Hillsborough verdicts reached

[FanchesterCity]

Just an illustration of things

The entire Liverpool allocation (24K) was served by 23 turnstiles through the ill-fated Leppings Lane corner - a tight corner to say the least.
The entire Forest allocation (30K) was served by 60 turnstiles, spread across two sides of the stadium.

The West Stand (the one behind the goals) had a standing area of 10,100 and was served by 7 turnstiles.
Each of those 7 turnstiles was expected to be able to allow the entry of 20 people per minutes (1 every 3 seconds)

So, if they all operated at that level of through put, they'd managed 7 (turnstiles) * 20 (people) * 60 (minutes) = 8400 people in an hour. So, at best, with a wonderfully smooth flow of people, it would take 1hr 15 mins to get everybody inside.

If people aren't already arriving 1 hr 15 mins before the match, you know already that you can't get them all in, and once crowd starts forming, the throughput rate drops because people aren't prepared with their tickets, or if there's anybody at the wrong turnstile, it's hard for them to turn back, thus things get slowed down.

Just from the turnstile throughputs alone, by 1.45pm, there should have been warning signs that they weren't going to be able to get everybody in. Even with questionable electronic counting, after 2:00pm the danger signs should be apparent merely with a visual of the number of fans inside the stadium.

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

Just an illustration of things

The entire Liverpool allocation (24K) was served by 23 turnstiles through the ill-fated Leppings Lane corner - a tight corner to say the least.
The entire Forest allocation (30K) was served by 60 turnstiles, spread across two sides of the stadium.

The West Stand (the one behind the goals) had a standing area of 10,100 and was served by 7 turnstiles.
Each of those 7 turnstiles was expected to be able to allow the entry of 20 people per minutes (1 every 3 seconds)

So, if they all operated at that level of through put, they'd managed 7 (turnstiles) * 20 (people) * 60 (minutes) = 8400 people in an hour. So, at best, with a wonderfully smooth flow of people, it would take 1hr 15 mins to get everybody inside.

If people aren't already arriving 1 hr 15 mins before the match, you know already that you can't get them all in, and once crowd starts forming, the throughput rate drops because people aren't prepared with their tickets, or if there's anybody at the wrong turnstile, it's hard for them to turn back, thus things get slowed down.

Just from the turnstile throughputs alone, by 1.45pm, there should have been warning signs that they weren't going to be able to get everybody in. Even with questionable electronic counting, after 2:00pm the danger signs should be apparent merely with a visual of the number of fans inside the stadium.

Brilliant post - thanks

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

Petition against the S*n
https://www.change.org/p/the-govern...s-lg-share_petition-reason_msg&fb_ref=Default

 

[livingforthecity]

crime report for 2 CCTV video tapes that went missing from locked & alarmed control room at Hillsborough
= huge cover-up

 

[johnnytapia]

For me the point should be that even if there was evidence of ticketless fans, people jibbing in, and fans with tickets committing the cardinal sin of turning up not long before kick off because they've been enjoying a drink with their mates, how is that any different to any other fanbase for a game of this magnitude? A mate of mine has jibbed into Wembley 3 times in recent years. How many of us take the advice on our match tickets that says take up your seats 30/45/60 mins before kick-off? Not many for sure!

It's up to the police to maintain order and for that they failed miserably.

But there were no ticketless fans and nobody tried to jib in. And none had been drinking. And none turned up, en masse, late. That would never happen. Ever. The report said so. Ergo, it must be true and all our experiences of similar events count for naught when weighed against what the report said. So those that remember what football was like then, who remember what we’d have done for a similar match (ticketless, jibbing, drinking etc) - hold your tongue. There were no ticketless fans. There were no jibbers. There were no drinkers. There is the report. And the report is right.

 

[Dubai Blue]

But that's not what the report says. It says that the "drinkers, jibbers and ticketless" had no impact on what eventually transpired because their numbers were not above the levels that would be normally be expected and accounted for.

 

[shackattack]

But there were no ticketless fans and nobody tried to jib in. And none had been drinking. And none turned up, en masse, late. That would never happen. Ever. The report said so. Ergo, it must be true and all our experiences of similar events count for naught when weighed against what the report said. So those that remember what football was like then, who remember what we’d have done for a similar match (ticketless, jibbing, drinking etc) - hold your tongue. There were no ticketless fans. There were no jibbers. There were no drinkers. There is the report. And the report is right.

as a person of a certain age i do remember what football was like then. yes there would have been ticketless fans, drunken fans and ones after bunking in, but by simple policing of the gate once it opened, blocking off the tunnel and directing fans to the pens either side-possibly no one would have died. the inquest concluded that it was an unsafe stadium, policing was poor to say the least, and the emergency services reacted abysmally.the numbers in the leppings lane were consistent with the number of tickets sold, so where did your ticketless fans go to??? people go glastonbury and other festivals every year , get totally wasted yet there are few if any deaths.

 

[FanchesterCity]

The Taylor report never said that.
It said that many fans had enjoyed a drink beforehand - as was the norm, but that they weren't intoxicated and it didn't contribute to the disaster.
It also said that fans turning up without tickets was predictable, but that there was no evidence of any significant numbers of them, and the disaster wasn't a capacity issue - it was too many in one area exacerbated by poor signage and nobody closing the sliding door across the tunnel entrance when the capacity was full (as they would normally have done).

