EXPERTS & FOOTBALL

[bigthinrob]

Been keeping a close eye on the current 'crowd control' issues at S6 and one or two things spring to mind. 

 

Obviously it's been well documented that SYP commissioned their 'independent' report regarding their failings in crowd control issues on the night of the Derby.

 

The subsequent actions following the publication of said report have led to the draconian measures which came into effect last Saturday.

 

It appears that these measures have been implemented on the findings of an 'expert' from Manchester Met. Not a 'panel' of experts who may have contradictory opinions on the matter, but a single 'expert'.

 

This set me wondering who this 'expert' may be, what his 'expert' status entails and more importantly how independent & unbiased this person is. Obviously in a court of law both the defence & prosecution barrister's will employ an 'expert' who will reflect & argue their shade of the argument. This can obviously be very lucrative for these 'experts' who frequently advertise their services for 'hire'. 

 

I looked into Manchester Met's expertise in the specific field of 'crowd control' & its causes & effects and one name who does in fact seem to be an expert, seems to dominate. I am not saying he definitely is the person concerned, but it looks almost beyond doubt, that if not him directly, it would be either one of his colleagues or his students, who would without doubt reflect his teachings.

 

Dr. Keith Still who is clearly an eminent expert in crowd control issues is clearly the senior lecturer at Manchester Met (& other establishments) and amongst his academic career also offers his services as an 'Expert witness'.

 

He has offered his services over many years, in various corners of the world. It is quite a long list of appearances from as far afield as the States, Nottingham and numerous places in between.

 

Slap bang in the middle of the list of enquiries he has acted as an expert witness is Yep, 'The Hillsborough enquiry'.

 

Now I do not in any shape or form suggest that Dr Still was not the right man for the job, his record speaks for itself. What i do question is that, in the light of the extreme nature of the Hillsborough enquiry and the traumatic evidence presented, is whether Dr Still (or one of his disciples) could feasibly present an unbiased report on present day Hillsborough when South Yorkshire Police came calling.  

 

 

[nevthelodgemoorowl]

4 hours ago, bigthinrob said:

Been keeping a close eye on the current 'crowd control' issues at S6 and one or two things spring to mind. 

 

Obviously it's been well documented that SYP commissioned their 'independent' report regarding their failings in crowd control issues on the night of the Derby.

 

The subsequent actions following the publication of said report have led to the draconian measures which came into effect last Saturday.

 

It appears that these measures have been implemented on the findings of an 'expert' from Manchester Met. Not a 'panel' of experts who may have contradictory opinions on the matter, but a single 'expert'.

 

This set me wondering who this 'expert' may be, what his 'expert' status entails and more importantly how independent & unbiased this person is. Obviously in a court of law both the defence & prosecution barrister's will employ an 'expert' who will reflect & argue their shade of the argument. This can obviously be very lucrative for these 'experts' who frequently advertise their services for 'hire'. 

 

I looked into Manchester Met's expertise in the specific field of 'crowd control' & its causes & effects and one name who does in fact seem to be an expert, seems to dominate. I am not saying he definitely is the person concerned, but it looks almost beyond doubt, that if not him directly, it would be either one of his colleagues or his students, who would without doubt reflect his teachings.

 

Dr. Keith Still who is clearly an eminent expert in crowd control issues is clearly the senior lecturer at Manchester Met (& other establishments) and amongst his academic career also offers his services as an 'Expert witness'.

 

He has offered his services over many years, in various corners of the world. It is quite a long list of appearances from as far afield as the States, Nottingham and numerous places in between.

 

Slap bang in the middle of the list of enquiries he has acted as an expert witness is Yep, 'The Hillsborough enquiry'.

 

Now I do not in any shape or form suggest that Dr Still was not the right man for the job, his record speaks for itself. What i do question is that, in the light of the extreme nature of the Hillsborough enquiry and the traumatic evidence presented, is whether Dr Still (or one of his disciples) could feasibly present an unbiased report on present day Hillsborough when South Yorkshire Police came calling.  

 

 

Such a pity Still and Billings could not have set their enquiring minds to work 31 years sooner and let us know what their opinion of the pens was.  

[Ibbo48]

Good to have you back, rob

[Rogerwyldesmullet]

Great point made by the OP

Also, FWIW, interested parties might note the periodic census of university research work (REF - Research Excellence Framework) is coming up next year. It plays out very welll both institutionally and career wise for expert/researchers in Universities to show that their work has “impact” in external contexts. For Ref 2021 purposes, the more Dr Stills work or that of his minions affects ongoing crowd control arrangements at Hillsboro, the better it is for him and for MMU, 

[Inspector Lestrade]

 

I'm quite sure that it doesn't take an expert from a University to solve a simple logistics problem.   

 

Take a couple of experienced  Hillsborough policemen and they could implement a solution in a matter of hours.  

 

This smacks of the higher echelons trying to prove a point after been embarrassed after the Derby game (Why did they apologise?).  

 

They should concentrate on the real issues in the city, the stabbings and drug problems not going around creating issues because of their failures.

[Guest REDAs_biG_piECE]

Yes absolutely most so called experts that the establishment present to us are as crooked and corrupt as they come.

 

Often lobbied, bribed and or members of secret societies such as Freemasonry their word counts for nothing if you know how the corrupt system works.

[StudentOwl]

4 minutes ago, REDAs_biG_piECE said:

Yes absolutely most so called experts that the establishment present to us are as crooked and corrupt as they come.

 

Often lobbied, bribed and or members of secret societies such as Freemasonry their word counts for nothing if you know how the corrupt system works.

