Re: Kelvin MacKenzie : Fri Sep 14, 2012 11:55 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Can you enlighten us on what evidence you base your allegation that any significant number did?

In the cold world of facts, the game was a sellout, and only 24 people more than its official capacity entered the Leppings Lane end. Is it those 24?

Do you know what the official capacity of the Leppings Lane was? I suspect the problem lay there - they always seemed to me to try to cram in three times more than the standing area was safely designed for on big matches (as it was so much smaller than the other end).

Re: Kelvin MacKenzie : Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:01 pm  

In answer to my own question, seems the main problem was the central pens. c.3,000 people in them compared with 1,600 as should have been. Problem seems to have been police opened the gates and fans correctly followed the signs to there but should have been re-directed by stewards / police to the less full pens. They weren't.

Re: Kelvin MacKenzie : Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:12 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

I was also thinking of the 1954 Challenge Cup final replay at Odsal when many thousands entered the ground without tickets. Considering that over 100,000 people were stood on "terraces" which were made of cinder and a few railway sleepers its incredible how the whole lot didnt subside.

Very good point.

Re: Kelvin MacKenzie : Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:33 pm  

Dally wrote:

In answer to my own question, seems the main problem was the central pens. c.3,000 people in them compared with 1,600 as should have been. Problem seems to have been police opened the gates and fans correctly followed the signs to there but should have been re-directed by stewards / police to the less full pens. They weren't.

There seems to be two incidents to me, one the crushing and overcrowded turnstiles outside the ground which forced the police to open the gates, and then secondly the resulting overcrowding in the central pen which obviously cause the fatal crushing.

Ive not read enough about it, but why was there overcrowding outside in the first place?

[Kosh]

Re: Kelvin MacKenzie : Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:37 pm  

christopher wrote:

There seems to be two incidents to me, one the crushing and overcrowded turnstiles outside the ground which forced the police to open the gates, and then secondly the resulting overcrowding in the central pen which obviously cause the fatal crushing.

Ive not read enough about it, but why was there overcrowding outside in the first place?

Inadequate turnstiles for the size of crowd. Not enough of them and not fast enough getting people through. Another known issue BTW.

Re: Kelvin MacKenzie : Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:40 pm  

christopher wrote:

Ive not read enough about it, but why was there overcrowding outside in the first place?

Think of your average RL match - including Cup Finnals. 5 minutes before KO the ground is normally empty. Loads of people have a drink / mill around outside and then go in at the last minute. Apparently it was a sunny day so people probably thought they'd enjoy a bit of sun and space before getting into a hot, sweaty, confined space?

Re: Kelvin MacKenzie : Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:59 pm  

Kosh wrote:

Inadequate turnstiles for the size of crowd. Not enough of them and not fast enough getting people through. Another known issue BTW.

Then it seems to me the FA are as culpable as the Police in actually starting the chain of events.

The football hooligans of that era should also feel a pang of guilt. No barriers at the front of terraces and the situation would have been vastly different.

Re: Kelvin MacKenzie : Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:22 pm  

christopher wrote:

Then it seems to me the FA are as culpable as the Police in actually starting the chain of events.

The football hooligans of that era should also feel a pang of guilt. No barriers at the front of terraces and the situation would have been vastly different.

I think the FA copped a bit of flak in the report, especially about the previous semi finals. Along with Sheffield Weds and Sheffield Council.

Re: Kelvin MacKenzie : Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:30 pm  

christopher wrote:

Then it seems to me the FA are as culpable as the Police in actually starting the chain of events.

The football hooligans of that era should also feel a pang of guilt. No barriers at the front of terraces and the situation would have been vastly different.

I started going to football matches in the mid 1970s – and to top-flight matches from 1979.

The most unpleasant experiences I've ever had, connected with sports fans, have involved ending up on trains with RU fans or being in a bar with RU Hacks. I'm talking abusive, drunk – on one of those trains, the floor was pretty much flooded. On another, which was not any sort of a sports 'express', there was a group of young RU fans behaving in a disgraceful and abusive manner to passengers – in a carriage that included families with young children.

There is a popular idea that only football has ever had oiks connected with it. It's a myth. And indeed, RL is hardly innocent on the matter.

The actual history of – okay, let's call it sports-related hooliganism – goes back a good century or more. If memory serves me correctly, there was a mass bottle throwing (and they were not plastic) at a football match in 1906. It barely warranted a mention anywhere. Similarly, when Dixie Dean thumped a fan who was giving him racist abuse, there was hardly any mention (a policeman shook Dean's hand). Compare that to the furore over Eric Cantona drop-kicking a gobby little fascist.

Reporting of incidents only really started in the mainstream, national media in the mid to late 1970s. You could make the case that it became 'an issue' when the middle classes started feeling that it was impinging on their lives – even if only because they read about it.

Never forget that the government of the 1980s wanted to use football fans as guinea pigs for ID cards. But then again, there was a demonisation of the working class in general taking place.

This is not to suggest that some people did not use football as an excuse for fighting. But it needs to be seen in the wider context – including the class one.

Compare these sort of incidents to the 'japes' of the Bullingdon Boys, as but one example. What barriers were errected to stop them doing things like trashing people's businesses?

Re: Kelvin MacKenzie : Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:48 pm  

Mintball wrote:

.

Reporting of incidents only really started in the mainstream, national media in the mid to late 1970s. You could make the case that it became 'an issue' when the middle classes started feeling that it was impinging on their lives – even if only because they read about it.

Dont really agree with that. Large scale football hooliganism was a problem from the mid 60's and well reported at the time. I remember a Leeds v Man City game in '68 by which time the rituals were well established. About 4,000 City supporters escorted to and from the train station by police on horseback and dog handlers, numerous "skirmishes" in and around the ground, attempts by groups of City fans to invade the Leeds end, Leeds fans waiting outside the ground to ambush City fans, etc, etc. There was a huge breakdown in the relationship between fans and the police in the late 60's when the Harry Roberts song could be heard at many football grounds.

Cant say I've ever witnessed anything at RL or RU grounds comparable to football from about 1967 to the early 90's.