I think 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.
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.
We don’t like it and consider it unfair but it’s not without any safety merit.
What can’t be defended however is the associated club comms, marshalling/announcements post game and not limiting vehicle access in Charlton Lane ie the implementation of it.
The Sam Bartram gate / steps fighting I think is likely to be a ‘hands up we got that wrong’ issue as never really seen before to my knowledge.
I’d expect (sadly) a similar arrangement next time with a commitment to handle it better.
And everything you have posted was said after the game in 2013 when pretty much the same arrangements were used.
And as shown by Saturday and the lack of comms before during and after from our club, nothing has changed in how our own supporters were treated at our ground
As I said I don’t like it but there is a logic to it.
The corporate knowledge by police and club is lost over the passage of time.
But of course not by fans who have no input it seems despite the club statements to the contrary on ‘engagement’ and other such guff!
The club had a responsibility (not choice) to communicate the diversion to the fanbase. For whatever reason, they neglected to do this in an effective manner and as a result the management team have lost a lot of goodwill and confidence from fans in their decision making.
I think 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.
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.
We don’t like it and consider it unfair but it’s not without any safety merit.
What can’t be defended however is the associated club comms, marshalling/announcements post game and not limiting vehicle access in Charlton Lane ie the implementation of it.
The Sam Bartram gate / steps fighting I think is likely to be a ‘hands up we got that wrong’ issue as never really seen before to my knowledge.
I’d expect (sadly) a similar arrangement next time with a commitment to handle it better.
And everything you have posted was said after the game in 2013 when pretty much the same arrangements were used.
And as shown by Saturday and the lack of comms before during and after from our club, nothing has changed in how our own supporters were treated at our ground
As I said I don’t like it but there is a logic to it.
The corporate knowledge by police and club is lost over the passage of time.
But of course not by fans who have no input it seems despite the club statements to the contrary on ‘engagement’ and other such guff!
A well respected former staff member recently wrote to Gavin Carter with a goodwill message and a friendly offer to discuss something to help the club on the basis of their many years of experience. They didn’t want anything in return.
Fair enough if the club isn’t interested in their view, but they didn’t even get the courtesy of an acknowledgement to say thanks but no thanks.
I think 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.
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.
We don’t like it and consider it unfair but it’s not without any safety merit.
What can’t be defended however is the associated club comms, marshalling/announcements post game and not limiting vehicle access in Charlton Lane ie the implementation of it.
The Sam Bartram gate / steps fighting I think is likely to be a ‘hands up we got that wrong’ issue as never really seen before to my knowledge.
I’d expect (sadly) a similar arrangement next time with a commitment to handle it better.
And everything you have posted was said after the game in 2013 when pretty much the same arrangements were used.
And as shown by Saturday and the lack of comms before during and after from our club, nothing has changed in how our own supporters were treated at our ground
As I said I don’t like it but there is a logic to it.
The corporate knowledge by police and club is lost over the passage of time.
But of course not by fans who have no input it seems despite the club statements to the contrary on ‘engagement’ and other such guff!
A well respected former staff member recently wrote to Gavin Carter with a goodwill message and a friendly offer to discuss something to help the club on the basis of their many years of experience. They didn’t want anything in return.
Fair enough if the club isn’t interested in their view, but they didn’t even get the courtesy of an acknowledgement to say thanks but no thanks.
I think 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.
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.
We don’t like it and consider it unfair but it’s not without any safety merit.
What can’t be defended however is the associated club comms, marshalling/announcements post game and not limiting vehicle access in Charlton Lane ie the implementation of it.
The Sam Bartram gate / steps fighting I think is likely to be a ‘hands up we got that wrong’ issue as never really seen before to my knowledge.
I’d expect (sadly) a similar arrangement next time with a commitment to handle it better.
And everything you have posted was said after the game in 2013 when pretty much the same arrangements were used.
And as shown by Saturday and the lack of comms before during and after from our club, nothing has changed in how our own supporters were treated at our ground
As I said I don’t like it but there is a logic to it.
The corporate knowledge by police and club is lost over the passage of time.
But of course not by fans who have no input it seems despite the club statements to the contrary on ‘engagement’ and other such guff!
So on that logic when we go to The Den later on this season our fans can expect the same logic to be applied and let out onto the trains first while Millwall fans are diverted around the streets until our fans have all left?
I think 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.
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.
We don’t like it and consider it unfair but it’s not without any safety merit.
What can’t be defended however is the associated club comms, marshalling/announcements post game and not limiting vehicle access in Charlton Lane ie the implementation of it.
The Sam Bartram gate / steps fighting I think is likely to be a ‘hands up we got that wrong’ issue as never really seen before to my knowledge.
I’d expect (sadly) a similar arrangement next time with a commitment to handle it better.
And everything you have posted was said after the game in 2013 when pretty much the same arrangements were used.
