The Hillsborough Disaster Files
- Thread starter Liquid
- 128 comments
- 13,467 views
- 4,231
- UK
I'm going to be a bit controversial with my opinion (and that's all it is, my opinion). I really don't mean to cause offence, but I think some of the crowd could be a tiny bit to blame (though it pales in comparison to the amount of blame, I feel towards the other parties involved/actions taken).
When I've been in a large crowd before, I do tend to become a bit selfish in my thoughts and actions.. If there's a gap in front of me, I close that gap, out of fear of someone else - from behind- jumping into the open space, I haven't done it all the time, but it depends what i'm queuing for. Which, when you think about it is actually quite dangerous, depending on the density of the crowd (1 square metre occupied by 4 people is considered unsafe).
I know it's probably wrong for me to compare what others may do/may have done, based on my own experiences, but when I've been in large crowds before, queuing for something, I've noticed others around me doing the same thing. All it takes is someone tripping over, for something to turn into a bad situation, quite quickly.
When I've been in a large crowd before, I do tend to become a bit selfish in my thoughts and actions.. If there's a gap in front of me, I close that gap, out of fear of someone else - from behind- jumping into the open space, I haven't done it all the time, but it depends what i'm queuing for. Which, when you think about it is actually quite dangerous, depending on the density of the crowd (1 square metre occupied by 4 people is considered unsafe).
I know it's probably wrong for me to compare what others may do/may have done, based on my own experiences, but when I've been in large crowds before, queuing for something, I've noticed others around me doing the same thing. All it takes is someone tripping over, for something to turn into a bad situation, quite quickly.
- 87,514
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Okay, now you've got the concept of evidence-based thinking. Hopefully we've cleared that up.
Good lord, you're literally reading the exact opposite of what's written.
I'm stating that as the fans are NOT responsible, they cannot have gone into the ground of their own free will. It's a simple concept: people who do things because they want to are (usually) responsible for their actions; people who do things because they are forced to are not (always) responsible for their actions. As the fans have not been held responsible for the actions, it seems reasonable to me that they were acting under coercion, not free will.
The posts from @Liquid, @prisonermonkeys and @TenEightyOne are all based on the supposition that the fans were actively trying to get into the ground because they wanted to see the match. I'm saying that because they are held blameless, they must surely have been forced in. They and I disagree on this point, by the looks and we're having a pretty nice, reasonable discussion about it.
You believe that what I'm saying is insincere and you're not discussing anything with me based on what your opinion of what I'm saying is, you're arguing with me because you think that what I think isn't what I've said and while you think what I've said is right you think that what I think is wrong. You're arguing, we're discussing.
Oh yeah, it's all about the rational discussion of the topic and nothing to do with how much you dislike me...
So let's clear it up for you:
* In 2012 my opinion was that the fans forcing their way in were to blame.
* In 2016 the inquest determined that this didn't happen and the fans were blameless, thus my opinion in 2012 and any opinion like it is wrong.
* It does not seem reasonable to me that ordinary people would continue to walk forwards into a crowd when their way is blocked, suggesting some external force.
* It does not seem reasonable to me that ordinary people at walking pace could generate crush forces, suggesting some significant energy in their movements, suggesting some external force.
* If that external force exists, it's probably important to find out what it was - if it was the police using kettling tactics to drive the fans in, that changes things from culpability by misjudgment to de facto manslaughter, and that seems quite important for a criminal investigation.
* There is no evidence for the external force - at least to date.
Some people disagree with the 3rd and 4th points, suggesting that ordinary people could generate the crush forces by blithely walking forwards into a crowd, and would do that due to 'group think'. I think that if that were the case, the inquest would have put some blame on Liverpool fans, but they did not. This is what we were discussing before your input.
Last edited:
- 17,307
- United Kingdom
I'd hate to presume that I can speak on behalf of Famine on this topic, and not wishing to offend anyone, but I think this summarises the situation.
Liverpool fans were crushed by the force of Other Liverpool fans deliberately pushing forward, thanks to circumstance that are now well documented.
Other Liverpool fans found blameless.
Therefore..
Liverpool fans were crushed by the force of _________________________________________, thanks to circumstance that are well documented.
So what do we write in the blank space?
Liverpool fans were crushed by the force of Other Liverpool fans deliberately pushing forward, thanks to circumstance that are now well documented.
Other Liverpool fans found blameless.
Therefore..
Liverpool fans were crushed by the force of _________________________________________, thanks to circumstance that are well documented.
So what do we write in the blank space?
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
You're right.
