It was a tragic appalling event which should never have happened. Had the authorities on the ground that day met the usual standard duty of care before, during, or after the events that caused injury and death it is likely the 96 people who perished would have returned to their families.
Had the authorities governing the licencing of the use of premises and staging the match fulfilled their responsibilities those on the ground would have never been put in the position of having to manage a facility that was not fit for purpose.
Had people attending the match not behaved in a manner that put others under threat of injury, no matter the excuse, no matter the incompetence of the ground entry facilities or personnel, people would not have died. That 2000 people were allowed/directed into an overcrowded facility does not mean 2000 people, facing effectively barriers of human beings, have to force their way into that facility. That those people were falsely accused, insulted, maligned and berated for a range of despicable behaviours and specifically causing such deaths was a disgrace. However no one waking up that morning, football supporter, policeman, ambulance man or ground staff went to Hillsborough to cause harm or injury.
We now live in very different times but football crowds for a decade or more before the events of that day were treated by the authorities as little more than cattle. On more than a few occasions elements within those crowds behaved like cattle. It had a dehumanising effect which contributed to events that day. The animosity/ indifference displayed at the outset of the incident, as evidenced by Motsons' comments on a "a little crowd trouble" was almost to be expected. How many watching on television having witnessed Heysel and countless other examples of mindless crowd violence initially thought to challenge such a view. Even the players were animatedly urging spectators to return to the terrace.
Should that explain the then mystifying lack of response by the police and their seeming prevention of the involvement of other emergency services? No. Does it excuse it? No.
Viewing the images, in hindsight, it is clear the incident was outside of not only the experience of the "on site" authorities but tragically their individual fortitude and competence. The whole scenario desperately cried out for someone to take control. People who have lost loved ones have every right to express their angst and anger and to expect justice. However as the recent public INDEPENDENT enquiry revealed having examined over 500,000 documents there was ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE that the Taylor and subsequent Smith enquiries, or the actions of the initial coroner and the DPP failure to provide that justice was a result of ANY GOVERNMENTAL INTERFERENCE.
By what perversion do people wish to degrade the loss of 96 lives by casting UNSUBSTANTIATED political innuendo to further their own political agenda?
Contrary to the modern common perception there are no guarantees in life. It is neither within the remit or the control of government to protect us from all of the challenges of life. Ultimately we are all responsible for our own actions and speaking personally I am grateful I have never had to walk in the shoes of those involved that day. That some who did were found wanting and then failed to stand up to be accountable for their actions is a lesson for us all.
Had people attending the match not behaved in a manner that put others under threat of injury, no matter the excuse, no matter the incompetence of the ground entry facilities or personnel, people would not have died. That 2000 people were allowed/directed into an overcrowded facility does not mean 2000 people, facing effectively barriers of human beings, have to force their way into that facility.
What do you mean by the underlined?
On being allowed / directed into the central pens, the fans would go through a tunnel. The sightlines, from the area before the tunnel and also the start of the tunnel itself, to the terrace are poor. It may looked busy ahead, but then it was a cup semi - final and this would be the norm. In my opinion, it would be hard to say the area was overcrowded until it was too late to turn round due to numbers of people behind.
As far as governments are concerned, more should have been done, both pre and post accident, by both Conservative and Labour governments.
Had people attending the match not behaved in a manner that put others under threat of injury, no matter the excuse, no matter the incompetence of the ground entry facilities or personnel, people would not have died. That 2000 people were allowed/directed into an overcrowded facility does not mean 2000 people, facing effectively barriers of human beings, have to force their way into that facility. That those people were falsely accused, insulted, maligned and berated for a range of despicable behaviours and specifically causing such deaths was a disgrace. However no one waking up that morning, football supporter, policeman, ambulance man or ground staff went to Hillsborough to cause harm or injury.
Great post, but slightly let down by this paragraph.
It's a huge game for your club, you've been delayed outside the ground and you're seconds away from the kick off. There's been a huge crush outside, you're feeling really insecure and uncomfortable - and suddenly there's daylight as the police decide to open the gate. So you rush for the space and see the opportunity to get onto the terraces to see the game you've paid a fortune to watch - only no-one's directing the crowd to the side pens, you're swept along down a single narrow tunnel by crowd dynamics into an area with no escape forward, back or to the left. How is your behaviour going to save you? How would your behaviour have avoided it?
Could they all have turned up 30 minutes earlier? Probably, but does this happen even now? Could they have been less excited? Sure, but unrealistic. Could they have decided to stick with the crush rather than head for the open gate? Would you? etc.
This isn't about behaving in a certain manner, it's not about 'no matter the excuse', it's about the reality of crowd dynamics - and particularly those of football crowds - and their management, especially so close to kick off on one of the biggest games of the season. This 'manner of behaviour' was common to football crowds back in the day, and it was - fundamentally and of root cause - the dreadful decisions by the police that led to the deaths of the 96.
What happened happened, and it will always be a tragedy no matter the cause or the outcome of any inquiry. The inquiries, however, are a matter of national disgrace. I agree there is a degree of 20-20 hindsight when it comes to Hillsborough and, without wishing to excuse the police in any way, it was inevitable that their first thought would be that this was a crowd disturbance. I suspect this is also part of the reason why ambulances - and more importantly the medics -stayed outside the ground. However it was the actions of the police that led to the disaster, and for them to not only cover up the truth but to attribute blame for the disaster to the fans - who were guilty of nothing more than wanting to watch a football match - is and remains despicable. And no-one's held them to account for nearly 25 years.
The good news of Hillsborough is that the Taylor report, its subsequent implementation - even if over-emphasised - and the associated funding for football ground development means that it is probably less likely to happen now than at any time in football's history.
Access into and egress from grounds is significantly better designed and managed. If there is likely congestion outside the ground, the police will usually delay kick off another 15 minutes to avoid the crowd rush. Clubs put on entertainment ahead of the game to encourage people to arrive earlier. There are stewards everywhere, not absent as they were on 15 April 1989. Football hooliganism has been virtually eradicated from grounds and is proactively policed, with enforcement supported by law. games are categorised for risk and managed accordingly, and of course all-seating controls the number of people allowed into each section.