And as shown by Saturday and the lack of comms before during and after from our club, nothing has changed in how our own supporters were treated at our ground
As I said I don’t like it but there is a logic to it.
The corporate knowledge by police and club is lost over the passage of time.
But of course not by fans who have no input it seems despite the club statements to the contrary on ‘engagement’ and other such guff!
So on that logic when we go to The Den later on this season our fans can expect the same logic to be applied and let out onto the trains first while Millwall fans are diverted around the streets until our fans have all left?
No.
It’s not fair / right but can be argued as the right call even so. More so because it has some precedence.
I don’t think there is any agenda / great conspiracy theory at play here just a judgement call that is questionable but defendable. Our relatively well behaved supporter reputation maybe counts against us perversely ? 🤷🤷
I think 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.
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.
We don’t like it and consider it unfair but it’s not without any safety merit.
What can’t be defended however is the associated club comms, marshalling/announcements post game and not limiting vehicle access in Charlton Lane ie the implementation of it.
The Sam Bartram gate / steps fighting I think is likely to be a ‘hands up we got that wrong’ issue as never really seen before to my knowledge.
I’d expect (sadly) a similar arrangement next time with a commitment to handle it better.
And everything you have posted was said after the game in 2013 when pretty much the same arrangements were used.
And as shown by Saturday and the lack of comms before during and after from our club, nothing has changed in how our own supporters were treated at our ground
As I said I don’t like it but there is a logic to it.
The corporate knowledge by police and club is lost over the passage of time.
But of course not by fans who have no input it seems despite the club statements to the contrary on ‘engagement’ and other such guff!
So on that logic when we go to The Den later on this season our fans can expect the same logic to be applied and let out onto the trains first while Millwall fans are diverted around the streets until our fans have all left?
No.
It’s not fair / right but can be argued as the right call even so. More so because it has some precedence.
I don’t think there is any agenda / great conspiracy theory at play here just a judgement call that is questionable but defendable. Our relatively well behaved supporter reputation maybe counts against us perversely ? 🤷🤷
Guess we'll see what happens tomorrow night in the cup game when they're held back afterwards at Palace.
I think 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.
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.
We don’t like it and consider it unfair but it’s not without any safety merit.
What can’t be defended however is the associated club comms, marshalling/announcements post game and not limiting vehicle access in Charlton Lane ie the implementation of it.
The Sam Bartram gate / steps fighting I think is likely to be a ‘hands up we got that wrong’ issue as never really seen before to my knowledge.
I’d expect (sadly) a similar arrangement next time with a commitment to handle it better.
And everything you have posted was said after the game in 2013 when pretty much the same arrangements were used.
And as shown by Saturday and the lack of comms before during and after from our club, nothing has changed in how our own supporters were treated at our ground
As I said I don’t like it but there is a logic to it.
The corporate knowledge by police and club is lost over the passage of time.
But of course not by fans who have no input it seems despite the club statements to the contrary on ‘engagement’ and other such guff!
So on that logic when we go to The Den later on this season our fans can expect the same logic to be applied and let out onto the trains first while Millwall fans are diverted around the streets until our fans have all left?
No.
It’s not fair / right but can be argued as the right call even so. More so because it has some precedence.
I don’t think there is any agenda / great conspiracy theory at play here just a judgement call that is questionable but defendable. Our relatively well behaved supporter reputation maybe counts against us perversely ? 🤷🤷
You said "trying to remove 3k quickly". From my seat there was no attempt whatsoever, by police or club, to quickly remove Millwall supporters from the ground so your 'arguement' falls at the first hurdle I'm afraid. Also, the precedence would be to keep the away supporters in the ground for 30/45 minutes as practiced elsewhere.
I think 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.
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.
We don’t like it and consider it unfair but it’s not without any safety merit.
What can’t be defended however is the associated club comms, marshalling/announcements post game and not limiting vehicle access in Charlton Lane ie the implementation of it.
The Sam Bartram gate / steps fighting I think is likely to be a ‘hands up we got that wrong’ issue as never really seen before to my knowledge.
I’d expect (sadly) a similar arrangement next time with a commitment to handle it better.
And everything you have posted was said after the game in 2013 when pretty much the same arrangements were used.
And as shown by Saturday and the lack of comms before during and after from our club, nothing has changed in how our own supporters were treated at our ground
As I said I don’t like it but there is a logic to it.
The corporate knowledge by police and club is lost over the passage of time.
But of course not by fans who have no input it seems despite the club statements to the contrary on ‘engagement’ and other such guff!
So on that logic when we go to The Den later on this season our fans can expect the same logic to be applied and let out onto the trains first while Millwall fans are diverted around the streets until our fans have all left?
No.
It’s not fair / right but can be argued as the right call even so. More so because it has some precedence.
