Anger as Pokemon Go uses SWFC Hillsborough memorial as 'Pokestop'

[Bannofan]

The contents of this thread could have been lifted from any other thread about the tragedy that we have had in the last 10 years on Owlstalk.

 

It really comes down to opinions on here - those who think the Liverpool fans behaviour on that day contributed, even in the smallest amount, to the awful events that occurred - and those who think they are blameless as that's what all football fans behaved like at the time and that should have been taken into account when planning the safety of the semi final.

 

An enquiry found the latter to be the case, but unfortunately there are eyewitnesses and primary sources on the day that cannot accept that the Liverpool fans remain untouchable in any official enquiry, and question the reasons why that is.

 

We will continue to have this debate, and nobodies viewpoint will be changed.  

 

 

[robowl4life]

F00king Pikachu bringing all this bobar up again ffs 

Edited August 25, 2016 by robowl4life

[Inspector Lestrade]

Just to put it in the arena not trying to make a point as such.

 

Back in the 70's and 80's Wednesday were not very successful we had little to brag about.  The one big thing we had to brag about was Hillsborough.  It was easily in the top five grounds in the country.

 

Looked very modern compared to most, especially the Cantilever stand, which to me was probably the best seating area in the country in that era. 

 

We could use it to beat utd fans with.  That our ground was brilliant.  

 

It was always a well kept ground, tidy, no mess anywhere.  Many grounds had plenty of rubble laying about.

 

 

 

 

[DeeJayOne]

25 minutes ago, steveger said:

It's way more than what happened at Hillsborough, their day to day policing is a farce, look at Orgreave, look at what happened in Rotherham with the grooming, there's many more instances on a smaller scale where they just cant cope or seem to handle anything, they aint fit for purpose and they should be merged and run by west yorkshire police.

This isnt me having a go at the brave and hardworking frustrated cops on the street as they are obviously controlled by the people at the top, making a complete arse of it, year after year.

 

Absolutely agree that there needs to at the very least be an inquest into Orgreave too.

 

 

[coopswfc76]

19 minutes ago, southportdc said:

 

No, the fact that the changes to ground design and policing have prevented any more deaths or crushes supports my point that ground design and policing caused the crushes. 

 

Either that or everyone got sober and punctual after 1989. 

 

Of course that's helped but Fan Behaviour has improved massively since then also.

[Dick_Turpin]

56 minutes ago, Bannofan said:

The contents of this thread could have been lifted from any other thread about the tragedy that we have had in the last 10 years on Owlstalk.

 

It really comes down to opinions on here - those who think the Liverpool fans behaviour on that day contributed, even in the smallest amount, to the awful events that occurred - and those who think they are blameless as that's what all football fans behaved like at the time and that should have been taken into account when planning the safety of the semi final.

 

An enquiry found the latter to be the case, but unfortunately there are eyewitnesses and primary sources on the day that cannot accept that the Liverpool fans remain untouchable in any official enquiry, and question the reasons why that is.

 

We will continue to have this debate, and nobodies viewpoint will be changed.  

 

 

Primary sources are there to be interpreted. The fact that there were drunk people doesn't mean they "caused" the disaster. 

[coopswfc76]

No bugger in the thread has said they caused the disaster, All people have said is that fan behaviour was a contributory factor.

[Dick_Turpin]

2 minutes ago, coopswfc76 said:

No bugger in the thread has said they caused the disaster, All people have said is that fan behaviour was a contributory factor.

 

Whats that if it's not being part of the cause?  

 

Why do people get so het up about this failure of the wider Liverpool fanbase to admit "guilt"? 

[modboy]

Do feel many swfc fans are swayed by the fact it happened in our home.  

 

 

[HIGHERSTATE]

5 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

 

Whats that if it's not being part of the cause?  

 

Why do people get so het up about this failure of the wider Liverpool fanbase to admit "guilt"? 

 

Maybe people get irked by their reputation to look after their own, do what they please (even if they are hypocritical), ignore the rules and constantly rebel against establishment.

Edited August 25, 2016 by HIGHERSTATE

[coopswfc76]

I don't think anybody is het up about it just its our viewpoint and like yourself Rickygoo I just cant understand how somebody who attended games back then would think that fans weren't a contributory factor.

[HIGHERSTATE]

6 minutes ago, modboy said:

Do feel many swfc fans are swayed by the fact it happened in our home.  

 

 

 

Yes people do seem to take it personal..Which I can completely understand..

 

Cos inevitably as the football club we feel we represent will be second in line to be made culpable..whether thats possible or not is another argument.

[Paolo Di Catio]

1 hour ago, DeeJayOne said:

 

Bingo.

 

Here's some reasoning:

 

 

 

 

All looked on with hindsight and with today's health and safety in mind.

There's a question in there about delaying the match. Can't remember many matches if any being delayed back then, certainly not a semi when the other kicked off at the same time.

Hillsborough was one of the better stadiums at the time and to single us out as it has been is a disgrace. How many back then were unfit for purpose and had poor design?