I remember watching the tragedy unfold at the time, on Grandstand if memory serves, and it was a dark dark day. It seemed then that it would be impossible for football to recover. We've significantly addressed the practical issues of the day, but one can't help thinking that had the police owned up to their part in it rather than blaming the fans the lessons would have been learned an awful lot more quickly than they were.
So the only political agenda we should be discussing here is that of the two governments who failed the Hillsborough families and the wider football community as a whole, and that of the South Yorkshire Police - who have yet to be held account for their actions that fateful day. The context then was very different to now, but it's no defence.
Dear Grapevine Dare I correct you on two points on what was a very good piece John Motson Said before during and after the game was called off that too many people were in the middle sections of the stand and there was space at either side. At one point he was telling the camera man to pan across to the side where there was a lot of space. The government are responsible for all of our well being under Health and Safety legislation. Were there enough police officers outside the ground NO as quoted by a police officer that was on plain clothes duty on the day. Were the emergency gates leading onto the pitch wide enough to allow people to evacuate in an emergency NO. I could carry on but I think you get my point. As for the Government of the day and subsequent Governments I am sure that they would at a high level agreed to allow senior police officers from West Yorkshire to retire on medical grounds after they were found to be covering their backsides for many years when in my opinion that should now be in prison. None of the 96 should have died and over half should have been saved and so for all the 96 fellow supports, their families, all connected with LFC and everyone who attends football matches across the UK justice needs to be done so the 96 can finally rest in peace.
Had people attending the match not behaved in a manner that put others under threat of injury, no matter the excuse, no matter the incompetence of the ground entry facilities or personnel, people would not have died. That 2000 people were allowed/directed into an overcrowded facility does not mean 2000 people, facing effectively barriers of human beings, have to force their way into that facility. That those people were falsely accused, insulted, maligned and berated for a range of despicable behaviours and specifically causing such deaths was a disgrace. However no one waking up that morning, football supporter, policeman, ambulance man or ground staff went to Hillsborough to cause harm or injury.
Great post, but slightly let down by this paragraph.
It's a huge game for your club, you've been delayed outside the ground and you're seconds away from the kick off. There's been a huge crush outside, you're feeling really insecure and uncomfortable - and suddenly there's daylight as the police decide to open the gate. So you rush for the space and see the opportunity to get onto the terraces to see the game you've paid a fortune to watch - only no-one's directing the crowd to the side pens, you're swept along down a single narrow tunnel by crowd dynamics into an area with no escape forward, back or to the left. How is your behaviour going to save you? How would your behaviour have avoided it?
Could they all have turned up 30 minutes earlier? Probably, but does this happen even now? Could they have been less excited? Sure, but unrealistic. Could they have decided to stick with the crush rather than head for the open gate? Would you? etc.
This isn't about behaving in a certain manner, it's not about 'no matter the excuse', it's about the reality of crowd dynamics - and particularly those of football crowds - and their management, especially so close to kick off on one of the biggest games of the season. This 'manner of behaviour' was common to football crowds back in the day, and it was - fundamentally and of root cause - the dreadful decisions by the police that led to the deaths of the 96.
What happened happened, and it will always be a tragedy no matter the cause or the outcome of any inquiry. The inquiries, however, are a matter of national disgrace. I agree there is a degree of 20-20 hindsight when it comes to Hillsborough and, without wishing to excuse the police in any way, it was inevitable that their first thought would be that this was a crowd disturbance. I suspect this is also part of the reason why ambulances - and more importantly the medics -stayed outside the ground. However it was the actions of the police that led to the disaster, and for them to not only cover up the truth but to attribute blame for the disaster to the fans - who were guilty of nothing more than wanting to watch a football match - is and remains despicable. And no-one's held them to account for nearly 25 years.
The good news of Hillsborough is that the Taylor report, its subsequent implementation - even if over-emphasised - and the associated funding for football ground development means that it is probably less likely to happen now than at any time in football's history.
Access into and egress from grounds is significantly better designed and managed. If there is likely congestion outside the ground, the police will usually delay kick off another 15 minutes to avoid the crowd rush. Clubs put on entertainment ahead of the game to encourage people to arrive earlier. There are stewards everywhere, not absent as they were on 15 April 1989. Football hooliganism has been virtually eradicated from grounds and is proactively policed, with enforcement supported by law. games are categorised for risk and managed accordingly, and of course all-seating controls the number of people allowed into each section.
I remember watching the tragedy unfold at the time, on Grandstand if memory serves, and it was a dark dark day. It seemed then that it would be impossible for football to recover. We've significantly addressed the practical issues of the day, but one can't help thinking that had the police owned up to their part in it rather than blaming the fans the lessons would have been learned an awful lot more quickly than they were.
So the only political agenda we should be discussing here is that of the two governments who failed the Hillsborough families and the wider football community as a whole, and that of the South Yorkshire Police - who have yet to be held account for their actions that fateful day. The context then was very different to now, but it's no defence.
Grapevine, great piece, though I am not quite so sure that I have your confidence that football fans no longer get treated like cattle and that the context is so very different now - I think our own fans' experiences of Palace and Millwall match crowd control this season suggests we have sadly not come as far away from those days as we all might like.
Grapevine, great piece, though I am not quite so sure that I have your confidence that football fans no longer get treated like cattle and that the context is so very different now - I think our own fans' experiences of Palace and Millwall match crowd control this season suggests we have sadly not come as far away from those days as we all might like.
RIP the 96.
A fair point, although I suspect that the thin blue line wouldn't - and didn't - hold up with the pressure of a couple of thousand fans pushing forwards.
I haven't seen this one yet, will get it Friday night. But just going back to the programme I mentioned above, "Hillsborough -Never forgotten" and in reference to the political inaction.
