I'm still pissed off that my 85 year old dad, who walks with a stick, had to march such a long way back to the station after the game. He's in better shape than most (for his age) but he was absolutely shattered by the time he made it round that detour. Elderly fans or those with mobility issues aren't going to provoke any trouble if they take the direct route so what's the point in treating them like that?
Don't bet against the scum attacking an 85 year old with a stick
Be good if it was a sword stick and he did a quick Zorro impression on them.
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.
I'm still pissed off that my 85 year old dad, who walks with a stick, had to march such a long way back to the station after the game. He's in better shape than most (for his age) but he was absolutely shattered by the time he made it round that detour. Elderly fans or those with mobility issues aren't going to provoke any trouble if they take the direct route so what's the point in treating them like that?
Don't bet against the scum attacking an 85 year old with a stick
Be good if it was a sword stick and he did a quick Zorro impression on them
Just want to draw out one point from the comment in the CAST letter that highlighted about what was the ‘steward in green’ doing as I think that’s unfair.
He’s been the coordinating steward in the East for a few seasons now, he’s friendly, works bloody hard, always on at the stewards back to look interested when they aren’t etc. When a few years ago the club sold a box to Pompey’s lads who were similarly looking for a ruck he went way above and beyond putting himself in danger a steward really shouldn’t have to.
I went past there before the point that video started. At that point there were Millwall shouting at the fence and trying to climb over it (there was no Charlton engagement at that stage, there’s only really a couple of hundred people that use that exit). I could see the steward in green there frantically trying to coordinate, maybe radioing through for help.
I’m not really adding anything here. I just didn’t want something to go unchecked that insinuated he let down his colleagues etc based on a snapshot video that doesn’t cover the whole area / incident, as I suspect he once again probably went above and beyond.
As your post is obviously based on a post I made earlier (and one I'm slightly surprised to see attached verbatim to the Trust response) may I just make a couple of quick points in response. (And I will keep it quick - there is much I could add but it probably won't add a lot to what has already been said).
I have no doubt what you say about the supervisor is right. And yes, having regular, able staff is a huge plus for any stewarding operation. So fair play to him for what you highlight he has done in the past.
As you say, my observations are based admittedly on a short video clip that doesn't show the full picture. But from what I can see, the supervisor had two choices - take control of the situation (which in fairness he had no chance of doing faced by that mob) or get urgent assistance. If he had no radio, and he had to get to an emergency phone or find someone with a radio, then I understand why he went out of view in the clip. But in doing so, he has left those two young stewards to face the music and they could have taken a serious hiding.
Something has gone seriously wrong here between the supervisor and the control room. If the supervisor had no radio, why was he not provided with one by the club/his company (not sure if the stewarding is controlled in-house); if he had a radio, did he request assistance and if so, why didn't it come? And much more importantly - and this is far more important than what the supervisor may or may not have done - why did the safety officer and the gold controller in the control room not see what was happening?; and if they did, why on earth didn't they get urgent police /response team assistance to the area?
One final thing. In an earlier post you refer to the response teams as "bully boys". I'm not going to deny I've met over the years a few people who do like to throw their weight about. But the vast majority of guys I work with are decent guys who are just trying to do a difficult job and keep everyone safe. (In fact, if you don't have police in the ground their role is vital). Believe me when I say trying to deal with pissed up or coked up guys (in some cases both) is not easy and these response teams sometimes need to say more than please to get these peoples attention.
Right definitely my last post until we get a full response from the club.
Just want to draw out one point from the comment in the CAST letter that highlighted about what was the ‘steward in green’ doing as I think that’s unfair.
He’s been the coordinating steward in the East for a few seasons now, he’s friendly, works bloody hard, always on at the stewards back to look interested when they aren’t etc. When a few years ago the club sold a box to Pompey’s lads who were similarly looking for a ruck he went way above and beyond putting himself in danger a steward really shouldn’t have to.
I went past there before the point that video started. At that point there were Millwall shouting at the fence and trying to climb over it (there was no Charlton engagement at that stage, there’s only really a couple of hundred people that use that exit). I could see the steward in green there frantically trying to coordinate, maybe radioing through for help.
