Hillsborough Disaster

[jaffka]

Not having it

Why did the police open the gates

Devilment?

For a laugh?

Read the Taylor Report. Seriously. The chain of causation is pretty long and complex. The 'simple' reason for opening the gates were because a dangerous crush was developing outside the ground in the bottleneck area of the Leppings Lane.

Why was that? Well, for a lot of reasons (and this isn't an exhaustive list, but some of the reasons I can come up with off the top of my head).

Because the police had refused requests to delay the kick-off to allow fans to enter more slowly and thus avoid some of the desperation of people to get in before kick-off.

Because the police hadn't set up filtering systems that had been in place at previous semi-finals at Hillsborough to manage the arrival of fans at the Leppings Lane end, leading to the crush outside.

Because the police didn't notice that the crush was building up in enough time to take any other course of action.

Because there weren't enough turnstiles at that end of the ground to deal with the number of fans it was required to admit.

Because Liverpool, despite having more fans, were given the 'wrong' end of the stadium, with far fewer turnstiles per number of tickets.

Because lessons hadn't been learned from previous events at the ground at which crushes had developed.

Because the match commander had no experience of events at the ground.

Because Police in the 1980s saw fans as hooligans rather than as fans.

Largely it was because the police in charge made a mistake, that they later compounded with other mistakes which they immediately tried to cover up with lies.

why are you here?

why not go to some doom mongering scouse forum where you can all be blameless?

[blurred]

You're missing one... It's do with people not having tickets, yet gaining entry to the stadium. Did this happen? Simple yes or no.

No. Or rather, let me explain thus.

The official Health and Safety Executive report gives a best estimate of 9734 people having been admitted into the Leppings Lane End by 3.05pm on the day of the disaster (having literally counted by watching it on CCTV footage, whether through the turnstile or through the opened gate).

96 people died in a stadium despite the number of people present in that part of the stadium being some 400 under the official capacity of the stand at the time of the disaster. Can we please stop this 'ticketless fans' bullshit. It's offensive, as well as factually wrong.

An interesting fact about Hillsborough, for those that don't know - there were 7 turnstiles at the Leppings Lane End, to cope with a capacity of 10,100 fans. The opposite Kop end, by comparison, had 42 turnstiles for 21,000 fans. The average capacity of each turnstile was around 600 people per hour (or, to put it another way, one person through each turnstile every 5 seconds if ther were no delays and it was working properly).

To fill the Leppings Lane End to capacity, assuming that all the turnstiles were operating at maximum efficiency all the time (one person every 4 seconds), would take just under 2 hours.

By contrast, you could fill the opposite end of the ground in around 50 minutes.

[TANGODANCER]

However on reflection when one looks at the facts and todays report it becomes clear that being drunk, ticketless or climbing over turnstiles had little contribution to the deaths at Hillsborough. Indeed most of those behavioural problems were present in 1946 at the Burnden disaster but I do not recall any negative press directed at the bolton or stoke fans that day.

Not to detract from the thread, but just to correct that a little Benn: Yes, crazy overcrowding caused the disaster, but there were no tickets back then and people climbed in from everywhere,over gates, walls and stands and over the railway etc etc. This is from records, not me being there, but one thing I can add, this was 1946, one year after World War II ended. I was seven at the time and folk couldn't afford to pay the rent or buy enought food. Being drunk just wasn't an option, nobody could afford it. The rest, yes, but certainly not that.

Continue.

[Verbal]

The police errors occured because of the late-comers, many pissed, a good number ticketless, who caused panic outside & the police & stewards wrongly, but for what they thought were good reasons & opened gates leading to the horrific crushing.