For me the most extraordinary footage in that film comes from Anfield on the day of a commemoration of Hillsborough and soon after Gordon Brown's government has announced that there will not be a public enquiry of the type of the campaigners sought. There are 30,000 people in the stadium. Andy Burnham, the then sports minister, and a Liverpudlian, comes to a rostrum to give a speech. He starts. After a few sentences he pauses, and one lone voice shouts out "Justice for the 96!" Then a few more follow, and then within five seconds the whole crowd is on its feet, roaring it out. Andy Burnham waits to let them finish. But they dont finish. They keep on and on. The camera is on his face. You see first his recognition that they are not going to stop...then his recognition that whatever he and his government have decided, he is going to have to go back down to London and tell them to think again. Finally he nods several times as if to say, ok, no more false words, I will do something And to his credit, as the film makes clear, that is what he did. He was a politician who came face to face with the raw public anger of an entire constituency, and realised that was his duty.
And as a result of that the new enquiry was set up and led, controversially at the time, by the Bishop of Liverpool. And in this film, he quietly points out that when all other public institutions failed these people, there was one place left to turn to, the Church. And the Church did not fail them. I am not a religious person, but this good quietly spoken man made me think.
Ah. Good. It is a great testament to the people of Liverpool. They just refused to give up and 'move on'. And Andy Burnham, when reminded what a politician's real job is, in such a powerful way, did the right thing. Credit to him. And I would say that whatever party he belonged to.
As one of those who bought the "drunk Scallies" line from the authorities at the time and for years after, I was embarrassed and angry to learn the truth in recent years and those responsible must be brought to account. Like the conniving police and newspaper bosses, they must go to prison. Like the thieving politicians who have always considered themselves above the law, they must go to prison. Like the lying righteous politicians, they must go to prison. When you add in all the celebrity paedophiles and sexual abusers who are also heading to prison, it paints an increasingly disgusting picture of the establishment we were brought-up to revere.
I think thats the main thing for me cardinal i bought it too
I have spoken to a good friend who was there with his dad and uncle and he was only young about 14 but he did remember seeing and his dad talking about the fans that were bunking in for free but nowhere near the amount or in the manor that was subsequently reported
Seeing at the amount of lies that have been uncovered and the horrific stories that came out about the treatment of the children that died and the lengths the authorities went to , to shame them and deflect from the truth
I am sadden and embarrassed that I fell for it and I now will only ever believe the word of the Liverpool fans and the OB who tried to tell the truth but were forced into changing their statements and subsequently left the force
apropos of nothing, but a lot of Lifers offered help to me regarding my wife's lost degree woes the other day - she did a degree in Environmental Health in the very early 90s - someone (can't guess who!) encouraged her to do her dissertation on Health & Safety at football grounds post-Hillsborough. As a result she got to visit around 25 stadiums at all levels of the game in the North of England, as the old grounds gradually modernised & became all-seater. Was a very interesting time for her & a real historical snapshot of the game. Will have to dig it out, full of photos from back in the day. Lots of the clubs offered her/us free tickets for games so she could see the policing & stewarding in action...
We lived in Liverpool at the time, Hillsborough was very raw still - it was compounded by the Jamie Bulger murder - I often wonder if the disaster had befallen any other city whether the authorities response would have been the same. Liverpool was a hotbed of anti-Thatcher militancy in the 80s & with Heysel a fresh memory in 89, the city & fans were quite an easy scapegoat.
I loved my time in Liverpool, the people were by & large fantastic - I was a soft southerner working in my first proper job in a hard-as-nails working class factory on the edges of Toxteth, yet the people working there were brilliant. Love the city & glad to see that the wheels of justice are slowly turning in their favour...
Just seen this. The shot of the fan thrusting his ticket at the camera; "they didn't even take the tickets, they just opened the gates" - this was damning. Unbelievable that it took 24 years for this footage to come out. Did the BBC forget about the footage? Did Panorama not want to do this years ago?
Grapevine in trying to write a balanced piece you've uttered some pure imbalanced drivel on the fans. I'm no hater or lover of Liverpool fans. Anyone who has been to football matches where fans en masse are trying to get into a stadium have a slight understanding of how once you are in a see of bodies it is very hard to make decisions against the flow of the crowd: Especially in a foreign environment, albeit one where Liverpool fans had complained about before. That is why in modern environments lines of egress are modelled, in order to dissipate the force and flow of a crowd. It would be interesting to see how your movement, would be measured and rational in the push of thousands for a tight space. You're going to a football match with a ticket? Oh no the crowds are too febrile I'm off home. Can't think I ever thought that in the interminable wait on Wembley Way, fortunately it's infrastructure creaked but handled the crowds on the way out, I can't think what I'd have thought if I was delayed on the way in.
I concede my comments on crowd behaviour will be seen as controversial. They should not. After all this time is not the only benefit to come out of this tragedy, every authority involved has been forced to look at itself, how it reacted to the incident, behaved in the aftermath and the subsequent investigations which astonishingly have taken decades.
To argue fans should not be subject to the same scrutiny, at one level is entirely understandable, but analytically is disingenuous. Ultimately to remove the element from which the victims arose serves no one, least of all the deceased and their families. Do we not all agree the one objective must be "Hillsborough never happens again"?
To suggest fans have nothing to learn "short changes" the objective. Just as there needs to be prosecutions of those in authority who failed in their basic duty of care, or attempted to subvert the course of justice, to reinforce the lessons learned, we have to address the role of some fans. Why are fans so precious? - people died.
They were crushed by the pressure from others, who were crushed by the pressure from others, no matter the layers involved someone, somewhere, created pressure on the people in front of them. Did they intend to do harm or even understand they might cause harm? No, tragically I DOUBT IT CROSSED THEIR MIND but THAT IS MY POINT. I imply no direct responsibility but faced with a barrier of bodies someone created a domino effect which ended in tragedy.