I’m not really adding anything here. I just didn’t want something to go unchecked that insinuated he let down his colleagues etc based on a snapshot video that doesn’t cover the whole area / incident, as I suspect he once again probably went above and beyond.
As your post is obviously based on a post I made earlier (and one I'm slightly surprised to see attached verbatim to the Trust response) may I just make a couple of quick points in response. (And I will keep it quick - there is much I could add but it probably won't add a lot to what has already been said).
I have no doubt what you say about the supervisor is right. And yes, having regular, able staff is a huge plus for any stewarding operation. So fair play to him for what you highlight he has done in the past.
As you say, my observations are based admittedly on a short video clip that doesn't show the full picture. But from what I can see, the supervisor had two choices - take control of the situation (which in fairness he had no chance of doing faced by that mob) or get urgent assistance. If he had no radio, and he had to get to an emergency phone or find someone with a radio, then I understand why he went out of view in the clip. But in doing so, he has left those two young stewards to face the music and they could have taken a serious hiding.
Something has gone seriously wrong here between the supervisor and the control room. If the supervisor had no radio, why was he not provided with one by the club/his company (not sure if the stewarding is controlled in-house); if he had a radio, did he request assistance and if so, why didn't it come? And much more importantly - and this is far more important than what the supervisor may or may not have done - why did the safety officer and the gold controller in the control room not see what was happening?; and if they did, why on earth didn't they get urgent police /response team assistance to the area?
One final thing. In an earlier post you refer to the response teams as "bully boys". I'm not going to deny I've met over the years a few people who do like to throw their weight about. But the vast majority of guys I work with are decent guys who are just trying to do a difficult job and keep everyone safe. (In fact, if you don't have police in the ground their role is vital). Believe me when I say trying to deal with pissed up or coked up guys (in some cases both) is not easy and these response teams sometimes need to say more than please to get these peoples attention.
Right definitely my last post until we get a full response from the club.
Lifted from your email to the club with CAST copied, with yours and another email referenced in the main body of the letter.
Just want to draw out one point from the comment in the CAST letter that highlighted about what was the ‘steward in green’ doing as I think that’s unfair.
He’s been the coordinating steward in the East for a few seasons now, he’s friendly, works bloody hard, always on at the stewards back to look interested when they aren’t etc. When a few years ago the club sold a box to Pompey’s lads who were similarly looking for a ruck he went way above and beyond putting himself in danger a steward really shouldn’t have to.
I went past there before the point that video started. At that point there were Millwall shouting at the fence and trying to climb over it (there was no Charlton engagement at that stage, there’s only really a couple of hundred people that use that exit). I could see the steward in green there frantically trying to coordinate, maybe radioing through for help.
I’m not really adding anything here. I just didn’t want something to go unchecked that insinuated he let down his colleagues etc based on a snapshot video that doesn’t cover the whole area / incident, as I suspect he once again probably went above and beyond.
Just wanted to say having wrote all that, watching the video again I can see the supervisor in green is different to the one I was referring to above who manages the stewards in the East. Apologies for confusing things.
@Fortune 82nd Minute I wasn’t looking to be critical of your input so apologies if you interpreted it as that. Just wasn’t sure of comments suggesting the supervisor had walked away leaving them to it when that may not have been the case. Having watched the YouTube vid again where people are being attacked on the stairs, you can see that supervisor in green still there in the bottom left corner next to the 0.55 potentially operating a phone box? (and probably crapping themselves).
I have watched the clip the supervisor had no radio, I thought so at the time I have sat in same seat in East Stand since it opened in 1994 and used the Bartrum exit mostly during this period, never have i seen any trouble at this exit. I choose Sam Bartrum exit as its quietest & I can get back to my car in 5 mins. I avoid the train now as its such a disorganised mess after matchs, when station staff lock the gate onto the station platform it has felt dangerous after certain matches with the crush and mixing of home and away fans. At the Millwall match on Saturday, I left with my son and his two mates (27yrs) and we arrived a minute or so before the Millwall thugs forced the gate by rocking it back and forth, those two young stewards went way beyond their job spec trying to hold the gate. The supervisor was helpless with no radio. Big questions need answering as stewarding of ES at Millwall match felt less than two previous home matches. Why weren't stewards and police moved there after the trouble with Millwall fans in home section when one jumped back into JS. Does anyone know how many police and stewards were employed? Whoever was in charge clearly went absent.