The reason the fans are reported as "blameless" is a relative one; they were originally almost-wholly blamed for the crush that occurred. This inquest has found that they were not acting in any way that was abnormal and that in fact the police service and others were grossly negligent in their handling of the situation. That led to 96 verdicts of Unlawful Killing in that inquest.
Literally the fans were to blame for the kinetic force, I think the point I was arguing from was that their actions were not unreasonable, unacceptable, unlawful or unusual. Saying "the fans were to blame" in a case that's proved so emotive will always be controversial (as you know). That's why most people are concentrating on the fact that the final blame for the unlawful actions that led to the crush doesn't lie with the fans despite the fans' actions being naturally contributory. After all, no fans with no desire = no crush.
Still the focus has to be on those managing the crowd as taking the ultimate blame.
Will, herd instinct and natural behaviours take over in crowds. Here's an interesting article (emotive language but the content is good).
Last edited:
- 4,231
- UK
Good article. 👍 I was reading it earlier today.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
The Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police has been suspended. This isn't to do with any direct involvement in 1989, it's more because he's accused of perpetuating the untruths. BBC.
Meanwhile The Times (another Murdoch paper) has said it "made a mistake" in not featuring the Hillsborough verdicts on the cover of their first edition. Hillsborough did feature on the second edition's cover. BBC.
Meanwhile The Times (another Murdoch paper) has said it "made a mistake" in not featuring the Hillsborough verdicts on the cover of their first edition. Hillsborough did feature on the second edition's cover. BBC.
They are blameless because they wanted to watch the football match and were directed into that section of the stand by police. They did not know the problem they were causing by continuing to enter the stand, not until it was too late.
Were they forced? Strictly speaking no, they could have walked away but they had no reason to do so as they had no reason to believe anything was wrong, except for the lack of turnstiles outside.
That is the key factor for the fans being blameless, they were directed into the stand by police, in large numbers, and were unaware of the crushing at the front of the stand.
- 87,514
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Sure, but as I mentioned earlier:
Perhaps I'm reading too much into 'blameless' but to me when you say someone is completely exonerated from any culpability for something it suggests that no act they willingly performed is in any way related to the outcome.
I'm in two minds. Many of the crowds mentioned in the piece are... ad hoc or competitive - crowds forming at a sale or the dreaded Black Friday.
Football crowds are everyday - or at least they are since the FA decided that every day was a good day to have professional football matches. They're not really that dynamic and they're not really fighting with each other to get something (though I'll concede that on terraces there may be more of an urgency to get a good spot than in allocated seating areas in all-seaters) - everyone's heading the same way for the same thing and there's no benefit to getting there first. You go to a football ground and you pretty much know what to expect by the second or third time you go, unless you're playing Nobody Nomads and the attendance is six.
Sure, if there's a competitive element you can see people fighting for something so badly that they don't notice if someone falls over and gets trampled. In a (very large) bunch of like-minded and largely friendly folk like fellow football supporters the case seems less clear to me. I've been in those crowds, they're largely good places and you don't have the antipathy for your fellow man that you do in general queues - these guys are your friends because they're in your tribe. Compare to the queue for the Tube at Victoria at 8.25am
- 489
- England
The fans at the back had no idea what was happening at the front. We saw the gate open and went in to watch a game of football under the subconscious assumption there was room to do that. Nobody had any idea what the situation was ahead. I felt the force from behind before I even got into the terrace part of the stand, luckily my friends dad sensed the danger picked us both up in the air where we crawled and passed above the heads of fellow fans until we were back outside of the stadium. The person(s) who authorised the opening of the gate are the guilty parties here. Always have been, always will be.
Reading and hearing things at the time and over the years did really get to me. I was only 9 years of age at the time but I was more than aware of what we were being labelled as being. I'm not going to lie, there were times when I started to believe (believe is a too strong a word, maybe cast doubt on the truth for lack of a better phrase) some of the utter ******** being spread about in the newspapers and other outlets. You can only imagine how it feels to be catastrophically let down by the people who are there to protect you to protect themselves for the series of errors that happened that day.
What happened that day was inevitably going to happen at one of these games and surprisingly did not happen before it. It could have been ANY fans at MANY a ground of that era. ANY set of fans, it really could have.
It may well be set out as justice for the 96 but it is justice for everybody who was there that day and a massive weight off all of our shoulders. A weight that never should have been placed there in the first place.
Thank God For the Hillsborough family support group for their unwavering fight for justice. YNWA
Reading and hearing things at the time and over the years did really get to me. I was only 9 years of age at the time but I was more than aware of what we were being labelled as being. I'm not going to lie, there were times when I started to believe (believe is a too strong a word, maybe cast doubt on the truth for lack of a better phrase) some of the utter ******** being spread about in the newspapers and other outlets. You can only imagine how it feels to be catastrophically let down by the people who are there to protect you to protect themselves for the series of errors that happened that day.