Outside the ground, arising from a failure to operate previous control measures and inept turnstile arrangements, there was evidence of public disorder. I fully understand the excitement, the anticipation and the building frustration when faced with missing the start of a game you have been building up for and paid good money to see but that cannot be equated to any potential injury or worse any inappropriate behaviour may cause.
The police assessment, mistaken or otherwise, considered fans outside the stadium to be at risk of injury. An assessment which prompted the fateful decision to open the gate. Had the gate not been opened 2000 people ticketed or otherwise would not have been channelled into an area unable to accommodate them.
The comments concerning stadia improvements are entirely valid but again the reference to governments failing football are wide of the mark. Stadia and their safety are the preserve of the local authorities. It is the same around the world. Did the US or even state government invest in the new Dallas Cowboys stadium? No, it was the City of Arlington. Drive through the towns and Villages of France you will encounter a local stadium furnished with floodlights funded by the "Marie".
I first went to the Valley with my Dad when 8yrs old. He had lived through the era of 60,000 crowds. Did they not enjoy big games with as much expectation or excitement? Was their access or egress so much better? Over the decades of leaving that same old Valley ground via the partially opened Valley Grove gates it certainly was not.
Of course times are different but sometimes we need reminding WE TOO HAVE A DUTY OF CARE NOT TO DO HARM TO THOSE AROUND US.
I havent seen the programme, but some great debate here (ignoring those looking for a fight). I will have to see if I can download it and take a look......I too thought it was the Scallies at first, but over the years it became apparent that there was a cover up of sorts. Politics aside, I hope that this sort of thing never happens to anyone ever again.....to think that the 96 just went to watch their favourite team and never returned home leaves a lump in the throat. It could have been any of us....
Heres a link for any other overseas members who couldnt watch via BBC iPlayer.
I've now watched and and find it incredibly and horribly complacent. The cover ups are completely undefendable and those that willfully perverted the course of justice should be held accountable. Its without any shadow of a doubt that the Officer in charge on the day was hopelessly inexperienced and two catastrophic mistakes were made in opening the gates by the turnstyles and failing to shut the entrance into the centre section of the ground prior to opening the gates. Compound this with only three ambulances making it into the stadium and a complete lack of any kind of organisation or leadership of the combined services lead to the needless loss of life to 96 innocent victims.
The courage and strength of the families was epitomised by Anne Williams...she never gave up fighting for justice for her son and the other 95. Over half the number of fatalities could have been saved if adequate and timely first aid had been available including Annes son who was still alive as at 3.30pm that afternoon....15 minutes after the coroner said that all the victims would have been already dead.
Sadly Anne will never see justice. Lets hope the remaining families do. RIP Ann Williams
You are one of the most thoughtful and balanced Lifers, and I hesitate to disagree with you, having read your latest comment carefully, three times.
However I think your conclusions continue to imply support for the original police position, which has now been comprehensively discredited, and by an enquiry which, however late, represents the kind of justice mechanism which other countries believe is among our greatest strengths as a country. You were not (I presume) at Hillsborough. Nor do you quote one word of the enquiry to back up your assertion that "we have to address the role of some fans". You are in danger of sounding like the person in the pub who says "I still think he did it" after somebody has been cleared in a high profile murder trial.
I understand what you are getting at. Some fans were on the piss. Some of them, as a result, behaved without consideration to everyone else. However that happens each and every week at every game, and more widely in society. And while it is tempting to think otherwise, I believe it has always been that way.
The police and the authorities are mandated and required to protect the law abiding vast majority from the idiots. The enquiry clearly stated that they comprehensivly failed to do so, and it rejects entirely any assertion that this crowd in total behaved any differently (and therefore more dangerously) than any normal large football crowd.
That is the finding, is it not? If so, I think you should respect it.
Just seen this. The shot of the fan thrusting his ticket at the camera; "they didn't even take the tickets, they just opened the gates" - this was damning. Unbelievable that it took 24 years for this footage to come out. Did the BBC forget about the footage? Did Panorama not want to do this years ago?
Why would this be an issue ? Did he think (bearing in mind he was there) that there were plenty of ticketless fans ?
This all happened under 4 years after Heysel and in 1989 English clubs were still banned from European competition as a result.
On 11th April 1989 (as I have said before) I worked the away end turnstiles at The Den for the visit of Liverpool. I am fully aware of what went on at turnstiles when the cheeky scousers came to town and had entertained them at Selhurst as well. 4 days after that Millwall game Liverpool (and possibly many of the same fans) were at Hillsborough.
When we played at Selhurst this season (and I was there like many others) - were the police partly to blame for the stupidity afterwards ? In my opinion, Yes I would estimate that the majority of our crowd that day was pretty pissed and plenty were causing acts of vandalism etc so were the supporters partly to blame for the stupidity afterwards ? In my opinion, Yes
At Hillsborough - were the authorities on the day partly to blame for the outcome ? In my opinion, Yes At Hillsborough - were the fans partly to blame for the outcome ? In my opinion, Yes
Football fans have history when it comes to all of this, and some more than others. Just in my opinion the fans who steamed onto Leppings Lane were not without blame. Do we seriously believe ticketless fans (although none to my knowledge have ever come forward) and alcohol didn't play their part ?
Any cover up is awful but it doesn't change the events of the day.
I havent seen the programme, but some great debate here (ignoring those looking for a fight). I will have to see if I can download it and take a look......I too thought it was the Scallies at first, but over the years it became apparent that there was a cover up of sorts. Politics aside, I hope that this sort of thing never happens to anyone ever again.....to think that the 96 just went to watch their favourite team and never returned home leaves a lump in the throat. It could have been any of us....
RIP the 96
I think most people thought that at first, John Motson even announced to the nation during his live match commentary that he'd been told the crush was due to thousands of ticketless fans arriving late and being let in hence the mass overcrowding.