Charlton made a big deal about Saturday with regular posts as attendence racked upwards, celebrating 6th 20K audience best attendance for 50yrs V Millwall YET since Saturday 7 news stories have appeared on clubs website, countless insta posts and yet still comms dept have not thought to communicate to 20,000 anything about the debacle after the match and fans being attacked? Nathan has said we're in it together on a journey... Nathan, coaches, players and us the fans are we are all invested but is the club hierachy who appear to have a disregard for us fans who have been through thick and thin with charlton over the years......that is only conclusion one can make with zero communication?
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).
Just want to draw out one point from the comment in the CAST letter that highlighted about what was the ‘steward in green’ doing as I think that’s unfair.
He’s been the coordinating steward in the East for a few seasons now, he’s friendly, works bloody hard, always on at the stewards back to look interested when they aren’t etc. When a few years ago the club sold a box to Pompey’s lads who were similarly looking for a ruck he went way above and beyond putting himself in danger a steward really shouldn’t have to.
I went past there before the point that video started. At that point there were Millwall shouting at the fence and trying to climb over it (there was no Charlton engagement at that stage, there’s only really a couple of hundred people that use that exit). I could see the steward in green there frantically trying to coordinate, maybe radioing through for help.
I’m not really adding anything here. I just didn’t want something to go unchecked that insinuated he let down his colleagues etc based on a snapshot video that doesn’t cover the whole area / incident, as I suspect he once again probably went above and beyond.
As your post is obviously based on a post I made earlier (and one I'm slightly surprised to see attached verbatim to the Trust response) may I just make a couple of quick points in response. (And I will keep it quick - there is much I could add but it probably won't add a lot to what has already been said).
I have no doubt what you say about the supervisor is right. And yes, having regular, able staff is a huge plus for any stewarding operation. So fair play to him for what you highlight he has done in the past.
As you say, my observations are based admittedly on a short video clip that doesn't show the full picture. But from what I can see, the supervisor had two choices - take control of the situation (which in fairness he had no chance of doing faced by that mob) or get urgent assistance. If he had no radio, and he had to get to an emergency phone or find someone with a radio, then I understand why he went out of view in the clip. But in doing so, he has left those two young stewards to face the music and they could have taken a serious hiding.
Something has gone seriously wrong here between the supervisor and the control room. If the supervisor had no radio, why was he not provided with one by the club/his company (not sure if the stewarding is controlled in-house); if he had a radio, did he request assistance and if so, why didn't it come? And much more importantly - and this is far more important than what the supervisor may or may not have done - why did the safety officer and the gold controller in the control room not see what was happening?; and if they did, why on earth didn't they get urgent police /response team assistance to the area?
One final thing. In an earlier post you refer to the response teams as "bully boys". I'm not going to deny I've met over the years a few people who do like to throw their weight about. But the vast majority of guys I work with are decent guys who are just trying to do a difficult job and keep everyone safe. (In fact, if you don't have police in the ground their role is vital). Believe me when I say trying to deal with pissed up or coked up guys (in some cases both) is not easy and these response teams sometimes need to say more than please to get these peoples attention.
Right definitely my last post until we get a full response from the club.
Lifted from your email to the club with CAST copied, with yours and another email referenced in the main body of the letter.
Bob, I never e-mailed the club! Only place I posted that post was on here.
So I took a video from the west stand must have been just after matey hit him and you can see the Charlton fan shove him away and then a Millwall fan (fair play) comes up the stairs and gets a few digs in on the Millwall fan who then has a little dig at the Good Samaritan scum fan. then another pond life tries to throw same Charlton fan down the stairs but he’s pretty solid and the old snide goes back down the stairs .