 

Fans did contribute to the disaster as were many parts that combined to what we now know. Fences were erected due to hooiganism. English clubs were in the middle of a ban due to the trouble caused by Liverpool fans at Heysel in 85.

Police at the time were there to control fans (not look after them like today) Thatcher was openly critical of football and it wasn't the family day out we see today.

 

I posted a video earlier in this thread of Scousers swinging into Windows at Wembley. I remember it on the day and the commentator was chuckling about it. The dangerous way they were doing it, is obvious it wasn't a one off. Liverpool then and now try to get in without tickets. Back then it was well known for em to cause disturbances/ distractions so they could force their way in. 

 

Take a look at Gate C when it was open. How did the fans react? You can clearly see fans on top of the wall.

 

Question 7 has to be YES. 

[@owlstalk]

I just don't understand how the Sun readers are still chattering on like they're the absolute fact holders

[Paolo Di Catio]

2 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

I just don't understand how the Sun readers are still chattering on like they're the absolute fact holders

 Who's quoting the Sun? Stop making stuff up to suit your argument. 

[Inspector Lestrade]

9 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

Primary sources are there to be interpreted. The fact that there were drunk people doesn't mean they "caused" the disaster. 

 

Well,l thanks for that, here's me thinking that it was.  Well, I never, thanks to your insightful post.  

 

Drunks are easier to control?

 

Drunks don't want to fight the world?

 

Drunks don't commit crime?

 

Now all the big games I have being to and they are many, drunkness was a big problem not so much now but certainly in that era.  Drunks take up valuable police time, they are obnoxious they want things their way (i'm going to get into this ground if it kills me).

 

Now I don't think anyone is saying that drunks were the primary cause of the disaster but I find it difficult to believe that they didn't add to the problems.  The mind set wether rightly or wrongly in those days was to control the hooligans and Liverpool in those days were no angels.  Infamous, for Stanley blades and rushing the gates.   Health and safety was given short shrift by everyone. The authorities yes were to blame overall but the fans to my way of thinking must take some of the responsibility.  The last hearing seemed to be judging the events by todays standards and knowledge.

 

The authorities as I keep repeating were set up to combat hooligans not to deal with health and safety to the degree it is today.  (Hillsbourgh may well have been the catalyst for H&S.  (You never saw any Hiviz})

 

 It was a society problem, society failed to deal with it. We all have some responsibility, some more than others.  

 

 

 

 

[HIGHERSTATE]

I only started to go to games around 1988 and you tell that overall the police really weren't interested in crowd safety...Just to get people on the terracing as quickly as possible and throw people out when causing any trouble..that was pretty much their job and the culture at the time...they even probably turned a blind eye when the number of fans was too much for them..They pretty much struggled in any attempts at crowd safety in the bigger games...might be their numbers, lack of knowledge of crowd control or lack of training..The establishment only saw them as a group of people with the potential to cause shedloads of upset that nobody else wanted.

 

During the 80s during large matches there was little crowd control or thought of safety anyway and during the disasters it probably turned into almost chaos anyway..So if there was more than usual fans there at the Leppings Lane and surrounding areas, wouldn't this have contributed to the chaos?

 

Edited August 25, 2016 by HIGHERSTATE

[DeeJayOne]

8 minutes ago, Holmes said:

(i'm going to get into this ground if it kills me).

 

Bad choice of words in this topic.

 

 

 

Shame.

 

 

[Inspector Lestrade]

1 minute ago, DeeJayOne said:

 

Bad choice of words in this topic.

 

 

 

Shame.

 

 

 

`But I only wrote them, it had nothing to do with me.  If had been taught better then it wouldn't have happened.  it was the teachers fault.  I'm not taking responsibility for them.

[Dick_Turpin]

19 minutes ago, Holmes said:

 

Well,l thanks for that, here's me thinking that it was.  Well, I never, thanks to your insightful post.  

 

Drunks are easier to control?

 

Drunks don't want to fight the world?

 

Drunks don't commit crime?

 

Now all the big games I have being to and they are many, drunkness was a big problem not so much now but certainly in that era.  Drunks take up valuable police time, they are obnoxious they want things their way (i'm going to get into this ground if it kills me).

 

Now I don't think anyone is saying that drunks were the primary cause of the disaster but I find it difficult to believe that they didn't add to the problems.  The mind set wether rightly or wrongly in those days was to control the hooligans and Liverpool in those days were no angels.  Infamous, for Stanley blades and rushing the gates.   Health and safety was given short shrift by everyone. The authorities yes were to blame overall but the fans to my way of thinking must take some of the responsibility.  The last hearing seemed to be judging the events by todays standards and knowledge.

 

The authorities as I keep repeating were set up to combat hooligans not to deal with health and safety to the degree it is today.  (Hillsbourgh may well have been the catalyst for H&S.  (You never saw any Hiviz})

 

 It was a society problem, society failed to deal with it. We all have some responsibility, some more than others.  

 

 

 

 

An inquest jury who went over all the evidence after 20odd years including questioning by lawyers representing people with an interest in blaming the fans and a High Court judge in the immediate aftermath appointed by Thatcher who wasn't exactly pro-Scouse and anti-cop came to their own conclusions.