At Hillsborough - were the authorities on the day MOSTLY to blame for the outcome ? In my opinion, Yes At Hillsborough - were the fans partly to blame for the outcome ? In my opinion, Yes
RIP the 96
Of course times are different but sometimes we need reminding WE TOO HAVE A DUTY OF CARE NOT TO DO HARM TO THOSE AROUND US.
I concede my comments on crowd behaviour will be seen as controversial. They should not. After all this time is not the only benefit to come out of this tragedy, every authority involved has been forced to look at itself, how it reacted to the incident, behaved in the aftermath and the subsequent investigations which astonishingly have taken decades.
To argue fans should not be subject to the same scrutiny, at one level is entirely understandable, but analytically is disingenuous. Ultimately to remove the element from which the victims arose serves no one, least of all the deceased and their families. Do we not all agree the one objective must be "Hillsborough never happens again"?
To suggest fans have nothing to learn "short changes" the objective. Just as there needs to be prosecutions of those in authority who failed in their basic duty of care, or attempted to subvert the course of justice, to reinforce the lessons learned, we have to address the role of some fans. Why are fans so precious? - people died.
They were crushed by the pressure from others, who were crushed by the pressure from others, no matter the layers involved someone, somewhere, created pressure on the people in front of them. Did they intend to do harm or even understand they might cause harm? No, tragically I DOUBT IT CROSSED THEIR MIND but THAT IS MY POINT. I imply no direct responsibility but faced with a barrier of bodies someone created a domino effect which ended in tragedy.
Outside the ground, arising from a failure to operate previous control measures and inept turnstile arrangements, there was evidence of public disorder. I fully understand the excitement, the anticipation and the building frustration when faced with missing the start of a game you have been building up for and paid good money to see but that cannot be equated to any potential injury or worse any inappropriate behaviour may cause.
The police assessment, mistaken or otherwise, considered fans outside the stadium to be at risk of injury. An assessment which prompted the fateful decision to open the gate. Had the gate not been opened 2000 people ticketed or otherwise would not have been channelled into an area unable to accommodate them.
The comments concerning stadia improvements are entirely valid but again the reference to governments failing football are wide of the mark. Stadia and their safety are the preserve of the local authorities. It is the same around the world. Did the US or even state government invest in the new Dallas Cowboys stadium? No, it was the City of Arlington. Drive through the towns and Villages of France you will encounter a local stadium furnished with floodlights funded by the "Marie".
I first went to the Valley with my Dad when 8yrs old. He had lived through the era of 60,000 crowds. Did they not enjoy big games with as much expectation or excitement? Was their access or egress so much better? Over the decades of leaving that same old Valley ground via the partially opened Valley Grove gates it certainly was not.
Of course times are different but sometimes we need reminding WE TOO HAVE A DUTY OF CARE NOT TO DO HARM TO THOSE AROUND US.
Grapevine49
Sorry, but this shows a complete lack of understanding of crowd dynamics, particularly in a crush situation.
The implication in your post is that, for a crush to occur, there must have been some degree of 'pushing and shoving' at the back. This is simply not true. It is perfectly possible for crowd densities to build up to dangerous and fatal levels over a period of time without any indication 'at the back' that there is anything wrong - this has been well studied and documented. Many of the eyewitness testamonies from the day suggest that pressure built up over time.
The fact is, that the crowd size and behaviour should have been predictable to a reasonable high degree of accuracy based upon past experiences. Despite this, the authorities failed to manage the situation appropriately.
You also seem to imply that if, for example, it had been Charlton fans involved (God forbid), that there may have been a different outcome. We can never know that. However, the crowd dynamics at Hillsborough would have been completed different from the old Valley. Just because nothing went wrong there, doesn't mean that the fans were the 'different' factor.
I find it quite depressing that those responsible for the cover-up, who have now been widely discredited, did such a good job of it that some people still believe their lies today.
Just seen this. The shot of the fan thrusting his ticket at the camera; "they didn't even take the tickets, they just opened the gates" - this was damning. Unbelievable that it took 24 years for this footage to come out. Did the BBC forget about the footage? Did Panorama not want to do this years ago?
Why would this be an issue ? Did he think (bearing in mind he was there) that there were plenty of ticketless fans ?
This all happened under 4 years after Heysel and in 1989 English clubs were still banned from European competition as a result.
On 11th April 1989 (as I have said before) I worked the away end turnstiles at The Den for the visit of Liverpool. I am fully aware of what went on at turnstiles when the cheeky scousers came to town and had entertained them at Selhurst as well. 4 days after that Millwall game Liverpool (and possibly many of the same fans) were at Hillsborough.
When we played at Selhurst this season (and I was there like many others) - were the police partly to blame for the stupidity afterwards ? In my opinion, Yes I would estimate that the majority of our crowd that day was pretty pissed and plenty were causing acts of vandalism etc so were the supporters partly to blame for the stupidity afterwards ? In my opinion, Yes
At Hillsborough - were the authorities on the day partly to blame for the outcome ? In my opinion, Yes At Hillsborough - were the fans partly to blame for the outcome ? In my opinion, Yes
Football fans have history when it comes to all of this, and some more than others. Just in my opinion the fans who steamed onto Leppings Lane were not without blame. Do we seriously believe ticketless fans (although none to my knowledge have ever come forward) and alcohol didn't play their part ?
Any cover up is awful but it doesn't change the events of the day.
The 'ticketless fans' theory has been widely discredited. Evidence has shown that the total number of people in the Leppings Lane end was less than its allowed capacity. Even if there were ticketless fans (and there were undoubtedly a few, but probably far fewer than some would believe), proper and compentent crowd management would have avoided the problem. Even if everyone who entered the gate had a ticket, the crush still would have occurred.
NO - that is a distortion of what I have said. I have said very plainly I attribute NO direct responsibility to those fans, precisely because I recognise the dynamics of crowd movement (I had 30 years of regularly accessing, standing on and egressing football terraces across London). It is also why I respect the official enquiries and the independent enquiry in this regard.