Except the Taylor Report completely dismissed that idea, didn't it. There was also an accident on the motorway that day giving a legimate reason for many to be be late. This is from the Interim Report:

has become a fact of football life that fans do turn up at all-ticket matches without tickets. It is not possible to give an accurate figure or even a reliable estimate of the number without tickets on 15 April. Police estimates varied from about 200 to about 2,000. There were certainly frequent requests for tickets or "spares" during the hours before the build-up. Many of those warned off by the police were seen to return to the area. Some were hanging about on the bridge. Again, however, the police witnesses who most impressed me did not consider the number of ticketless fans to be inordinately large. This accords with two other sources of evidence.
201. First, there was a wide range of witnesses who observed inside the ground that the Liverpool end was at a late stage well below capacity save for pens 3 and 4. The north stand still had many empty seats and the wing pens were sparse. The match being a sell-out, there were clearly many ticket holders to come and they could account for the large crowd still outside the turnstiles. Had the Liverpool accommodation been full by 2.40 pm, one could have inferred that most or much of the large crowd outside lacked tickets.
202. Secondly, such figures as are available from the Club's electronic monitoring system and from analyses by the HSE suggest that no great number entered without tickets. They show that the number who passed through turnstiles A to G plus those who entered through gate C roughly equalled the terrace capacity figure of 10,100 for which tickets had been sold. The Club's record showed 7,038 passed through turnstiles A to G. However, the counting mechanism on turnstile G was defective, so the HSE did a study using the video film and projecting figures from the other turnstiles. This gave an assessment of 7,494, with a maximum of 7,644 passing through A to G. Again, using the video, the HSE assessed the number who entered the ground whilst gate C was open at 2,240 with a maximum of 2,480. Accordingly, the HSE's best estimate of the total entering through gate C and turnstiles A to G was 9,734 with a maximum of 10,124. I recognise that these can only be rough checks because, for example, some with terrace tickets were allowed through turnstiles 1 to 16 and there would be other similar factors which have not formed part of the assessment. Nevertheless, the figures do suggest that there was not a very significant body of ticketless fans in the crowd which built up.
....
208. I have already found that there was not an abnormally large number of fans without tickets on this occasion. With one or two exceptions, the police witnesses themselves did not subscribe to the "conspiracy" theory. I am satisfied that the large concentration at Leppings Lane from 2.30 pm to 2.50 pm did not arrive as a result of any concerted plan. There were, I accept, small groups without tickets who were willing to exploit any adventitious chance of getting into the ground. They, together with the minority who had drunk too much, certainly aggravated the problem faced by the police. But that main problem was simply one of large numbers packed into the small area outside the turnstiles.

Reading this thread has been quite alarming. Myths and prejudices still being perpetuated. Police were under prepared, yes. a few drunks, yes (as it says in the interim report up there ^ - also subquestions, was a) people turning up to games ticketless a common occurrence in the 80s and b) did Liverpool fans have a 'reputation' among police and other fans after Heysel?). A completel failure to communicate with fans or each other by the police, aye. All these factors exarcerbated the problem of congestion outside the turnstiles.

But criminal checks being done on victims, unnecessary and unrecorded blood-alcohol being taken on victims (alive and dead,) senior police figures editing and doctoring junior officers' reports intended for the Taylor Report to put the south yorkshire police in a more positive lgiht...this isn't something you can just dismiss. Even for the most ardent cynic it is sobering reading at the very least. It'll take a while to digest.

[benn]

However on reflection when one looks at the facts and todays report it becomes clear that being drunk, ticketless or climbing over turnstiles had little contribution to the deaths at Hillsborough. Indeed most of those behavioural problems were present in 1946 at the Burnden disaster but I do not recall any negative press directed at the bolton or stoke fans that day.

Not to detract from the thread, but just to correct that a little Benn: Yes, crazy overcrowding caused the disaster, but there were no tickets back then and people climbed in from everywhere,over gates, walls and stands and over the railway etc etc. This is from records, not me being there, but one thing I can add, this was 1946, one year after World War II ended. I was seven at the time and folk couldn't afford to pay the rent or buy enought food. Being drunk just wasn't an option, nobody could afford it. The rest, yes, but certainly not that.

Continue.

sorry if I inferred they were ticketless, but the turnstiles on the embankment were closed 20 mins bfore kick off and as you say people continued to clamber in over from every where over the next 40 mins.

however I think you are being a little niaive to think that most of those blokes (and they were working class blokes) had could not afford a pint or two before the game, there were many more pubs and breweries in bolton in those days and relatively speaking beer was cheaper. I would go on to say they were no more or no less inebriated than the liverpool fans.

[CAPSLOCK]

You're missing one... It's do with people not having tickets, yet gaining entry to the stadium. Did this happen? Simple yes or no.