Scum scrapping with each other. Business as usual.
Just want to draw out one point from the comment in the CAST letter that highlighted about what was the ‘steward in green’ doing as I think that’s unfair.
He’s been the coordinating steward in the East for a few seasons now, he’s friendly, works bloody hard, always on at the stewards back to look interested when they aren’t etc. When a few years ago the club sold a box to Pompey’s lads who were similarly looking for a ruck he went way above and beyond putting himself in danger a steward really shouldn’t have to.
I went past there before the point that video started. At that point there were Millwall shouting at the fence and trying to climb over it (there was no Charlton engagement at that stage, there’s only really a couple of hundred people that use that exit). I could see the steward in green there frantically trying to coordinate, maybe radioing through for help.
I’m not really adding anything here. I just didn’t want something to go unchecked that insinuated he let down his colleagues etc based on a snapshot video that doesn’t cover the whole area / incident, as I suspect he once again probably went above and beyond.
As your post is obviously based on a post I made earlier (and one I'm slightly surprised to see attached verbatim to the Trust response) may I just make a couple of quick points in response. (And I will keep it quick - there is much I could add but it probably won't add a lot to what has already been said).
I have no doubt what you say about the supervisor is right. And yes, having regular, able staff is a huge plus for any stewarding operation. So fair play to him for what you highlight he has done in the past.
As you say, my observations are based admittedly on a short video clip that doesn't show the full picture. But from what I can see, the supervisor had two choices - take control of the situation (which in fairness he had no chance of doing faced by that mob) or get urgent assistance. If he had no radio, and he had to get to an emergency phone or find someone with a radio, then I understand why he went out of view in the clip. But in doing so, he has left those two young stewards to face the music and they could have taken a serious hiding.
Something has gone seriously wrong here between the supervisor and the control room. If the supervisor had no radio, why was he not provided with one by the club/his company (not sure if the stewarding is controlled in-house); if he had a radio, did he request assistance and if so, why didn't it come? And much more importantly - and this is far more important than what the supervisor may or may not have done - why did the safety officer and the gold controller in the control room not see what was happening?; and if they did, why on earth didn't they get urgent police /response team assistance to the area?
One final thing. In an earlier post you refer to the response teams as "bully boys". I'm not going to deny I've met over the years a few people who do like to throw their weight about. But the vast majority of guys I work with are decent guys who are just trying to do a difficult job and keep everyone safe. (In fact, if you don't have police in the ground their role is vital). Believe me when I say trying to deal with pissed up or coked up guys (in some cases both) is not easy and these response teams sometimes need to say more than please to get these peoples attention.
Right definitely my last post until we get a full response from the club.
Lifted from your email to the club with CAST copied, with yours and another email referenced in the main body of the letter.
Bob, I never e-mailed the club! Only place I posted that post was on here.
Apologies, an email was received covering the same incident. I'm an old man and easily confused!
Charlton made a big deal about Saturday with regular posts as attendence racked upwards, celebrating 6th 20K audience best attendance for 50yrs V Millwall YET since Saturday 7 news stories have appeared on clubs website, countless insta posts and yet still comms dept have not thought to communicate to 20,000 anything about the debacle after the match and fans being attacked? Nathan has said we're in it together on a journey... Nathan, coaches, players and us the fans are we are all invested but is the club hierachy who appear to have a disregard for us fans who have been through thick and thin with charlton over the years......that is only conclusion one can make with zero communication?
It’s not a comms department failure at this point, if it ever was. It’s a senior management failure.
The message they are sending by remaining silent is that this does not matter to them. It is damaging over and above the original problems.