I have also said the accusations made by the authorities and supported by the media were a disgrace. I do not challenge the findings of the enquiry that the authorities involved before, during and after the tragedy failed in their duty of care to the point people lost their lives.
The people who travelled to Hillsborough on that day had the right in a civilised society to expect the authorities to protect them and in the event of injury to act in their bests interests.
The authorities failed abysmally to meet the standard of the duty of care required and where people have failed to meet their responsibilities they should have been and still should be prosecuted.
I understand the sensitivities and accept the authorities through their subversion of the facts in attempting to escape their responsibilities turned this tragedy into a blame competition. They have rightly been found out.
However to argue that does not mean fans do not have something to learn from the tragedy for me is a huge disservice to the deceased and their families.
You completely misinterpret the point about the Valley. Why was it in our parents day 60,000 people could go to a football match, on a regular basis, more than a few having had a few bevvies in the pub, after a mornings shift in the factories enjoy the game with no doubt as much anticipation excitement but be able to effectively police themselves to the point that there were probably only ten policemen and a dog on duty?
Comments
Shakes head and walks away
Had the authorities governing the licencing of the use of premises and staging the match fulfilled their responsibilities those on the ground would have never been put in the position of having to manage a facility that was not fit for purpose.
Had people attending the match not behaved in a manner that put others under threat of injury, no matter the excuse, no matter the incompetence of the ground entry facilities or personnel, people would not have died. That 2000 people were allowed/directed into an overcrowded facility does not mean 2000 people, facing effectively barriers of human beings, have to force their way into that facility. That those people were falsely accused, insulted, maligned and berated for a range of despicable behaviours and specifically causing such deaths was a disgrace. However no one waking up that morning, football supporter, policeman, ambulance man or ground staff went to Hillsborough to cause harm or injury.
We now live in very different times but football crowds for a decade or more before the events of that day were treated by the authorities as little more than cattle. On more than a few occasions elements within those crowds behaved like cattle. It had a dehumanising effect which contributed to events that day. The animosity/ indifference displayed at the outset of the incident, as evidenced by Motsons' comments on a "a little crowd trouble" was almost to be expected. How many watching on television having witnessed Heysel and countless other examples of mindless crowd violence initially thought to challenge such a view. Even the players were animatedly urging spectators to return to the terrace.
Should that explain the then mystifying lack of response by the police and their seeming prevention of the involvement of other emergency services? No. Does it excuse it? No.
Viewing the images, in hindsight, it is clear the incident was outside of not only the experience of the "on site" authorities but tragically their individual fortitude and competence. The whole scenario desperately cried out for someone to take control. People who have lost loved ones have every right to express their angst and anger and to expect justice. However as the recent public INDEPENDENT enquiry revealed having examined over 500,000 documents there was ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE that the Taylor and subsequent Smith enquiries, or the actions of the initial coroner and the DPP failure to provide that justice was a result of ANY GOVERNMENTAL INTERFERENCE.
By what perversion do people wish to degrade the loss of 96 lives by casting UNSUBSTANTIATED political innuendo to further their own political agenda?
Contrary to the modern common perception there are no guarantees in life. It is neither within the remit or the control of government to protect us from all of the challenges of life. Ultimately we are all responsible for our own actions and speaking personally I am grateful I have never had to walk in the shoes of those involved that day. That some who did were found wanting and then failed to stand up to be accountable for their actions is a lesson for us all.
Grapevine49
On being allowed / directed into the central pens, the fans would go through a tunnel. The sightlines, from the area before the tunnel and also the start of the tunnel itself, to the terrace are poor. It may looked busy ahead, but then it was a cup semi - final and this would be the norm. In my opinion, it would be hard to say the area was overcrowded until it was too late to turn round due to numbers of people behind.
As far as governments are concerned, more should have been done, both pre and post accident, by both Conservative and Labour governments.
It's a huge game for your club, you've been delayed outside the ground and you're seconds away from the kick off. There's been a huge crush outside, you're feeling really insecure and uncomfortable - and suddenly there's daylight as the police decide to open the gate. So you rush for the space and see the opportunity to get onto the terraces to see the game you've paid a fortune to watch - only no-one's directing the crowd to the side pens, you're swept along down a single narrow tunnel by crowd dynamics into an area with no escape forward, back or to the left. How is your behaviour going to save you? How would your behaviour have avoided it?
Could they all have turned up 30 minutes earlier? Probably, but does this happen even now? Could they have been less excited? Sure, but unrealistic. Could they have decided to stick with the crush rather than head for the open gate? Would you? etc.
This isn't about behaving in a certain manner, it's not about 'no matter the excuse', it's about the reality of crowd dynamics - and particularly those of football crowds - and their management, especially so close to kick off on one of the biggest games of the season. This 'manner of behaviour' was common to football crowds back in the day, and it was - fundamentally and of root cause - the dreadful decisions by the police that led to the deaths of the 96.
What happened happened, and it will always be a tragedy no matter the cause or the outcome of any inquiry. The inquiries, however, are a matter of national disgrace. I agree there is a degree of 20-20 hindsight when it comes to Hillsborough and, without wishing to excuse the police in any way, it was inevitable that their first thought would be that this was a crowd disturbance. I suspect this is also part of the reason why ambulances - and more importantly the medics -stayed outside the ground. However it was the actions of the police that led to the disaster, and for them to not only cover up the truth but to attribute blame for the disaster to the fans - who were guilty of nothing more than wanting to watch a football match - is and remains despicable. And no-one's held them to account for nearly 25 years.
The good news of Hillsborough is that the Taylor report, its subsequent implementation - even if over-emphasised - and the associated funding for football ground development means that it is probably less likely to happen now than at any time in football's history.
Access into and egress from grounds is significantly better designed and managed. If there is likely congestion outside the ground, the police will usually delay kick off another 15 minutes to avoid the crowd rush. Clubs put on entertainment ahead of the game to encourage people to arrive earlier. There are stewards everywhere, not absent as they were on 15 April 1989. Football hooliganism has been virtually eradicated from grounds and is proactively policed, with enforcement supported by law. games are categorised for risk and managed accordingly, and of course all-seating controls the number of people allowed into each section.
