Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Uncle Globnasty]

The Police lies are the worst thing, they got it very wrong on the day, someone made a massive mistake. Nothing can change what happened that day, I remember it vividly as I was away with mates for the weekend and the issue was much discussed that night in the pub. There was thing about scousers being this and that but we are all people and such blanket condemnation is crap. Football was in a state back then, but public order is and was a Police matter. Any club you could name back then had fans who given the chance would have gone in for free. Would that be different today I ask? Justice is now partially done.

That doesn't make it alright though. The lion's share of the blame must be taken by the South Yorks police force and in particular the senior officers responsible for decisions taken before and on that fateful day. However, I think it is the fact that Liverpool supporters were exempted from any blame for what happened that day that many have difficulty with. It can be safely said that those who so sadly lost their lives were blameless, but I don't think you can say that no other Liverpool supporters contributed to the problems that day.

[MarpleAlty]

I almost didn't want to post this - the 96 innocent dead should finally be allowed to rest in peace - but...

http://www.forest.vitalfootball.co.uk/forum/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=32146&start=1

Eyewitness accounts from a number of Forest fans who were there on that disastrous day make for some interesting reading.

I have to admit the answer about the fans being fully exonerated fills me with some discomfort, but at this stage, for the sake of the families of those who lost their lives (and the taxpayers' millions), any other answer would have been unthinkable.

None of this should detract from the fact that the police cover-up was arguably the biggest scandal we'll likely ever know in football.

#JFT96

why have you posted this?

To start a topic. It's what you generally do on a forum.

[B. 4D]

Why did the FA allow a game to be played on a ground with no H&S certificate? As reported.
We got docked 18 points for not having the correct paper work !!!!

I guess that's OK for the FA, but not for others.

[hsmith1]

i think the jury had no option but to find the fans blameless,they had to answer the question,do you think the fans were to blame,so they had to answer No because the 96 that died were blameless,there should have been a question do you think that the fans that turned up without tickets contributed to the problems,in which case i think the answer would have been yes

[taxi Phil]

The bottom line here is the patent dishonesty of South Yorkshire Police. Their history isn't good (Orgreave, rhino whips to name but two). They try to cover stuff up, and get repeatedly found out.....look at the Rotherham grooming scandal for example.

And I await with great interest the findings of the enquiry into links with Freemasonry.

[Malty G]

I think this should disabuse anyone of the notion that the fans outside were to blame.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-35473732

Also David Conn's article as posted by Cult earlier.

On the point of jury members fearing that they would be cowed into compliance. It was a majority verdict and not unanimous.

[Ballers]

It goes to show how coloured people's minds are by the original coverage, notwithstanding the fact we are very near Manchester.

I'll repeat again, they've investigated the original allegations and found them groundless - and in the context of the time - i.e. It was a gradual building up in a bottleneck rather than a tanked up mob storming the barricades.

Following some of the 'logic' on here, if more than one person turned up at a football ground they would be responsible for any crush that occurred.

If the report had found there were many highly drunk football fans fighting a la Heysel and causing the crush then they would say so.

I'm not overly in love with Liverpool or scousers in general but I'm sick of sitting at work and hearing people around me going on about this having never ever been to a football match in their life, let alone the 80s or early 90s...

[GB Alty]

It goes to show how coloured people's minds are by the original coverage, notwithstanding the fact we are very near Manchester.

I'll repeat again, they've investigated the original allegations and found them groundless - and in the context of the time - i.e. It was a gradual building up in a bottleneck rather than a tanked up mob storming the barricades.

Following some of the 'logic' on here, if more than one person turned up at a football ground they would be responsible for any crush that occurred.

If the report had found there were many highly drunk football fans fighting a la Heysel and causing the crush then they would say so.

I'm not overly in love with Liverpool or scousers in general but I'm sick of sitting at work and hearing people around me going on about this having never ever been to a football match in their life, let alone the 80s or early 90s...

Excellent post Ballers, some of the posts on here are shameful

[CR1]

Well said Ballers...this transcends mere Manchester / Liverpool rivalry.

[B. 4D]

i think the jury had no option but to find the fans blameless,they had to answer the question,do you think the fans were to blame,so they had to answer No because the 96 that died were blameless,there should have been a question do you think that the fans that turned up without tickets contributed to the problems,in which case i think the answer would have been yes

Harold,
I hope that was a tongue in cheek comment!!!!

[MarpleAlty]

Apologies if my original post has offended anyone - as someone born '86 and too young to remember it first time round, it was quite shocking to see how some Forest fans felt.

It's obvious that the spectre of Heysel hanging over this exacerbated the problem.

Would ANY set of fans have died in that end that day, owing to police decisions (which were then inexplicably covered up)? The answer, of course, is yes. It just happened to be Liverpool that day.

[Mick]

i think the jury had no option but to find the fans blameless,they had to answer the question,do you think the fans were to blame,so they had to answer No because the 96 that died were blameless,there should have been a question do you think that the fans that turned up without tickets contributed to the problems,in which case i think the answer would have been yes

Too many people Still preferring to believe what they read twenty odd years ago or heard coming out of the mouths of senior policemen and politicians - how naive

What evidence was provided to establish that people had no tickets - answer = none

If some did, then so what - should have been sorted 200 metres away on Penistone Rd before directing into a bottleneck

[Number23]

i think the jury had no option but to find the fans blameless,they had to answer the question,do you think the fans were to blame,so they had to answer No because the 96 that died were blameless,there should have been a question do you think that the fans that turned up without tickets contributed to the problems,in which case i think the answer would have been yes

There almost certainly were fans without tickets as there were and still are at every big match and there were almost certainly touts outside selling tickets as there always were.
The issue was the control /  policing of those crowds of people outside which was very predictable. You can't blame the fans for the police / ground supervisors or whoever deciding to let those people into the ground with tragic results.
If you were outside a ground with or without a ticket, the match about to start, and a gate was opened by people in a position of responsibility would you have gone in or walked away?

You can't get away from the fact that decision and the subsequent response by the authorities contributed by far the most to the deaths. That would be bad enough if it were just a series of tragic errors of judgement but they then tried to cover it up and were aided and abetted by the press.

[hsmith1]

i never said that the decision to open the gate was right or wrong.It was the wrong decision that did lead up to the people outside rushing in and then trying to get onto the terraces that were already full.with people who had a right to be there.I thought the inquiry was to cover all aspects of that sad day.I totally agree that the police behaviour was a disgrace and the cover up was also.Remember that policing football was very different then and the fencing was there for a reason,having said that the police got it wrong.If i am not mistaken the government also aided in the cover up(the police could do no wrong back then)