I have watched the clip the supervisor had no radio, I thought so at the time I have sat in same seat in East Stand since it opened in 1994 and used the Bartrum exit mostly during this period, never have i seen any trouble at this exit. I choose Sam Bartrum exit as its quietest & I can get back to my car in 5 mins. I avoid the train now as its such a disorganised mess after matchs, when station staff lock the gate onto the station platform it has felt dangerous after certain matches with the crush and mixing of home and away fans. At the Millwall match on Saturday, I left with my son and his two mates (27yrs) and we arrived a minute or so before the Millwall thugs forced the gate by rocking it back and forth, those two young stewards went way beyond their job spec trying to hold the gate. The supervisor was helpless with no radio. Big questions need answering as stewarding of ES at Millwall match felt less than two previous home matches. Why weren't stewards and police moved there after the trouble with Millwall fans in home section when one jumped back into JS. Does anyone know how many police and stewards were employed? Whoever was in charge clearly went absent.
I fear that the club may now keep the Bartram gates closed permanently, it only being opened in emergencies.
Charlton made a big deal about Saturday with regular posts as attendence racked upwards, celebrating 6th 20K audience best attendance for 50yrs V Millwall YET since Saturday 7 news stories have appeared on clubs website, countless insta posts and yet still comms dept have not thought to communicate to 20,000 anything about the debacle after the match and fans being attacked? Nathan has said we're in it together on a journey... Nathan, coaches, players and us the fans are we are all invested but is the club hierachy who appear to have a disregard for us fans who have been through thick and thin with charlton over the years......that is only conclusion one can make with zero communication?
It’s not a comms department failure at this point, if it ever was. It’s a senior management failure.
The message they are sending by remaining silent is that this does not matter to them. It is damaging over and above the original problems.
Charlton made a big deal about Saturday with regular posts as attendence racked upwards, celebrating 6th 20K audience best attendance for 50yrs V Millwall YET since Saturday 7 news stories have appeared on clubs website, countless insta posts and yet still comms dept have not thought to communicate to 20,000 anything about the debacle after the match and fans being attacked? Nathan has said we're in it together on a journey... Nathan, coaches, players and us the fans are we are all invested but is the club hierachy who appear to have a disregard for us fans who have been through thick and thin with charlton over the years......that is only conclusion one can make with zero communication?
It’s not a comms department failure at this point, if it ever was. It’s a senior management failure.
The message they are sending by remaining silent is that this does not matter to them. It is damaging over and above the original problems.
I appreciate you more than any supporter knows how it works at club with comms...I also know how it works having worked in major organistation in promotions, marketing and comms that SMT tell comms what to do. One hopes that HOD of comms would been advising and recommending very strongily that the SMT : club need to put out some announcement as the longer this silence drags on, the worse it looks....A real shame as feel that we've got our charlton back on the playing front but maybe also on the cock ups which seem to follow whenever our club have to deal with a big match - Play off semis & now Millwall..... Airman i miss VOTV this was just the voice we fans miss...you saying it as it is ......
Very good. Assertive but staying within the remit of a Supporters' Trust. The Club needs to answer those points in detail, and if it in turn believes that it was unable to do things it wanted to do because the police overruled them, it needs to clearly state that.
I have made further personal approaches to the police via their website contact link and via Ward Councillors as advised by CAST, referencing the mounted horse presence by the club shop. If my phone cam had worked would have had good pic of officer riding her horse AT US walking from the West Stand main gate...
I have watched the clip the supervisor had no radio, I thought so at the time I have sat in same seat in East Stand since it opened in 1994 and used the Bartrum exit mostly during this period, never have i seen any trouble at this exit. I choose Sam Bartrum exit as its quietest & I can get back to my car in 5 mins. I avoid the train now as its such a disorganised mess after matchs, when station staff lock the gate onto the station platform it has felt dangerous after certain matches with the crush and mixing of home and away fans. At the Millwall match on Saturday, I left with my son and his two mates (27yrs) and we arrived a minute or so before the Millwall thugs forced the gate by rocking it back and forth, those two young stewards went way beyond their job spec trying to hold the gate. The supervisor was helpless with no radio. Big questions need answering as stewarding of ES at Millwall match felt less than two previous home matches. Why weren't stewards and police moved there after the trouble with Millwall fans in home section when one jumped back into JS. Does anyone know how many police and stewards were employed? Whoever was in charge clearly went absent.
I fear that the club may now keep the Bartram gates closed permanently, it only being opened in emergencies.
