After the Millwall game - club reply to CAST p34, further CAST response p45

chilham said:

clive said:

The answers i want are
 Once the decision by the Met was made to not hold back away fans/ reroute home fans, why the club did not relay this information to fans in a clear coherent manner via the website, via email, over the 'Tannoy' & on the big screen.

Why was there not sufficient numbers of stewards/ police in areas of the ground where they were required.

Why people volunteer for roles in ' fan engagement' & then do precisely the opposite when any problem arises.

Why the club website has seemed to have turned into some kind of advertising site rather than providing everyday information what some supporters might find useful.

And finally why the the club has still not communicated/ apologised to the fans for the disruption on Saturday.

In case of any confusion, this is not the same Clive as was involved with Charlton Chat. 

Mendonca In Asdas said:

Police i'm guessing , think Millwall will smash up the ground in protest, if they are kept behind?

DOUCHER said:

PragueAddick said:

valleynick66 said:

PragueAddick said:

valleynick66 said:

PragueAddick said:

RedPanda said:

For tomorrow:

Ahead of kick-off at Crystal Palace, millwallfc.co.uk releases the following information to ensure Lions supporters' visit goes as smoothly as possible...

Post-match, Millwall fans will exit the stadium and will be held temporarily outside the away turnstiles to allow home fans to disperse from the local area. Updates will be provided via a PA system on a regular basis to ensure regular communication is provided.

Well, we all knew that would be the case but it's excellent to have that there in writing. 

Perhaps @valleynick66 would like to explain if he still thinks "... with hindsight and having the opportunity to reflect, the decision by the police to not hold back Millwall could still be argued by the police to be reasonable. 

There is some logic in trying to remove 3k quickly given the perceived risk of adverse reaction by them if kept waiting." 

Maybe you are not reading what I wrote and instead assuming I’m saying something else?

To repeat I’m observing the police can argue their logic has some merit. That is all. 

I’m not saying it’s right or that I support it but simply saying they can defend it.  What they and the club can’t defend is its execution/implementation.

The comparison to Palace isn’t particularly relevant particularly as they likely get held back at many grounds. 

The police logic may be the greater ‘localness’ to us and our relative lack of hooliganism means a direct comparison is not the whole story. That’s my speculation of how they could justify it. 

I don’t really understand your dig. I’m forecasting the outcome of any review the club and police may make. 

It is a dig. No apologies from me for that. And I am "digging" that you seek to present a 'reasonable' point of view on behalf  of the police which is based on arguments already debunked here, thus potentially reducing the support from fans for those in the fanbase prepared to challenge  "the authorities".

You wrote: 

"There is some logic in trying to remove 3k quickly given the perceived risk of adverse reaction by them if kept waiting."  That risk perception is only valid if there was a record of Millwall fans routinely smashing up other grounds simply after being held back. Nobody has presented such a record, least of all you, the general perception is that they are routinely held, as are fans of Leeds, Pompey, anyone else with any track record of chippiness. They are being held back at Palace tomorrow, albeit outside the stand.

You wrote:

I’m assuming in the absence of any reports to the contrary there were no noteworthy skirmishes between the 2 sets of fans excepting the Sam Bartram gate incursion. On that basis I’d guess the police can claim it was the right call. If Millwall were held back as is normal police practice there would not be any noteworthy skirmishes either, because it takes two to have a skirmish, all the Charlton fans would have gone. That is why holding back away fans is normal practice. 

The worst thing for me about your post is that you suggest there is "safety merit" in their inane plan. You ignore the photos posted here showing the fans exiting the West, and the numerous reports of the frightening chaos in Harvey Gardens, and the professional assessment of these situations from a Lifer with relevant professional experience (@Fortune 82nd Minute). There is no "safety merit" in a plan which introduces potentially life-threatening crushes which would not happen on normal matchdays and therefore have not been planned for.

As I said. but you wish to ignore, I’m simply suggesting how the police can / could argue their decision. And I presume likely will should this matter ever get a formal review. 

It’s not a completely silly idea from them without any merit whatsoever. Surely you can accept that even though none of us much like it and can counter the rationale. As I also said you need to separate poor execution / implementation from the plan / proposal. 

If we take your view that the idea has no merit whatsoever then why did it get imposed? Are you suggesting it’s because the police are Millwall supporters and wanted to score a cheap win over us ? 

What is your conclusion on how it came to be and was unable to be countered by the other parties on the relevant meeting/commitee if without any foundation at all ? -  I assume the club and council contribute. 

Again I’m not a fan of the decision but I can take a step back and see why/how they may have reached the conclusion they did. 

Even if the outcome is a commitment that it won’t be repeated I’d not hold my breath it won’t
 be  based on the fact it’s the second time now. 

Of course lessons to be learned all around. 

Of course I don't believe anything as inane as you write there. My best guess is that they imposed it because it is the most operationally convenient for them. Occam's razor, some might say. They also knew that they could do this at Charlton because they know we are relatively compliant as a fanbase. Do you think they would have dared do that for the West Ham-Millwall fixture at Upton Park?

My conclusion, since you ask is based on what I was told at the match by a fan with excellent contacts, which you've already read. The Club tabled various sensible scenarios all of which the police rejected. In the past, led by Mick Everett the club had managed to head off more draconian police solutions through adult discussions. On this occasion they were completely over-ruled and at a very late stage told this was how it's gonna be. I'm not sure but I think the suggestion is that there was a new face high up on the police side. 

