lukestheman82 Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 2 minutes ago, curren said: Do they have a pokestop at the memorial for the Heysel 39 in Liverpool? Or will that come once they've stopped the relentless campaign for justice for the 39? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukestheman82 Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Just now, lukestheman82 said: great shout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apple Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 2 hours ago, Paolo Di Catio said: Anybody playing the game who's over the age of 16 needs a kick up the arse. Might help em grow up You're right. I should be reading grown up articles about global warming or how many people have died this week instead... Clearly fun stops after the age of 16. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmw Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Almost certainly accidental. The Pokemon Go app was developed by Niantic Labs under licence from Nintendo. Niantic used to be part of the Google group where they created a game called Ingress which was also a location-based game involving augmented reality and multiple players. In Ingress, players joined one of two factions and had to establish bases to gain territory etc etc. What seems to have happened is that they saw the potential to build the Pokemon Go app onto the location framework that had already grown up globally around Ingress. A lot of the "bases" that players of Ingress had set up have been retained in Pokemon Go as Pokestops and Gyms. Probably some Sheffield-based player of Ingress was initially responsible for getting the memorial established on the Niantic database and that could be why it is present now as a Pokestop. Ingress was nothing like as well known and popular as Pokemon Go is now, so whoever was responsible probably thought nothing of it. That's my theory and is probably miles from the truth but it sounds halfway plausible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birley Owl 1867 Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 2 hours ago, bigthinrob said: No i fully understand why they were a bit twitchy about it during the enquiry, but as i said, if people have been gagged for a while and not allowed to express their opinions where others were allowed to, when the restraints are lifted people are going to want to have their say. As for having 'our own views', to be quite honest, the majority on here seem to take quite a reasonable view (with odd exceptions) that the disaster was the result of a combination of events, not solely, but certainly not excluding the behaviour of some Liverpool fans. This is where the opposite camp differ, that they bore absolutely no responsibility. I would suggest the former point of view is the more balanced and reasonable of the two. But maybe enough now!! Agree totally with every word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Di Catio Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 1 hour ago, Apple said: You're right. I should be reading grown up articles about global warming or how many people have died this week instead... Clearly fun stops after the age of 16. Nowt to do with not having fun, it's childish. If anybody over the age of 16 wanders abart collecting cartoon blobs they need to seriosly re-evaluate their life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeJayOne Posted August 24, 2016 Author Share Posted August 24, 2016 (edited) 4 hours ago, bigthinrob said: That's what i was referring to mate, but i accept it could be easily missed in a longish post. "I'm sorry mate, no offence, it looks like i'm just looking for a reason to have a pop here, but you keep quoting figures, stats, evidence, without applying previous historical facts and a bit of common sense. I was there that day as i was for most of the multitude of Semi's we hosted around that time. You quote categorically that the 'crush' would have happened regardless of the numbers. Well maybe it would, but how come nothing like this happened before, with possibly one (nothing like as severe) exception. Quote Hillsborough hosted five FA Cup semi-finals in the 1980s. A crush occurred at the Leppings Lane end of the ground during the 1981 semi-final between Tottenham Hotspur and Wolverhampton Wanderers after hundreds more spectators were permitted to enter the terrace than could safely be accommodated, resulting in 38 injuries, including broken arms, legs and ribs. Police believed there had been a real chance of fatalities had swift action not been taken, and recommended the club reduce its capacity. In a post-match briefing to discuss the incident, Sheffield Wednesday chairman Bert McGee remarked: "testicles—no one would have been killed". The incident nonetheless prompted Sheffield Wednesday to alter the layout at the Leppings Lane end, dividing the terrace into three separate pens to restrict sideways movement. This 1981 change and other later changes to the stadium invalidated the stadium's safety certificate. The safety certificate was never renewed and the stated capacity of the stadium was never changed. The terrace was divided into five pens when the club was promoted to the First Division in 1984, and a crush barrier near the access tunnel was removed in 1986 to improve the flow of fans entering and exiting the central enclosure. After the crush in 1981, Hillsborough was not chosen to host an FA Cup semi-final for six years until 1987. Serious overcrowding was observed at the 1987 quarter-final between Sheffield Wednesday and Coventry City and again during the semi-final between Coventry City and Leeds United at Hillsborough. Leeds were assigned the Leppings Lane end. A Leeds fan described disorganisation at the turnstiles and no steward or police direction inside the stadium, resulting in the crowd in one enclosure becoming so compressed he was at times unable to raise and clap his hands. Other accounts told of fans having to be pulled to safety from above. Liverpool and Nottingham Forest met in the semi-final at Hillsborough in 1988, and fans reported crushing at the Leppings Lane end. Liverpool lodged a complaint before the match in 1989. One supporter wrote to the Football Association and Minister for Sport complaining, "The whole area was packed solid to the point where it was impossible to move and where I, and others around me, felt considerable concern for personal safety". "You can prove anything with facts" Edited August 24, 2016 by DeeJayOne SHEFFIELD SHOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cersei Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 11 minutes ago, Paolo Di Catio said: Nowt to do with not having fun, it's childish. If anybody over the age of 16 wanders abart collecting cartoon blobs they need to seriosly re-evaluate their life. Call my Vaperon a cartoon blob to its face bro! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lees Tom Cat Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Threads was pulled because like most ongoing trials it was a legal requirement. And bias reporting by people on social media set in their ways I.e. the ched Evans case. Got people in bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cactus Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 4 minutes ago, DeeJayOne said: "You can prove anything with facts" Taking these quotes from "independant" views again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Di Catio Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 4 minutes ago, DeeJayOne said: "You can prove anything with facts" You're so right http://www.gettyimages.ie/detail/video/ticketless-teenage-football-fan-desperate-to-see-match-news-footage/1B26058_0009 https://www.theguardian.com/football/2007/may/25/newsstory.sport8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 1 minute ago, cactus said: Taking these quotes from "independant" views again? Are you saying they are invented? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cactus Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 (edited) 4 minutes ago, rickygoo said: Are you saying they are invented? No, but they have been "cleansed" Why was the reason Liverpool complained in 1988.? becuase they wanted more tickets, not because of safety . Edited August 24, 2016 by cactus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Just now, cactus said: No, but they have been "cleansed" Why was the reason Liverpool complained in 1998.? becuase they wanted more tickets, not because of safety . In your humble opinion of course. And the other incidents? Anti-Wednesday propaganda? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cactus Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 1 minute ago, rickygoo said: In your humble opinion of course. And the other incidents? Anti-Wednesday propaganda? Not in my humble opionon at all. take a look at the letter from John Smith and show me where it mentions safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 2 minutes ago, cactus said: Not in my humble opionon at all. take a look at the letter from John Smith and show me where it mentions safety. So his overcrowding evidence - regardless of his reason for complaining - is irrelevant? And the other incidents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeJayOne Posted August 24, 2016 Author Share Posted August 24, 2016 12 minutes ago, cactus said: Taking these quotes from "independant" views again? Various sources, including: - Taylor Report (1989), p.21 - Statement of witness Asst. Chief Constable Robert Goslin, 14 August 1990 - David Conn, "safety failings that contributed to the deaths of 96 Liverpool fans were foreseeable", The Guardian, 19 September 2012 - Hillsborough Independent Panel (12 September 2012), the report of the Hillsborough Independent Panel - "Sheffield Licensing officer from time of Hillsborough disaster still works for council", Sheffield Star, 22 September 2012 - Matthew Bates, "Hillsborough warning signs were there in 1987", Coventry Telegraph, 12 September 2012 - Sam Ross, "David Bernstein makes unreserved apology for Hillsborough Disaster", Metro, 16 September 2012 ...and other sources. Wheres all your counter-sources? SHEFFIELD SHOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cactus Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 1 minute ago, DeeJayOne said: Various sources, including: - Taylor Report (1989), p.21 - Statement of witness Asst. Chief Constable Robert Goslin, 14 August 1990 - David Conn, "safety failings that contributed to the deaths of 96 Liverpool fans were foreseeable", The Guardian, 19 September 2012 - Hillsborough Independent Panel (12 September 2012), the report of the Hillsborough Independent Panel - "Sheffield Licensing officer from time of Hillsborough disaster still works for council", Sheffield Star, 22 September 2012 - Matthew Bates, "Hillsborough warning signs were there in 1987", Coventry Telegraph, 12 September 2012 - Sam Ross, "David Bernstein makes unreserved apology for Hillsborough Disaster", Metro, 16 September 2012 ...and other sources. Wheres all your counter-sources? Nothing, other than: being there on the day working on the leppings lane end being interviewed & making several statements to WM police Being intervieved again by Operation Resolve Nothing really. But my evidence didn't coincide with the "new truth". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Just now, cactus said: Nothing, other than: being there on the day working on the leppings lane end being interviewed & making several statements to WM police Being intervieved again by Operation Resolve Nothing really. But my evidence didn't coincide with the "new truth". It's been the truth since the Taylor Report. Or did Thatcher order a High Court Judge to stitch SYP up and exonerate the people of her favourite city? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeJayOne Posted August 24, 2016 Author Share Posted August 24, 2016 1 minute ago, cactus said: Nothing, other than: being there on the day working on the leppings lane end being interviewed & making several statements to WM police Being intervieved again by Operation Resolve Nothing really. But my evidence didn't coincide with the "new truth". So, basically, I'm right (and can prove with multiple sources from various different avenues and eras) and you're wrong (with just your own, biased, tainted, bullheaded view). Glad we cleared that up. :) SHEFFIELD SHOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now