Just fook off Im trying to watch ssn and have a relaxing beer and no I don't want a sticker. Sorry rant over

The police were prepared for a crowd reflecting the number of tickets sold. In hindsight - a terrible misjudgment, but as someone else stated earlier in the thread - it isnt fair to judge the tactics of that time by today's standards - many of which were created as a result of Hillsbrough itself.

 

The police weren't prepared at all. They would have struggled to contain a crowd a fraction of that size. Their 'tactics' were none existent. You don't even need to judge police tactics that day by today's standards. You could just compare them by the standards of the year before, when the same two teams had met at the same ground and the police had handled it properly.

This of course isn't true but look how Bradford carry themselves with dignity.

 

Bump.

 

 

(I don't know why I clicked on this thread)

Does that mean the litter-bugs are responsible for Bradford ??

No. Chain of events, wooden stand, litter, lack of bins, smokers etc. there is no absolute responsibility. It's a tragedy. Like Hillsborough. Mourn the innocent victims, with dignity.

and heysel. inquest determined it was joint responsibility i.e. fans/stadium/police

The police weren't prepared at all. They would have struggled to contain a crowd a fraction of that size. Their 'tactics' were none existent. You don't even need to judge police tactics that day by today's standards. You could just compare them by the standards of the year before, when the same two teams had met at the same ground and the police had handled it properly.

 

 

I gave Tyler a +1. If I could give you a minus one I would.

 

You maintain that no Liverpool supporter has any responsibility for what happened? Incredible.

 

 

 

Do you know how many fans turned up without tickets because i don't. The report was compiled by people with access to ALL the evidence and they deemed that part of it to be an insignificant factor in the disaster.

 

.

Don't think that bit is true. I think it said that that event on its own was not enough to cause the disaster but had a contributing factor.

 

Id have another look at the report if i could be arsed.

Does that mean the litter-bugs are responsible for Bradford ??

In a small way yes as was whoever thought building a stand out of wood was a good idea.

 

We don't build them in wood now because we know it burns to easily.

 

If it wasn't made of wood it wouldn't have happened. If smoking wasn't allowed it wouldn't have happened.

 

Difference is I don't recall Bradford fans denying any of the above.

In a small way yes as was whoever thought building a stand out of wood was a good idea.

 

We don't build them in wood now because we know it burns to easily.

 

If it wasn't made of wood it wouldn't have happened. If smoking wasn't allowed it wouldn't have happened.

 

Difference is I don't recall Bradford fans denying any of the above.

 

 

Did the police or ambulance service make stories up, lie and cover up anything they did ?

It amazes me that even though the Hillsborough Report is online for anybody who 'could be arsed' to read it, there are still some people who refuse to accept that the supporters were absolved of blame.

 

Here's the introduction to the relevant section. Each point is then covered in detail in a series of further subsections. Note the words 'unsubtantiated allegations' in the section title:

 

 

Chapter 12. Behind the headlines: the origins, promotion and reproduction of unsubstantiated allegations 

 

In the days after the disaster the media, particularly the press, published allegations and counter-allegations apportioning blame. This came to a head on 19 April when a number of newspapers, The Sun being the most prominent, reported serious allegations about the behaviour of Liverpool fans before and during the unfolding tragedy. The documents disclosed to the Panel show that the origin of these serious allegations was a local Sheffield press agency informed by several SYP officers, an SYP Police Federation spokesperson and a local MP. They also demonstrate how the SYP Police Federation, supported informally by the SYP Chief Constable, sought to develop and publicise a version of events that focused on several police officers’ allegations of drunkenness, ticketlessness and violence among a large number of Liverpool fans. This extended beyond the media to Parliament. Yet, from the mass of documents, television and CCTV coverage disclosed to the Panel there is no evidence to support these allegations other than a few isolated examples of aggressive or verbally abusive behaviour clearly reflecting frustration and desperation. 

 

— Lord Justice Taylor’s Interim Report condemned the evidence and testimony of senior police officers and rejected as exaggerated the allegations made against Liverpool fans. He stated categorically that fans’ behaviour played no part in the disaster.

 

— Consistent with Lord Justice Taylor’s findings, the Panel found no evidence among the vast number of disclosed documents and many hours of video material to verify the serious allegations of exceptional levels of drunkenness, ticketlessness or violence among Liverpool fans. There was no evidence that fans had conspired to arrive late at the stadium and force entry

 

 

It really can't be any plainer than that can it?

What a sheep.

 

It also says 'The Sun' on top of the paper they despise so much. You don't actually believe that that's the Sun do you?