Taylor also mentions the tendency for fans to arrive late - it was a known pattern, and not helped by poor facilities at the stadium (which resulted in clubs being encouraged to provide facilities and entertainment to get fans to the stadium early). Even if they had arrived 1 hour before the game, the turnstiles STILL didn't have enough throughput to get them all in.

You're totally misrepresenting Liverpool fans on this one. They don't deny that plenty of fans had a drink, it's the implication of 'drinking' they object to, which tends to suggest they were drunk, especially trying to find any victims with alcohol in their system (none had any significant amounts).
It's not the accusation of 'turning up late' that they object to, it was normal behaviour then and still is today, it's that the police planning is supposed to take that into account. It was of course exacerbated by traffic delays too. In previous years, the police had use cordons down Leppings Lane to keep the crowd well managed and prevent congestion at the turnstiles, but that year, they opted to use less police and abandon the cordons. The Liverpool fans didn't do anything different, but the authorities did - they compromised once too often with disastrous consequences.

Nobody is saying they were all angels, and that none of them were morons - they will have had their fair share like any other club has, but there was nothing exceptional about them that contributed to the disaster - that was entirely down to a number of failings of other parties, not least the SYP, but not only them. Not every Liverpool supporter is an angel, but as a group of fans, on that day, the 'group' was innocent.

Imagine if there was a disaster at City, and the police then started to say fans were in the pub across the road (true) and some had a drink at half time (true) the implication is there for all to see - that 'drink' is being blamed. That's what they tried to do with the victims, when in fact the majority of them hadn't had a drink at all, and of those other fans that probably had a drink, there was nothing in their behaviour that wouldn't have happened anyway - after all, pens 3 and 4 weren't full of drunks whilst pens 1,2,5 and 6 were all 'sober' - it was a normal mix of fans in all the pens. Alcohol played no part in this disaster.

At City, the vast majority of fans arrive in the last half hour, many in the last 20 minutes. It's only because there are enough turnstiles and the throughput is high that major queues don't form. Even so, we do still get modest queues. Close a couple of those turnstiles and we'd soon have quite a crowd forming, and it would be all the more dangerous in a tight corner as was the situation at Leppings Lane (and still is, even after modification). People simply don't queue in a straight line when an entrance is funnel shaped - they fill the funnel which puts immense pressure on those at the front and sides of the funnel whilst those at the back of it can often be oblivious. It was THIS crush that caused the gates to be opened - which then went on to form a secondary crush inside the pens.

 

[west didsblue]

But there were no ticketless fans and nobody tried to jib in. And none had been drinking. And none turned up, en masse, late. That would never happen. Ever. The report said so. Ergo, it must be true and all our experiences of similar events count for naught when weighed against what the report said. So those that remember what football was like then, who remember what we’d have done for a similar match (ticketless, jibbing, drinking etc) - hold your tongue. There were no ticketless fans. There were no jibbers. There were no drinkers. There is the report. And the report is right.

Idiot.
That is such a smart arsed stupid post it doesn't merit a proper response.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

But there were no ticketless fans and nobody tried to jib in. And none had been drinking. And none turned up, en masse, late. That would never happen. Ever. The report said so. Ergo, it must be true and all our experiences of similar events count for naught when weighed against what the report said. So those that remember what football was like then, who remember what we’d have done for a similar match (ticketless, jibbing, drinking etc) - hold your tongue. There were no ticketless fans. There were no jibbers. There were no drinkers. There is the report. And the report is right.

But Taylor didn't say there were no ticketless fans and that none had been drinking. What he did say was that there were clearly fans who had been drinking and even a minority that were the worse for drink. However he concluded that this played no significant part in the events that transpired. In fact, here's exactly what he did report:

196. Of those who arrived at 2.30 pm or after, very many had been drinking at public houses or had brought drink from home or an off-licence. I am satisfied on the evidence, however, that the great majority were not drunk nor even the worse for drink. The police witnesses varied on this. Some described a high proportion as drunk, as "lager-louts" or even as "animals". Others described a generally normal crowd with an unco-operative minority who had drunk too much. In my view some officers, seeking to rationalise their loss of control, overestimated the drunken element in the crowd. There certainly was such an element. There were youngsters influenced by drink and bravado pushing impatiently at the rear of the crowd thereby exacerbating the crush. But the more convincing police witnesses, including especially Detective Superintendent McKay and Chief Inspector Creaser as well as a number of responsible civilian witnesses, were in my view right in describing this element as a minority. Those witnesses attributed the crush to the sheer numbers of fans all anxious to gain entry. There was no criticism of the crowd by any of the witnesses in the period up to 2.30 pm or even 2.35 pm. What happened then was not a sudden deterioration in the mood or sobriety of those assembled there. No doubt those coming behind would have had more to drink and would have included the unruly minority. But the crisis developed because this very large crowd became packed into a confined turnstile area and its very density hampered its passage through the turnstiles.

The number of fans in the Leppings Lane pens was estimated to be pretty consistent with the number of tickets sold. The HSE estimated a range with a maximum of 10,124 in the Leppings Lane terrace compared to the 10,100 tickets sold. Their best estimate was 9,724. Had there been 2,000 more than there should have been, then you could have said that fans jibbing in may have played a significant part. But at the very most, there were possibly a couple of dozen extra people inside. More than likely there were actually less than the capacity of that area of the ground.

But even if there were fans who'd had a drink or two, and who had jibbed in, does that justify or excuse the deaths of those 96 people?