What happened that day was inevitably going to happen at one of these games and surprisingly did not happen before it. It could have been ANY fans at MANY a ground of that era. ANY set of fans, it really could have.
It may well be set out as justice for the 96 but it is justice for everybody who was there that day and a massive weight off all of our shoulders. A weight that never should have been placed there in the first place.
Thank God For the Hillsborough family support group for their unwavering fight for justice. YNWA
- 87,514
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
I knew a kid in my class at school who was a big Liverpool fan and went to the game - the only person I've ever met who was, actually - but he was up in the top tier at Leppings Lane with his dad.
I've never heard from someone who was in the crowd below. Were there police directing you - or, worse, corralling you - or was it simply a case of the crowd drifting in through that open gate?
- 87,514
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
I'm not sure.
I mean, there was nothing at the Forest end to suggest the same, but I recall that there were reports of delays on the M62 affecting some of the Liverpool supporters' coaches which led at least one officer to request a delay to kick-off - so perhaps that could have added a sense of urgency to events. That said, there were similar crowding issues the previous year at the same semi-final (Liverpool v Forest) at Hillsborough, a Wednesday-Coventry FA Cup match the previous season and another semi-final involving Spurs back in 1981 - the first of which lead to FA Cup semi-finals at Hillsborough being suspended and a minor redesign of the ground.
I'm wondering if Hillsborough ought to change its name now. It's been Hillsborough as long as I've been alive (and much, much further), named after both the Hillsborough House estate on which it was built and the Sheffield constituency of Hillsborough (which is itself now also defunct), but the stadium is in the Wadsley Bridge area of Sheffield and was originally called Owlerton after the neighbouring Owlerton area (which is why we're the Owls - formerly the Blades... someone else has that now
). Now there's a line under what happened, perhaps it's time for a change. Not to a horrible sponsor named ground though.
- 489
- England
All I remember was eagerly queuing for the turnstile, not knowing if we would get in on time. Then as word spread of the gates being opened it was like we were carried by the rest of the people almost as if it were a tide. I don't remember actually going through the gates and my views were limited by my height at the time so I don't either know or remember what the police were doing behind us.
To be honest it does not matter, at this point it was not much different from any match day at Anfield in respect to the force at which you were moved forward by the people behind. All the problems came as the result of the number of available pens in the stand vs the number of fans allowed in. Lets get one thing straight, the stand could handle the amount of fans coming in but obviously the available pens could not. Catastrophic error to let all the fans of every turnstile into just that small sub section.
We had no idea of how many pens were available and how could we? There has been many a time beforehand (and even after that day) where the force from behind from where I stood was just as strong, but the big difference then was that there was enough space to accommodate the influx of fans. Like I said you don't feel it at the back it was only when the movement forward stopped that it got tight, real fast. Even then there was no way for the people behind to know this as, again, this was still quite normal for the line to slow, then speed up again. But it never did.
Even when we got outside people were still trying to get in, oblivious to what was going on ahead. I remember seeing horses outside at the gates where the fans were still trying to get into the ground and space was getting tight inside that area also. So whether they were corralling from there I don't know and unlike them I would not deviate from the truth as I saw it.
Many stories from people also there that day on match days afterwards tell me a more detailed account of the roles some police officers played throughout all off this. I have every reason to believe these accounts but can't repeat them for obvious reasons.
- 87,514
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
That's interesting. As I mentioned earlier, horses were the norm outside football matches due to the era (they're still used now, but far less frequently and, even when selected to police the event, only held on standby most of the time. Except Millwall), so I've always assumed they were there but I've never heard them being explicitly mentioned before and I don't even remember them in the TV footage. Thanks for that 👍
I wonder if we will hear more when the criminal investigations get underway.
- 1,572
- Famine's house.
- Milford_Cubicle
Not getting involved with the ins and outs of the case itself... but from a personal perspective this:
I have been in a place where the subject the crowd were watching was an exciting one. There was no seating, just standing in one area. At the front there's a chest high barrier which is solid, immovable. I was at the front, against this barrier. When the event starts, a massive surge forwards from the whole crowd ends up with me and everyone else at the front pushed up against this barrier. The area was not overcrowded, there was still some room at the rear except nobody wanted to move backwards, they all wanted to be as close to the action as possible.