 

It amazes me that even though the Hillsborough Report is online for anybody who 'could be arsed' to read it, there are still some people who refuse to accept that the supporters were absolved of blame.

 

 

 

It amazes me that you're that bothered, and are prepared to argue the toss with people who clearly aren't going to change their minds.

 

There was no evidence that fans had conspired to arrive late at the stadium and force entry

 

 

It really can't be any plainer than that can it?

 

 

Well yeah, it can. There was no evidence that fans had conspired to arrive late. This means a couple of things really.

 

- The fans didn't conspire to arrive late. Whoopy do. They didn't conspire to arrive late, but perhaps, just maybe, they DID arrive live, and en mass, and force entry. Just because it wasn't conspired doesn't mean it didn't happen.

- Furthermore, there is no evidence. Again, that doesn't mean it didn't happen. It just means that there was no evidence it happened.

 

Please never be on a jury.

Good to see they learnt their lesson though innit?

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-459708/Ticket-stealing-Liverpool-fans-branded-worst-Europe-UEFA.html

Also seems to be very ones else fault except those with out tickets, I see a recuring theme 

Was there that day in the Forest end with mates. Two recollections stick in memory:

 

1) Arrived at 11am - streets behind Forest end largely empty, streets behind Liverpool end busy, with folks sat out drinking cans in the sun (not wrong in that)

 

2) 2.30pm in ground - Forest end practically full, Liverpool end practically empty.

 

As others more than said many causes of this, but hard to believe the above didn't contribute.....

Any excuse to jump on the scousers, no matter the fachhhts.

 

If it would have been Scousers invovled in a fire, it would some how be their fault.

 

Bollocks.

 

Utter bollocks.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXRp3qzEPiI

Well yeah, it can. There was no evidence that fans had conspired to arrive late. This means a couple of things really.

 

- The fans didn't conspire to arrive late. Whoopy do. They didn't conspire to arrive late, but perhaps, just maybe, they DID arrive live, and en mass, and force entry. Just because it wasn't conspired doesn't mean it didn't happen.

- Furthermore, there is no evidence. Again, that doesn't mean it didn't happen. It just means that there was no evidence it happened.

 

Please never be on a jury.

 

 

So you'd be happy to stand trial on the basis that even if there was no evidence whatsoever against you, you could still be convicted because a lack of evidence would be no indication that you were innocent?

 

So you'd be happy to stand trial on the basis that even if there was no evidence whatsoever against you, you could still be convicted because a lack of evidence would be no indication that you were innocent?

 

 

Number 1, I'd never stand trial.

Number 2, I think "innocent until proven guilty" is utter bollocks, and has seen MANY turd-stains released on mere technicalities and lack of evidence.

Did the police or ambulance service make stories up, lie and cover up anything they did ?

 

Would it have made a difference?

 

It amazes me that even though the Hillsborough Report is online for anybody who 'could be arsed' to read it, there are still some people who refuse to accept that the supporters were absolved of blame.

 

 

 

It really can't be any plainer than that can it?

 

At your request, or maybe because you allege that people read it and fail to believe it, I took a look.

 

First page I read was the biography page of those who made up the panel.

 

I just skimmed the facts but of the first 4 I looked at, three worked or were born in Liverpool and one was a solicitor specialising in taking on public services in lawsuits. That's hardly an independant panel in my book and I closed the page, deciding it found details to suit their own agenda.

Would it have made a difference?

 

Absolutely.

 

The shambles with the ambulances queueing up outside the ground when many lives could have been saved if they had had a sensibly conducted operation.

The sight which lives forever of young scousers ripping up advertising hoarding to create makeshift stretchers, while police stood around in utter confusion, receceiving no leadership.

The police change in senior responsibilities took away the man with all the relevant experience and so someone with 3 weeks in position had the semi as his first major football operation. A month's delay in implementing the change may well have avoided the whole incident.

 

But if you wish to believe otherwise that is your privilege.

First page I read was the biography page of those who made up the panel.

 

I just skimmed the facts but of the first 4 I looked at, three worked or were born in Liverpool and one was a solicitor specialising in taking on public services in lawsuits. That's hardly an independant panel in my book and I closed the page, deciding it found details to suit their own agenda.

 

Lord Justice Taylor complied the Interim Report which reached the same conclusion. Was he born in Liverpool as well?

I did think it most inappropriate for the bishop of Liverpool to be involved. As I recall, some if his statements were highly emotive. It really shouldn't have been something he should've got involved with if he was going purport to be impartial, which he did.

no bishop bashing, please