No. Or rather, let me explain thus.

The official Health and Safety Executive report gives a best estimate of 9734 people having been admitted into the Leppings Lane End by 3.05pm on the day of the disaster (having literally counted by watching it on CCTV footage, whether through the turnstile or through the opened gate).

96 people died in a stadium despite the number of people present in that part of the stadium being some 400 under the official capacity of the stand at the time of the disaster. Can we please stop this 'ticketless fans' bullshit. It's offensive, as well as factually wrong.

An interesting fact about Hillsborough, for those that don't know - there were 7 turnstiles at the Leppings Lane End, to cope with a capacity of 10,100 fans. The opposite Kop end, by comparison, had 42 turnstiles for 21,000 fans. The average capacity of each turnstile was around 600 people per hour (or, to put it another way, one person through each turnstile every 5 seconds if ther were no delays and it was working properly).

To fill the Leppings Lane End to capacity, assuming that all the turnstiles were operating at maximum efficiency all the time (one person every 4 seconds), would take just under 2 hours.

By contrast, you could fill the opposite end of the ground in around 50 minutes.

Righto...

I won't be reading the report as I can't be arsed...see, I'm not bothered went on, as it happens

Not to say I don't care that many innocents died, but I don't care why

It's just the way I am

However, let's try this one

Do we know that 'the crush' outside - I'm assuming there was a crush, hence PC Plod opening the gates to relieve what they considered to be a potentially dangerous situation - didn't include any pissed up scum with/without tickets?

See, I'm not having it there won't some pisscans about

There always are

Always

Do we also assume that there weren't forged tickets about, thus causing folk outside to fear they wouldn't get in?

[benn]

I won't be reading the report as I can't be arsed...see, I'm not bothered went on, as it happens

Not to say I don't care that many innocents died, but I don't care why

It's just the way I am

However, let's try this one

Do we know that 'the crush' outside - I'm assuming there was a crush, hence PC Plod opening the gates to relieve what they considered to be a potentially dangerous situation - didn't include any pissed up scum with/without tickets?

See, I'm not having it there won't some pisscans about

There always are

Always

Do we also assume that there weren't forged tickets about, thus causing folk outside to fear they wouldn't get in?

it seems then if i interpret correctly you cant be arsed reading the report as you probably know it will contradict everything you want to believe in your steotypical view of scousers. it seems you dislike its findings.

Yes there were pisscans, yes there were ticketless, yes there was a crush. now I could tick these three boxes for many a bwfc big game i've attended this last 40 years. So why is it in your opinion is this the cause? is it only scousers who did those sort of things at big games in the 70's and 80s?

[blurred]

Righto...

I won't be reading the report as I can't be arsed...see, I'm not bothered went on, as it happens

Not to say I don't care that many innocents died, but I don't care why

It's just the way I am

However, let's try this one

Do we know that 'the crush' outside - I'm assuming there was a crush, hence PC Plod opening the gates to relieve what they considered to be a potentially dangerous situation - didn't include any pissed up scum with/without tickets?

See, I'm not having it there won't some pisscans about

There always are

Always

Do we also assume that there weren't forged tickets about, thus causing folk outside to fear they wouldn't get in?

Those who were outside in the crush got in when the gate was opened. We know (as best as we can, thanks to the HSE) how many got into the ground. There weren't thousands outside the ground when the crush was happening, so whether or not there were ticketless fans there, there weren't more people in/around the ground than there should have been. Neither is there mention of numbers of forged tickets and fear that spectators wouldn't get in.

Put it this way - the stand held 10,000 (give or take) and there were 10,000 people there (give or take). If the latter was significantly larger than the former that would offer up an obvious possible root cause of the disaster, that it overcrowded because too many people got in, some of whom must have been there through nefarious means. As it happens, the numbers there equalled the amount the stand was supposed to safely hold, and so any mention of ticketless fans is pointless, and therefore because there weren't thousands of extra supporters or more people admitted to the area than should have been it's not ticketless/marauding fans who caused the disaster.