Which would be the most ridiculous of outcomes. A large number of the East Stand who use that exit are elderly and do so because they can’t easily deal with the hills involved
Or for those that dont like dealing with the modern technology scanners and just like to show your ticket to the nice guys at the turnstiles. Mentioning no names..
If they closed those turnstiles (which I realise no one at the club has suggested just someone on here) that would be a huge unnecessary over reaction. Can't think of any trouble there for all these decades since the east stand opened. Certainly shouldn't be closed just cos of one incident which could easily have been avoided by having a couple of police officers there and a few more stewards.
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).
You are determined to go way off tangent of the observation I made despite me trying to correct your interpretation.
I’m not helping the police in any sort of negative way - why you think that I do not know.
I’m only saying it has some merit even if you offer reasoned arguments to the contrary. It’s not completely unimaginable why they came up with the plan.
I’m not sure what is ‘operationally convenient’ about it however as their motivation versus keeping Millwall contained for a period. Whether we will learn if their justification / rationale I do not know.
The execution was poor regardless as I have repeatedly said.
The Lansdowne Mews issue seems unrelated (to me) to the decision to not keep Millwall back - we’ve not seen that problem before and again falls to the category of poor execution / implementation. I stated before I’d expect that to be an admission of ‘we got that wrong’.
I have watched the clip the supervisor had no radio, I thought so at the time I have sat in same seat in East Stand since it opened in 1994 and used the Bartrum exit mostly during this period, never have i seen any trouble at this exit. I choose Sam Bartrum exit as its quietest & I can get back to my car in 5 mins. I avoid the train now as its such a disorganised mess after matchs, when station staff lock the gate onto the station platform it has felt dangerous after certain matches with the crush and mixing of home and away fans. At the Millwall match on Saturday, I left with my son and his two mates (27yrs) and we arrived a minute or so before the Millwall thugs forced the gate by rocking it back and forth, those two young stewards went way beyond their job spec trying to hold the gate. The supervisor was helpless with no radio. Big questions need answering as stewarding of ES at Millwall match felt less than two previous home matches. Why weren't stewards and police moved there after the trouble with Millwall fans in home section when one jumped back into JS. Does anyone know how many police and stewards were employed? Whoever was in charge clearly went absent.
I fear that the club may now keep the Bartram gates closed permanently, it only being opened in emergencies.
The Bertrand gate was not the issue here. 2 sets of opposing fans decided to ‘clash’ either side of that fence. This could happen again regardless of the Bartran gate was open or not
I have watched the clip the supervisor had no radio, I thought so at the time I have sat in same seat in East Stand since it opened in 1994 and used the Bartrum exit mostly during this period, never have i seen any trouble at this exit. I choose Sam Bartrum exit as its quietest & I can get back to my car in 5 mins. I avoid the train now as its such a disorganised mess after matchs, when station staff lock the gate onto the station platform it has felt dangerous after certain matches with the crush and mixing of home and away fans. At the Millwall match on Saturday, I left with my son and his two mates (27yrs) and we arrived a minute or so before the Millwall thugs forced the gate by rocking it back and forth, those two young stewards went way beyond their job spec trying to hold the gate. The supervisor was helpless with no radio. Big questions need answering as stewarding of ES at Millwall match felt less than two previous home matches. Why weren't stewards and police moved there after the trouble with Millwall fans in home section when one jumped back into JS. Does anyone know how many police and stewards were employed? Whoever was in charge clearly went absent.
I fear that the club may now keep the Bartram gates closed permanently, it only being opened in emergencies.
The Bertrand gate was not the issue here. 2 sets of opposing fans decided to ‘clash’ either side of that fence. This could happen again regardless of the Bartran gate was open or not
Charlton made a big deal about Saturday with regular posts as attendence racked upwards, celebrating 6th 20K audience best attendance for 50yrs V Millwall YET since Saturday 7 news stories have appeared on clubs website, countless insta posts and yet still comms dept have not thought to communicate to 20,000 anything about the debacle after the match and fans being attacked? Nathan has said we're in it together on a journey... Nathan, coaches, players and us the fans are we are all invested but is the club hierachy who appear to have a disregard for us fans who have been through thick and thin with charlton over the years......that is only conclusion one can make with zero communication?