I don’t think there is any agenda / great conspiracy theory at play here just a judgement call that is questionable but defendable. Our relatively well behaved supporter reputation maybe counts against us perversely ? 🤷🤷
Guess we'll see what happens tomorrow night in the cup game when they're held back afterwards at Palace.
They’ve being ‘held’ in the street outside, exactly as has been the case with us at Selhurst in the past.
I think 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.
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.
We don’t like it and consider it unfair but it’s not without any safety merit.
What can’t be defended however is the associated club comms, marshalling/announcements post game and not limiting vehicle access in Charlton Lane ie the implementation of it.
The Sam Bartram gate / steps fighting I think is likely to be a ‘hands up we got that wrong’ issue as never really seen before to my knowledge.
I’d expect (sadly) a similar arrangement next time with a commitment to handle it better.
And everything you have posted was said after the game in 2013 when pretty much the same arrangements were used.
And as shown by Saturday and the lack of comms before during and after from our club, nothing has changed in how our own supporters were treated at our ground
As I said I don’t like it but there is a logic to it.
The corporate knowledge by police and club is lost over the passage of time.
But of course not by fans who have no input it seems despite the club statements to the contrary on ‘engagement’ and other such guff!
So on that logic when we go to The Den later on this season our fans can expect the same logic to be applied and let out onto the trains first while Millwall fans are diverted around the streets until our fans have all left?
No.
It’s not fair / right but can be argued as the right call even so. More so because it has some precedence.
I don’t think there is any agenda / great conspiracy theory at play here just a judgement call that is questionable but defendable. Our relatively well behaved supporter reputation maybe counts against us perversely ? 🤷🤷
You said "trying to remove 3k quickly". From my seat there was no attempt whatsoever, by police or club, to quickly remove Millwall supporters from the ground so your 'arguement' falls at the first hurdle I'm afraid. Also, the precedence would be to keep the away supporters in the ground for 30/45 minutes as practiced elsewhere.
Again not my argument personally. I don’t agree it’s the right solution.
I’m suggesting how/why the police could defend it as the least likeky to have problems.
Quickly in this context is just that 3k can move quicker toward the station than the larger numbers from 3 sides of the ground.
The result / match dynamics always influence how quick the majority of fans leave and can’t be assured beforehand - well I say that - us not winning is highly predictable I suppose 😉😆
I think 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.
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.
We don’t like it and consider it unfair but it’s not without any safety merit.
What can’t be defended however is the associated club comms, marshalling/announcements post game and not limiting vehicle access in Charlton Lane ie the implementation of it.
The Sam Bartram gate / steps fighting I think is likely to be a ‘hands up we got that wrong’ issue as never really seen before to my knowledge.
I’d expect (sadly) a similar arrangement next time with a commitment to handle it better.
And everything you have posted was said after the game in 2013 when pretty much the same arrangements were used.
And as shown by Saturday and the lack of comms before during and after from our club, nothing has changed in how our own supporters were treated at our ground
As I said I don’t like it but there is a logic to it.
The corporate knowledge by police and club is lost over the passage of time.
But of course not by fans who have no input it seems despite the club statements to the contrary on ‘engagement’ and other such guff!
So on that logic when we go to The Den later on this season our fans can expect the same logic to be applied and let out onto the trains first while Millwall fans are diverted around the streets until our fans have all left?
No.
It’s not fair / right but can be argued as the right call even so. More so because it has some precedence.
I don’t think there is any agenda / great conspiracy theory at play here just a judgement call that is questionable but defendable. Our relatively well behaved supporter reputation maybe counts against us perversely ? 🤷🤷
You said "trying to remove 3k quickly". From my seat there was no attempt whatsoever, by police or club, to quickly remove Millwall supporters from the ground so your 'arguement' falls at the first hurdle I'm afraid. Also, the precedence would be to keep the away supporters in the ground for 30/45 minutes as practiced elsewhere.
Again not my argument personally. I don’t agree it’s the right solution.
I’m suggesting how/why the police could defend it as the least likeky to have problems.
Quickly in this context is just that 3k can move quicker toward the station than the larger numbers from 3 sides of the ground.
The result / match dynamics always influence how quick the majority of fans leave and can’t be assured beforehand - well I say that - us not winning is highly predictable I suppose 😉😆
Surprisingly the ground clears quite quickly whatever the result, play-off semi-finals excepted. As evidence I spent many years parked behind the west stand waiting to be allowed out onto Harvey Gardens.
Comments
And no, it wasn’t me.
You said "trying to remove 3k quickly". From my seat there was no attempt whatsoever, by police or club, to quickly remove Millwall supporters from the ground so your 'arguement' falls at the first hurdle I'm afraid. Also, the precedence would be to keep the away supporters in the ground for 30/45 minutes as practiced elsewhere.
wtf was the stewards thinking not locking the gate and why wasnt it manned by more aswell as police🤦🏻♂️