I remember watching the tragedy unfold at the time, on Grandstand if memory serves, and it was a dark dark day. It seemed then that it would be impossible for football to recover. We've significantly addressed the practical issues of the day, but one can't help thinking that had the police owned up to their part in it rather than blaming the fans the lessons would have been learned an awful lot more quickly than they were.
So the only political agenda we should be discussing here is that of the two governments who failed the Hillsborough families and the wider football community as a whole, and that of the South Yorkshire Police - who have yet to be held account for their actions that fateful day. The context then was very different to now, but it's no defence.
Dare I correct you on two points on what was a very good piece
John Motson Said before during and after the game was called off that too many people were in the middle sections of the stand and there was space at either side. At one point he was telling the camera man to pan across to the side where there was a lot of space.
The government are responsible for all of our well being under Health and Safety legislation. Were there enough police officers outside the ground NO as quoted by a police officer that was on plain clothes duty on the day. Were the emergency gates leading onto the pitch wide enough to allow people to evacuate in an emergency NO. I could carry on but I think you get my point.
As for the Government of the day and subsequent Governments I am sure that they would at a high level agreed to allow senior police officers from West Yorkshire to retire on medical grounds after they were found to be covering their backsides for many years when in my opinion that should now be in prison.
None of the 96 should have died and over half should have been saved and so for all the 96 fellow supports, their families, all connected with LFC and everyone who attends football matches across the UK justice needs to be done so the 96 can finally rest in peace.
RIP the 96.
For me the most extraordinary footage in that film comes from Anfield on the day of a commemoration of Hillsborough and soon after Gordon Brown's government has announced that there will not be a public enquiry of the type of the campaigners sought. There are 30,000 people in the stadium. Andy Burnham, the then sports minister, and a Liverpudlian, comes to a rostrum to give a speech. He starts. After a few sentences he pauses, and one lone voice shouts out "Justice for the 96!" Then a few more follow, and then within five seconds the whole crowd is on its feet, roaring it out. Andy Burnham waits to let them finish. But they dont finish. They keep on and on. The camera is on his face. You see first his recognition that they are not going to stop...then his recognition that whatever he and his government have decided, he is going to have to go back down to London and tell them to think again. Finally he nods several times as if to say, ok, no more false words, I will do something And to his credit, as the film makes clear, that is what he did. He was a politician who came face to face with the raw public anger of an entire constituency, and realised that was his duty.
And as a result of that the new enquiry was set up and led, controversially at the time, by the Bishop of Liverpool. And in this film, he quietly points out that when all other public institutions failed these people, there was one place left to turn to, the Church. And the Church did not fail them. I am not a religious person, but this good quietly spoken man made me think.
I have spoken to a good friend who was there with his dad and uncle and he was only young about 14 but he did remember seeing and his dad talking about the fans that were bunking in for free but nowhere near the amount or in the manor that was subsequently reported
Seeing at the amount of lies that have been uncovered and the horrific stories that came out about the treatment of the children that died and the lengths the authorities went to , to shame them and deflect from the truth
I am sadden and embarrassed that I fell for it and I now will only ever believe the word of the Liverpool fans and the OB who tried to tell the truth but were forced into changing their statements and subsequently left the force
We lived in Liverpool at the time, Hillsborough was very raw still - it was compounded by the Jamie Bulger murder - I often wonder if the disaster had befallen any other city whether the authorities response would have been the same. Liverpool was a hotbed of anti-Thatcher militancy in the 80s & with Heysel a fresh memory in 89, the city & fans were quite an easy scapegoat.
I loved my time in Liverpool, the people were by & large fantastic - I was a soft southerner working in my first proper job in a hard-as-nails working class factory on the edges of Toxteth, yet the people working there were brilliant. Love the city & glad to see that the wheels of justice are slowly turning in their favour...
To argue fans should not be subject to the same scrutiny, at one level is entirely understandable, but analytically is disingenuous. Ultimately to remove the element from which the victims arose serves no one, least of all the deceased and their families. Do we not all agree the one objective must be "Hillsborough never happens again"?
To suggest fans have nothing to learn "short changes" the objective. Just as there needs to be prosecutions of those in authority who failed in their basic duty of care, or attempted to subvert the course of justice, to reinforce the lessons learned, we have to address the role of some fans. Why are fans so precious? - people died.
They were crushed by the pressure from others, who were crushed by the pressure from others, no matter the layers involved someone, somewhere, created pressure on the people in front of them. Did they intend to do harm or even understand they might cause harm? No, tragically I DOUBT IT CROSSED THEIR MIND but THAT IS MY POINT. I imply no direct responsibility but faced with a barrier of bodies someone created a domino effect which ended in tragedy.
Outside the ground, arising from a failure to operate previous control measures and inept turnstile arrangements, there was evidence of public disorder. I fully understand the excitement, the anticipation and the building frustration when faced with missing the start of a game you have been building up for and paid good money to see but that cannot be equated to any potential injury or worse any inappropriate behaviour may cause.
The police assessment, mistaken or otherwise, considered fans outside the stadium to be at risk of injury. An assessment which prompted the fateful decision to open the gate. Had the gate not been opened 2000 people ticketed or otherwise would not have been channelled into an area unable to accommodate them.
The comments concerning stadia improvements are entirely valid but again the reference to governments failing football are wide of the mark. Stadia and their safety are the preserve of the local authorities. It is the same around the world. Did the US or even state government invest in the new Dallas Cowboys stadium? No, it was the City of Arlington. Drive through the towns and Villages of France you will encounter a local stadium furnished with floodlights funded by the "Marie".
I first went to the Valley with my Dad when 8yrs old. He had lived through the era of 60,000 crowds. Did they not enjoy big games with as much expectation or excitement? Was their access or egress so much better? Over the decades of leaving that same old Valley ground via the partially opened Valley Grove gates it certainly was not.