It’s not a comms department failure at this point, if it ever was. It’s a senior management failure.
The message they are sending by remaining silent is that this does not matter to them. It is damaging over and above the original problems.
Particularly given Gavin Carter apparently reads the forum!
I have watched the clip the supervisor had no radio, I thought so at the time I have sat in same seat in East Stand since it opened in 1994 and used the Bartrum exit mostly during this period, never have i seen any trouble at this exit. I choose Sam Bartrum exit as its quietest & I can get back to my car in 5 mins. I avoid the train now as its such a disorganised mess after matchs, when station staff lock the gate onto the station platform it has felt dangerous after certain matches with the crush and mixing of home and away fans. At the Millwall match on Saturday, I left with my son and his two mates (27yrs) and we arrived a minute or so before the Millwall thugs forced the gate by rocking it back and forth, those two young stewards went way beyond their job spec trying to hold the gate. The supervisor was helpless with no radio. Big questions need answering as stewarding of ES at Millwall match felt less than two previous home matches. Why weren't stewards and police moved there after the trouble with Millwall fans in home section when one jumped back into JS. Does anyone know how many police and stewards were employed? Whoever was in charge clearly went absent.
I fear that the club may now keep the Bartram gates closed permanently, it only being opened in emergencies.
The Bertrand gate was not the issue here. 2 sets of opposing fans decided to ‘clash’ either side of that fence. This could happen again regardless of the Bartran gate was open or not
1 The club are to blame for not having enough police inside the ground.
2 The police told Charlton regards the security arrangements outside and we had no say in the matter.
3 If the spanners were kept in after the game hopefully things would have gone smoothly for Charlton fans exiting the ground and making their way home etc.
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.
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
I have watched the clip the supervisor had no radio, I thought so at the time I have sat in same seat in East Stand since it opened in 1994 and used the Bartrum exit mostly during this period, never have i seen any trouble at this exit. I choose Sam Bartrum exit as its quietest & I can get back to my car in 5 mins. I avoid the train now as its such a disorganised mess after matchs, when station staff lock the gate onto the station platform it has felt dangerous after certain matches with the crush and mixing of home and away fans. At the Millwall match on Saturday, I left with my son and his two mates (27yrs) and we arrived a minute or so before the Millwall thugs forced the gate by rocking it back and forth, those two young stewards went way beyond their job spec trying to hold the gate. The supervisor was helpless with no radio. Big questions need answering as stewarding of ES at Millwall match felt less than two previous home matches. Why weren't stewards and police moved there after the trouble with Millwall fans in home section when one jumped back into JS. Does anyone know how many police and stewards were employed? Whoever was in charge clearly went absent.
I fear that the club may now keep the Bartram gates closed permanently, it only being opened in emergencies.
Which would be the most ridiculous of outcomes. A large number of the East Stand who use that exit are elderly and do so because they can’t easily deal with the hills involved
Someone posted earlier that only a couple of hundred or so use it on an on going bassis.
I have watched the clip the supervisor had no radio, I thought so at the time I have sat in same seat in East Stand since it opened in 1994 and used the Bartrum exit mostly during this period, never have i seen any trouble at this exit. I choose Sam Bartrum exit as its quietest & I can get back to my car in 5 mins. I avoid the train now as its such a disorganised mess after matchs, when station staff lock the gate onto the station platform it has felt dangerous after certain matches with the crush and mixing of home and away fans. At the Millwall match on Saturday, I left with my son and his two mates (27yrs) and we arrived a minute or so before the Millwall thugs forced the gate by rocking it back and forth, those two young stewards went way beyond their job spec trying to hold the gate. The supervisor was helpless with no radio. Big questions need answering as stewarding of ES at Millwall match felt less than two previous home matches. Why weren't stewards and police moved there after the trouble with Millwall fans in home section when one jumped back into JS. Does anyone know how many police and stewards were employed? Whoever was in charge clearly went absent.