The only way to make sure that this doesn't happen again is to kick up a hell of a stink about it. I understand that a lot of people really don't fancy facing up to the police in any way, so the burden for kicking up a stink falls on those of us who are lucky enough to be educated, articulate,  without any entry on a police database, and able to compare practice from other relevant situations. Obviously even then it's best done via an organised group. But the police certainly don't need your help in pretending in advance that this was a 'safety -led' decision which produced the best possible outcome. Tell that to the fans at Lansdowne Mews whose kids now have lasting memories of the wrong kind, those stuck on the West staircases, or the chaos in Harvey Gardens. Do you know that there are otherwise mentally strong people who suffer from a fear of crowds in confined places? I'm married to one. And of course even for those who don't suffer that phobia, everyone over the age of 30 has one word at the back of their minds. Hillsborough. (and the 20 year aftermath of police cover-up and worse).

valleynick is talking shite but your response is not only condescending but that nonsense wrote to the club by the trust earlier is clearly lacking in the education and articulation skills that are actually needed here - it misses the main point fans are concerned about 

fenaddick said:

CaptainRobbo said:

If Charlton fans had been let out before the spanners and had been in a local pub, there's a good chance a bunch of scum would've gone looking for any Charlton fans still in the vicinity.
Don't really know what the answer is but the OB need to up their game next time.

They went to the ROD anyway. The answer is hold them in AND filter them to the station after

shirty5 said:

fenaddick said:

CAST have also written to the police

https://www.castrust.org/2025/09/police-management-of-millwall-match/

All good points bar the communication aspect of the inconvenience caused which was the clubs responsibility to put out there loud and clear. They failed. 

Unless the club were unaware of the police decision when the police put it out at 9:30am on Friday (We don’t know the answer to that as the club are still silent on that). 

It was only on here on 11am on Friday that it came to light. We all know the farce which occurred the following day 

Both the Police and the Club are at fault 

msomerton said:

Airman Brown said:

shirty5 said:

fenaddick said:

CAST have also written to the police

https://www.castrust.org/2025/09/police-management-of-millwall-match/

All good points bar the communication aspect of the inconvenience caused which was the clubs responsibility to put out there loud and clear. They failed. 

Unless the club were unaware of the police decision when the police put it out at 9:30am on Friday (We don’t know the answer to that as the club are still silent on that). 

It was only on here on 11am on Friday that it came to light. We all know the farce which occurred the following day 

Both the Police and the Club are at fault 

The police and the club management meet, usually on Thursdays before a Saturday game. There is no chance the plan wasn’t discussed at that meeting. The club knew and declined to share it in any other than a token way. It was negligent, as the police would have been if they hadn’t disclosed it to the club in advance of announcing it. The club knew and hid it.

It was because the club were still pushing the sale of tickets for the game. What would warning punters of the police restrictions in place and the implication of possible serious crowd trouble done for sales. 

Airman Brown said:

msomerton said:

Airman Brown said:

shirty5 said:

fenaddick said:

CAST have also written to the police

https://www.castrust.org/2025/09/police-management-of-millwall-match/

All good points bar the communication aspect of the inconvenience caused which was the clubs responsibility to put out there loud and clear. They failed. 

Unless the club were unaware of the police decision when the police put it out at 9:30am on Friday (We don’t know the answer to that as the club are still silent on that). 

It was only on here on 11am on Friday that it came to light. We all know the farce which occurred the following day 

Both the Police and the Club are at fault 

The police and the club management meet, usually on Thursdays before a Saturday game. There is no chance the plan wasn’t discussed at that meeting. The club knew and declined to share it in any other than a token way. It was negligent, as the police would have been if they hadn’t disclosed it to the club in advance of announcing it. The club knew and hid it.

It was because the club were still pushing the sale of tickets for the game. What would warning punters of the police restrictions in place and the implication of possible serious crowd trouble done for sales. 

There were never going to be any significant sales that late as anyone involved over the years could have told them. The Millwall game isn’t like that. But in any event you cannot compromise safety for commercial gain. Why were there any advance comms at all? Because communication was key to safety.

Airman Brown said:

cabbles said:

Airman Brown said:

shirty5 said:

fenaddick said:

CAST have also written to the police

https://www.castrust.org/2025/09/police-management-of-millwall-match/

All good points bar the communication aspect of the inconvenience caused which was the clubs responsibility to put out there loud and clear. They failed. 

Unless the club were unaware of the police decision when the police put it out at 9:30am on Friday (We don’t know the answer to that as the club are still silent on that). 

It was only on here on 11am on Friday that it came to light. We all know the farce which occurred the following day 

Both the Police and the Club are at fault 

The police and the club management meet, usually on Thursdays before a Saturday game. There is no chance the plan wasn’t discussed at that meeting. Discussing these things is the whole point of the meeting. The club knew and failed to share the plan in any other than a token way. It was negligent, as the police would have been if they hadn’t disclosed it to the club in advance of announcing it. 

The club knew and the club hid it, because they knew it would be deeply unpopular.

In your experience Airman, and given the fact Palace were held back last night to accommodate Millwall in the same way were herded on Sat, is it unlikely to change the next time we play them?  

A lot of this comes down to individual police commanders and their understanding, so on a different day another officer may well do something different. It appears the police said and did two different things at Selhurst last night.

Guardy said:

fenaddick said:

CaptainRobbo said:

If Charlton fans had been let out before the spanners and had been in a local pub, there's a good chance a bunch of scum would've gone looking for any Charlton fans still in the vicinity.
Don't really know what the answer is but the OB need to up their game next time.

They went to the ROD anyway. The answer is hold them in AND filter them to the station after

Funny how the cowards never went to The Oak after the game. They would’ve got a very unpleasant welcome.