were aware of the venues previous near misses but declined a meeting on crowd safety that fateful year “stating same as last year".
SYP gave a high profile game to an inexperienced officer.
SYP lost control on the day.
Disaster plans were not planned properly or executed resulting in some avoidable deaths.
MOST disturbingly afterwards the SYP embark on an orchestrated cover up with solicitors and local politicians (one later knighted),
Many Government officials are aware of the cover up. There are previous connections between these people and SYP with regards miners strike.
Coroner clearly doesn’t do a great job.
National Paper gets involved in cover up.
Initial inquiry primarily blames SYP.
Subsequent inquiry finds no new evidence (what a waste of time)
23 year later more information is released.
With all this information now on the table my heart goes out to all those people who have been treated so wrongly by so many individuals and organisations. And respect to those who took on the fight for “The Truth”. I do struggle to see however how they can ever obtain true Justice and fear now that this is the start of another painful chapter.
96 people died attending a football match. It could have been fans of many teams at the time in any of the antiquated stadiums around then. It happened to LFC fans at SWFC. They were innocent victims, May they RIP.
- Safety of fans in the central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace, whether some, all or none had tickets, relied on police and stewards deciding that the area was full and shutting the gates to the tunnel. That was a operational decision. The overall commander said he relied on those officers in the vicinity to exercise some control. Unfortunately at the critical time there were no police or steward manning the gates or patrolling the central pens. The Police thus on the day were unable to control the numbers of fans in that central area.
Thanks Bing. I think that really should end all the discussion.
ITV News report below :
A former Conservative MP named as one of the sources behind The Sun's controversial coverage of the Hillsborough tragedy has said he is "deeply and sincerely sorry" for the part he played in the scandal.
Sir Irvine Patnick said he had been given "wholly inaccurate" information by some members of the police and was "appalled" at the extent of the cover-up surrounding the disaster.
But the former Tory MP for Sheffield Hallam said he "totally" accepted responsibility for repeating the information, which led to the tabloid newspaper's notorious front page story headlined The Truth.
In a statement issued through the Conservative Party, Sir Irvine said: "I would like to put on the record how appalled and shocked I was to discover the extent of the deceit and cover-up surrounding these events. It is now clear that the information I received from some police officers at the time was wholly inaccurate, misleading and plain wrong.
"However, I totally accept responsibility for passing such information on without asking further questions. So, many years after this tragic event, I am deeply and sincerely sorry for the part I played in adding to the pain and suffering of the victims' families."
Sir Irvine, 82, was named by the Hillsborough Independent Panel as one of the sources who briefed journalists that Liverpool fans were "drunk and aggressive" and forced entry into the football ground, contributing to the deadly crush.
The panel found the origin of The Sun's story, along with negative coverage in other newspapers, was a Sheffield-based news agency, which had been briefed by officers from South Yorkshire Police (SYP), a local Police Federation spokesman and Sir Irvine.
Their allegations were reported by White's News Agency and were based on meetings with police officers and interviews with Sir Irvine and Paul Middup, the secretary of the South Yorkshire Police Federation. The report states: "Mr Patnick based his comments on a conversation with police officers on the evening of the disaster while the officers were in considerable distress."
Former Sun editor Kelvin MacKenzie, who wrote the headline, apologised and said he had been "totally misled".
After the revelations emerged a Labour MP wrote to Prime Minister David Cameron calling for the former government whip to be stripped of his knighthood over his "shameful" role in the aftermath of the disaster. Backbencher John Mann said: "The shameful and disgusting behaviour of Sir Irvine Patnick is a significant feature in the Hillsborough independent panel report and his knighthood should be removed immediately."
2.2.23 He advised that ‘generally speaking if things are going well for Liverpool supporters crowd management should be reasonably well achieved, however should things in any way not go well [with] them then they had proved extremely difficult to contain and moods would easily change’.
To draw conclusions from this report on the impact of fans, ticketless or otherwise is short-sighted.
The only thing that surprised me about this report is that it could not find evidence of government collusion in a cover-up and could not hold Maggie Thatcher personally accountable for murder.
It's also unfortunate how much people belief that the authorities, etc. will sort it out. There were undoubtedly those in the tunnel who thought at some stage "this is too packed, we must be going the wrong way or something", but another part of their brain responded with "but the police wouldn't open the gate if it was too packed" or "the signs say standing this way, there must be enough standing space, otherwise they wouldn't have let us in", etc.
So, no, you can't blame any individual Liverpool supporters, and you can't blame the crowd as a whole, as the way it acted was entirely predictable. Those at the back wouldn't even need to push, they just join the back of the pack, people gets closed in, they move around, this creates waves in the crowd, and as we know the results of these waves of force can be magnified to a devastating level.
You haven't though, otherwise you would have read the biographies of the nine panel members and would know that the panel isn't from Liverpool. Two of them are and one works there as Bishop of Liverpool.
Two of the panel were former police including a former chief constable.
The report was unanimus.
That said, there is evidence in my view of what I have read amongst the many many documents viewed by the panel that do indicate that there were issues with Liverpool fans that day. Mainly centred around a number (unspecified) with tickets for the forest end that were turned away sometime after 2pm that then headed directly towards the Leppings Lane end. I will re-iterate that I do no think this had a significant impact on the outcome of the day simply because there were so many people trying to cram through too few turnstiles already.
"...and you're an utter tosser so there you go."
I'm glad someone told me this early!
Right Reverend James Jones, Bishop of Liverpool = Liverpool bias
Raju Bhatt, law firm specialising in civil service negligence = anti police bias
Katy Jones Journalist with strong links to Liverpool = Liverpool bias
Professor Phil Scraton, from Merseyside = Liverpool Bias
Peter Sissons Journalist from Liverpool = Liverpool bias
Two were included for their knowledge of how public records are kept and how to interrogate them, so I personally doubt they played much part in reaching the conclusions.
Sorry but for me that is a clear and massive bias towards the people of liverpool. If they wanted a purely independent panel it should arguably have had no-one connected with Liverpool or Sheffield involved, but certainly not a heavy majority.