Of course times are different but sometimes we need reminding WE TOO HAVE A DUTY OF CARE NOT TO DO HARM TO THOSE AROUND US.
Grapevine49
RIP the 96
Heres a link for any other overseas members who couldnt watch via BBC iPlayer.
I've now watched and and find it incredibly and horribly complacent. The cover ups are completely undefendable and those that willfully perverted the course of justice should be held accountable. Its without any shadow of a doubt that the Officer in charge on the day was hopelessly inexperienced and two catastrophic mistakes were made in opening the gates by the turnstyles and failing to shut the entrance into the centre section of the ground prior to opening the gates. Compound this with only three ambulances making it into the stadium and a complete lack of any kind of organisation or leadership of the combined services lead to the needless loss of life to 96 innocent victims.
The courage and strength of the families was epitomised by Anne Williams...she never gave up fighting for justice for her son and the other 95. Over half the number of fatalities could have been saved if adequate and timely first aid had been available including Annes son who was still alive as at 3.30pm that afternoon....15 minutes after the coroner said that all the victims would have been already dead.
Sadly Anne will never see justice. Lets hope the remaining families do. RIP Ann Williams
You are one of the most thoughtful and balanced Lifers, and I hesitate to disagree with you, having read your latest comment carefully, three times.
However I think your conclusions continue to imply support for the original police position, which has now been comprehensively discredited, and by an enquiry which, however late, represents the kind of justice mechanism which other countries believe is among our greatest strengths as a country. You were not (I presume) at Hillsborough. Nor do you quote one word of the enquiry to back up your assertion that "we have to address the role of some fans". You are in danger of sounding like the person in the pub who says "I still think he did it" after somebody has been cleared in a high profile murder trial.
I understand what you are getting at. Some fans were on the piss. Some of them, as a result, behaved without consideration to everyone else. However that happens each and every week at every game, and more widely in society. And while it is tempting to think otherwise, I believe it has always been that way.
The police and the authorities are mandated and required to protect the law abiding vast majority from the idiots. The enquiry clearly stated that they comprehensivly failed to do so, and it rejects entirely any assertion that this crowd in total behaved any differently (and therefore more dangerously) than any normal large football crowd.
That is the finding, is it not? If so, I think you should respect it.
This all happened under 4 years after Heysel and in 1989 English clubs were still banned from European competition as a result.
On 11th April 1989 (as I have said before) I worked the away end turnstiles at The Den for the visit of Liverpool. I am fully aware of what went on at turnstiles when the cheeky scousers came to town and had entertained them at Selhurst as well. 4 days after that Millwall game Liverpool (and possibly many of the same fans) were at Hillsborough.
When we played at Selhurst this season (and I was there like many others) - were the police partly to blame for the stupidity afterwards ? In my opinion, Yes
I would estimate that the majority of our crowd that day was pretty pissed and plenty were causing acts of vandalism etc so were the supporters partly to blame for the stupidity afterwards ? In my opinion, Yes
At Hillsborough - were the authorities on the day partly to blame for the outcome ? In my opinion, Yes
At Hillsborough - were the fans partly to blame for the outcome ? In my opinion, Yes
Football fans have history when it comes to all of this, and some more than others. Just in my opinion the fans who steamed onto Leppings Lane were not without blame. Do we seriously believe ticketless fans (although none to my knowledge have ever come forward) and alcohol didn't play their part ?
Any cover up is awful but it doesn't change the events of the day.
I think most people thought that at first, John Motson even announced to the nation during his live match commentary that he'd been told the crush was due to thousands of ticketless fans arriving late and being let in hence the mass overcrowding.
At Hillsborough - were the fans partly to blame for the outcome ? In my opinion, Yes
RIP the 96
Of course times are different but sometimes we need reminding WE TOO HAVE A DUTY OF CARE NOT TO DO HARM TO THOSE AROUND US.
Well said
The implication in your post is that, for a crush to occur, there must have been some degree of 'pushing and shoving' at the back. This is simply not true. It is perfectly possible for crowd densities to build up to dangerous and fatal levels over a period of time without any indication 'at the back' that there is anything wrong - this has been well studied and documented. Many of the eyewitness testamonies from the day suggest that pressure built up over time.
The fact is, that the crowd size and behaviour should have been predictable to a reasonable high degree of accuracy based upon past experiences. Despite this, the authorities failed to manage the situation appropriately.
You also seem to imply that if, for example, it had been Charlton fans involved (God forbid), that there may have been a different outcome. We can never know that. However, the crowd dynamics at Hillsborough would have been completed different from the old Valley. Just because nothing went wrong there, doesn't mean that the fans were the 'different' factor.
I find it quite depressing that those responsible for the cover-up, who have now been widely discredited, did such a good job of it that some people still believe their lies today.
I have also said the accusations made by the authorities and supported by the media were a disgrace. I do not challenge the findings of the enquiry that the authorities involved before, during and after the tragedy failed in their duty of care to the point people lost their lives.
The people who travelled to Hillsborough on that day had the right in a civilised society to expect the authorities to protect them and in the event of injury to act in their bests interests.
The authorities failed abysmally to meet the standard of the duty of care required and where people have failed to meet their responsibilities they should have been and still should be prosecuted.
I understand the sensitivities and accept the authorities through their subversion of the facts in attempting to escape their responsibilities turned this tragedy into a blame competition. They have rightly been found out.
However to argue that does not mean fans do not have something to learn from the tragedy for me is a huge disservice to the deceased and their families.
You completely misinterpret the point about the Valley. Why was it in our parents day 60,000 people could go to a football match, on a regular basis, more than a few having had a few bevvies in the pub, after a mornings shift in the factories enjoy the game with no doubt as much anticipation excitement but be able to effectively police themselves to the point that there were probably only ten policemen and a dog on duty?
You tell me what has changed.