The feeling of being crushed is terrifying. Luckily, the chest high barrier meant that those who had passed out (including me) could be pulled out of the crowd and taken to an open area to recover. I cannot imagine how utterly horrifying it must be to be trapped at the front of a surging crowd but with no way out. Small mercy that the 96 who lost their lives and the others who ended up severely disabled following brain injuries would've lost consciousness pretty quickly and not have suffered. The others who had to witness this horror and keep it with them to this day are the ones my thoughts are with right now.
I have been in a place where the subject the crowd were watching was an exciting one. There was no seating, just standing in one area. At the front there's a chest high barrier which is solid, immovable. I was at the front, against this barrier. When the event starts, a massive surge forwards from the whole crowd ends up with me and everyone else at the front pushed up against this barrier. The area was not overcrowded, there was still some room at the rear except nobody wanted to move backwards, they all wanted to be as close to the action as possible.
The feeling of being crushed is terrifying. Luckily, the chest high barrier meant that those who had passed out (including me) could be pulled out of the crowd and taken to an open area to recover. I cannot imagine how utterly horrifying it must be to be trapped at the front of a surging crowd but with no way out. Small mercy that the 96 who lost their lives and the others who ended up severely disabled following brain injuries would've lost consciousness pretty quickly and not have suffered. The others who had to witness this horror and keep it with them to this day are the ones my thoughts are with right now.
- 29,936
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
Something else to ponder; Ken Bates wanted the crush barriers electrified as a deterrent to fans trying to invade the pitch. Thank heavens that avenue was never explored nationwide.
The 1980s really were a horrible time for football, for whatever the reason, and leasons have mercifully been learnt. I can only hope that cover-ups are unravelled and those responsible for it are brought to justice; a 'token' gesture or not, successful prosecutions and convictions must be made.
The 1980s really were a horrible time for football, for whatever the reason, and leasons have mercifully been learnt. I can only hope that cover-ups are unravelled and those responsible for it are brought to justice; a 'token' gesture or not, successful prosecutions and convictions must be made.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
But you haven't provided any idea as to what that external force is. I'm open to the idea of what you suggest, but I cannot see how it would manifest. Like I said, explosions or gunfire would have scattered the crowd, but as has been pointed out, the crowd entered the stadium at a fairly constant rate. And I struggle to accept the idea that the police forced them in, because the police knew that the stadium was at capacity; they opened the gate to alleviate the pressure because it had worked before.
Whatever happened probably happened in the tunnel between the gate and the pens - the one place where there were no eyes or ears to observe and testify. I'd say that the most likely thing to have happened was that the fans in the stadium realised that there was no room and pushed back against those trying to get in. At the same time, the people at the back of the queue started pushing forward, trying to get in.
My understanding is that the inquiry has ruled out the idea that the fans consciously tried to get in with the knowledge that doing so would cause harm. They could perform a voluntary action and not be held responsible because they lacked the knowledge or awareness of the situation. Any investigation seeking to assign blame would need to focus on the decision-making process of the authorities - who made which decisions and when, how instructions were carried out and by whom, and what alternatives were considered.
I do admit that I am having trouble pinning down the inquiry's verdict that the fans were not responsible - was it a conclusion from a previous investigation, or a condition of the new one?
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
You're implying that the crowd had the presence of mind to recognise the situation for what it was and rationally address it. I think you're grossly underestimating the fear and the panic that would have taken over once people realised what was happening and that there was no way out. Pictures from the day showed the metal fences separating the crowd from the pitch collapsing under the weight of people, and there were reports of people in the seated galleries above the pens lifting people to safety.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
There is no answer. Like I said, you're expecting that people had the presence of mind to judge the situation.
squadops
(Banned)
- 1,987
- United States
I'm expecting what now? I'm expecting an answer to the question not some idiot guess as to what I may or may not be thinking.
You see, I posted a simple question, that is all. What I'm thinking at the moment is you probably wear sandals with white socks underneath but that is not what I'm posting.
You see, I posted a simple question, that is all. What I'm thinking at the moment is you probably wear sandals with white socks underneath but that is not what I'm posting.
- 7,177
- Lisboa
- FLAT_TWELVE
Such bickering is unnecessary. I fully understand what prisonermonkeys is saying to you and I find it very reasonable too. Your question can only be taken seriously as a Rhetorical_question.
But if it isn't and you really want to know the answer to what you wrote (I assume because you don't know the answer yourself)
I'll give the answer to you. It might surprise you though
"never"
But if it isn't and you really want to know the answer to what you wrote (I assume because you don't know the answer yourself)
I'll give the answer to you. It might surprise you though
"never"
Similar threads