The reasons are many and complex, and any number of things could have been done to lessen the tragedy - the simple act of closing off access to the central pens, as should have been done, for instance, would've meant that the side pens would have filled up more evenly and would've massively reduced any potential crush. But that's not to say that the failure to close off the central pens was the reason people died - a huge chain of events going back to the awarding of the semi-final to Hillsborough and the fact that the ground didn't have a valid safety certificate led to the disaster. For 23 years the narrative has largely been, thanks to the popular press, that it was the fans' fault. Hopefully now all these documents are in the public domain people will begin to realise the lies that were told, and begin to understand what really happened.

[Harry Genshaw]

why are you here?

why not go to some doom mongering scouse forum where you can all be blameless?

Yes. How dare he post in 'other footy' on a thread about the Hillsborough Disaster?

[jaffka]

why are you here?

why not go to some doom mongering scouse forum where you can all be blameless?

Yes. How dare he post in 'other footy' on a thread about the Hillsborough Disaster?

I call it righteous clap trap, if he seek absolution then he comes to the wrong place...alright with you????

[Harry Genshaw]

why are you here?

why not go to some doom mongering scouse forum where you can all be blameless?

Yes. How dare he post in 'other footy' on a thread about the Hillsborough Disaster?

I call it righteous clap trap, if he seek absolution then he comes to the wrong place...alright with you????

Not sure what this clap trap is you speak of, but if some folk still cant see whats been made pretty obvious today then there's no hope for em/you

[Verbal]

Some pretty damning stuff has come out today indicating the police were systematically trying to cover up failures on their part and shift blame on to fans. It's quite a talking point, jaffka.

[jaffka]

Come on here telling people to f*ck off, oh yeah great way to get your point across.

You see Genshaw just like Caps I dont give a feck and had quite enough of this sh*te being pointlessly brought up.

I have a view which differs from what is trying to be rammed down my throat, having experienced scouse shi*te supporters up front and personal I refuse to believe that they are completely absoloved of any sin.

[Harry Genshaw]

Jaffka I can only go back to a point I made earlier that some folk are letting their hatred of all things Scouse, cloud their judgement on this.

If you dont give a feck, fair enough. I think you should cos it could have been any of us and genuinely, I hope you or anyone on here doesn't ever have to go through what those families went through.

[blurred]

Come on here telling people to f*ck off, oh yeah great way to get your point across.

Someone continuing to peddle lies that were put right 23 years ago and have been publically put right many times since, and saying that the systematic police and establishment cover-ups were 'understandable' probably deserves to be told to f*ck off. It's insulting and ignorant in the extreme. Those who've asked questions or discussed things in a reasonable manner have been responded to reasonably and in good enough grace.

[jaffka]

Come on here telling people to f*ck off, oh yeah great way to get your point across.

Someone continuing to peddle lies that were put right 23 years ago and have been publically put right many times since, and saying that the systematic police and establishment cover-ups were 'understandable' probably deserves to be told to f*ck off. It's insulting and ignorant in the extreme.

Well put me in that bracket as well then, nothing has changed for me with what I believe.

Have the courage of your convictions then and continue to tell all others, just like me, who dare to disagree to f**k off.

[thebish]

why are you here?

why not go to some doom mongering scouse forum where you can all be blameless?

don't understand this - why shouldn't blurred be here? he's been a part of this forum on and off for years.

[Verbal]

Come on here telling people to f*ck off, oh yeah great way to get your point across.

Someone continuing to peddle lies that were put right 23 years ago and have been publically put right many times since, and saying that the systematic police and establishment cover-ups were 'understandable' probably deserves to be told to f*ck off. It's insulting and ignorant in the extreme.

Well put me in that bracket as well then, nothing has changed for me with what I believe.

Have the courage of your convictions then and continue to tell all others, just like me, who dare to disagree to f**k off.

[jaffka]

why are you here?

why not go to some doom mongering scouse forum where you can all be blameless?

don't understand this - why shouldn't blurred be here? he's been a part of this forum on and off for years.

telling people to f*ck off for having the audacity to disagree with him and have their own view, read back...

[blurred]

Well put me in that bracket as well then, nothing has changed for me with what I believe.

Have the courage of your convictions then and continue to tell all others, just like me, who dare to disagree to f**k off.

What, exactly, do you 'disagree' with? Which facts do you dispute, and why?