I fear that the club may now keep the Bartram gates closed permanently, it only being opened in emergencies.
Which would be the most ridiculous of outcomes. A large number of the East Stand who use that exit are elderly and do so because they can’t easily deal with the hills involved
Someone posted earlier that only a couple of hundred or so use it on an on going bassis.
That would be for entry. More people use it as an exit.
Comments
be based on the fact it’s the second time now.
I have no doubt what you say about the supervisor is right. And yes, having regular, able staff is a huge plus for any stewarding operation. So fair play to him for what you highlight he has done in the past.
As you say, my observations are based admittedly on a short video clip that doesn't show the full picture. But from what I can see, the supervisor had two choices - take control of the situation (which in fairness he had no chance of doing faced by that mob) or get urgent assistance. If he had no radio, and he had to get to an emergency phone or find someone with a radio, then I understand why he went out of view in the clip. But in doing so, he has left those two young stewards to face the music and they could have taken a serious hiding.
Something has gone seriously wrong here between the supervisor and the control room. If the supervisor had no radio, why was he not provided with one by the club/his company (not sure if the stewarding is controlled in-house); if he had a radio, did he request assistance and if so, why didn't it come? And much more importantly - and this is far more important than what the supervisor may or may not have done - why did the safety officer and the gold controller in the control room not see what was happening?; and if they did, why on earth didn't they get urgent police /response team assistance to the area?
One final thing. In an earlier post you refer to the response teams as "bully boys". I'm not going to deny I've met over the years a few people who do like to throw their weight about. But the vast majority of guys I work with are decent guys who are just trying to do a difficult job and keep everyone safe. (In fact, if you don't have police in the ground their role is vital). Believe me when I say trying to deal with pissed up or coked up guys (in some cases both) is not easy and these response teams sometimes need to say more than please to get these peoples attention.
Right definitely my last post until we get a full response from the club.
@Fortune 82nd Minute I wasn’t looking to be critical of your input so apologies if you interpreted it as that. Just wasn’t sure of comments suggesting the supervisor had walked away leaving them to it when that may not have been the case. Having watched the YouTube vid again where people are being attacked on the stairs, you can see that supervisor in green still there in the bottom left corner next to the 0.55 potentially operating a phone box? (and probably crapping themselves).
I have sat in same seat in East Stand since it opened in 1994 and used the Bartrum exit mostly during this period, never have i seen any trouble at this exit.
I choose Sam Bartrum exit as its quietest & I can get back to my car in 5 mins. I avoid the train now as its such a disorganised mess after matchs, when station staff lock the gate onto the station platform it has felt dangerous after certain matches with the crush and mixing of home and away fans.
At the Millwall match on Saturday, I left with my son and his two mates (27yrs) and we arrived a minute or so before the Millwall thugs forced the gate by rocking it back and forth, those two young stewards went way beyond their job spec trying to hold the gate. The supervisor was helpless with no radio.
Big questions need answering as stewarding of ES at Millwall match felt less than two previous home matches. Why weren't stewards and police moved there after the trouble with Millwall fans in home section when one jumped back into JS.
Does anyone know how many police and stewards were employed?
Whoever was in charge clearly went absent.
Nathan has said we're in it together on a journey... Nathan, coaches, players and us the fans are we are all invested but is the club hierachy who appear to have a disregard for us fans who have been through thick and thin with charlton over the years......that is only conclusion one can make with zero communication?
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).
Apologies, an email was received covering the same incident. I'm an old man and easily confused!
The message they are sending by remaining silent is that this does not matter to them. It is damaging over and above the original problems.
Airman i miss VOTV this was just the voice we fans miss...you saying it as it is ......
Which would be the most ridiculous of outcomes. A large number of the East Stand who use that exit are elderly and do so because they can’t easily deal with the hills involved
1 The club are to blame for not having enough police inside the ground.
2 The police told Charlton regards the security arrangements outside and we had no say in the matter.
3 If the spanners were kept in after the game hopefully things would have gone smoothly for Charlton fans exiting the ground and making their way home etc.
Don't really know what the answer is but the OB need to up their game next time.