 

[Guest REDAs_biG_piECE]

4 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

 

 

Its ok to mock what you don't understand

 

Its no coincidence that David Duckenfield was a worshipful master in the Freemasons

[StudentOwl]

Just now, REDAs_biG_piECE said:

 

Its ok to mock what you don't understand

 

Its no coincidence that David Duckenfield was a worshipful master in the Freemasons

I'm just wondering at what point you get invited to join. I'm planning on doing a PhD one day, I quite like the idea that as I shuffle offstage at graduation with my certificate in hand, some bloke with sunglasses and a little silver badge will sidle up to me and be like "psst... now you're an expert, whatdya say?". 

 

As for what I "don't understand", my old boss was one, and I'm not sure he really had as much influence as he liked to believe. I needed to print off invitations for a lodge meeting 'cause he couldn't even figure out how to do that. 

 

One final question... are you a travelling man? 

[Guest REDAs_biG_piECE]

3 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

I'm just wondering at what point you get invited to join. I'm planning on doing a PhD one day, I quite like the idea that as I shuffle offstage at graduation with my certificate in hand, some bloke with sunglasses and a little silver badge will sidle up to me and be like "psst... now you're an expert, whatdya say?". 

 

As for what I "don't understand", my old boss was one, and I'm not sure he really had as much influence as he liked to believe. I needed to print off invitations for a lodge meeting 'cause he couldn't even figure out how to do that. 

 

One final question... are you a travelling man? 

 

Youve just confirmed you have no understanding of Freemasonry (which if you haven't studied it why would you so that's ok) and most masons that you or I would happen to know are as harmless as the boy scouts. It's the high level ones that are the threat 

 

What degree mason was your boss?

[doubleo]

The bottom line is that SYP have lost all confidence in their judgement and capabilities so they have passed those responsibilities onto a third party, ie “the expert”.  They will now follow “the experts” recommendations so that in the event of, God Forbid, another disaster, they have covered their backs and can not then be held responsible. It begs the question, just what do we pay the Senior Officers / Managers for ? 

[bigthinrob]

Not saying the guy is corrupt in any way. If he’s put himself in a position that he is the accepted ‘expert’ in his field and he then reaps the benefit in the form of repeated appearances as an ‘expert witness’ for whoever is picking up the tab, then fair enough. (Although his Twitter page doesn’t seem to reflect a great embracing of the free market economy).

 

My gripe is that Dr Still would have been paid for his services by SYP because they knew in advance where his opinions re Hillsborough would lie, having been moulded by his previous expert appearances during the ‘Hillsborough’ process & would therefore have also known what his likely findings would be.

 

If the enquiry promised by SYP had enquired into the original REASON for the enquiry (alleged over zealous use of force following the Derby match) they could possibly have retained the services of a similar ‘expert’ to Dr Still, but who’s expertise lay in the fields of exactly that:- Over zealous policing.

I doubt , in that situation, they would have been quite so keen to publish & act on the findings.

 

[horny owl]

It seems to me SYP aren’t even following these new guide lines anyway

 

Didn’t the report say we could have a ‘sterile area’ to hold away fans up to 2K while home fans leave the stadium

 

If that’s the case what’s the problem in holding 500 Luton fans after the game has finished

[Ethel The Tree]

When those fans - home and away - complained about the over-zealous police operation that night

Few could have imagined it would lead to

1) further reductions in the North Stand capacity

2) major inconvenience to thousands of regular North Stand patrons

3) potential loss of income for the club via ticket sales, and

4) the need for the club to now pursue ways to get this latest 'ruling' overturned

 

Any working relationship built up between the club and SAG is surely back at square one

While the SYP will no doubt feel fully vindicated

However much that 'independent' report cost them, it was clearly worth it

[Rogers]

Universities are often wide of the mark with some of their reporting, partly down to the client giving them a very tight and specific scope or specific information / data to use that almost guides the assessment to a single conclusion. 

 

At the the end of the day, these uni’s get good money from studies and they have to be wary of the hand that feeds them. 

 

Like all uni studies, a secondary expert should review the report to ensure the conclusion is not completely wide if the mark. 

 

I’m not sure if the report was caveated in relation to the actual event (Derby) and I was surprised people flow modelling was not undertaken showing various crowd expectations.  Safety control conclusions / measures would be heavily dependant on this analysis. 

 

The controls seem to be very specific and I’m not sure an options analysis has been undertaken - see my first point. 

Edited August 14, 2019 by Rogers

[S36 OWL]

11 hours ago, bigthinrob said:

Been keeping a close eye on the current 'crowd control' issues at S6 and one or two things spring to mind. 

 

Obviously it's been well documented that SYP commissioned their 'independent' report regarding their failings in crowd control issues on the night of the Derby.

 

The subsequent actions following the publication of said report have led to the draconian measures which came into effect last Saturday.

 

It appears that these measures have been implemented on the findings of an 'expert' from Manchester Met. Not a 'panel' of experts who may have contradictory opinions on the matter, but a single 'expert'.

 

This set me wondering who this 'expert' may be, what his 'expert' status entails and more importantly how independent & unbiased this person is. Obviously in a court of law both the defence & prosecution barrister's will employ an 'expert' who will reflect & argue their shade of the argument. This can obviously be very lucrative for these 'experts' who frequently advertise their services for 'hire'. 

 

I looked into Manchester Met's expertise in the specific field of 'crowd control' & its causes & effects and one name who does in fact seem to be an expert, seems to dominate. I am not saying he definitely is the person concerned, but it looks almost beyond doubt, that if not him directly, it would be either one of his colleagues or his students, who would without doubt reflect his teachings.

 

Dr. Keith Still who is clearly an eminent expert in crowd control issues is clearly the senior lecturer at Manchester Met (& other establishments) and amongst his academic career also offers his services as an 'Expert witness'.

 

He has offered his services over many years, in various corners of the world. It is quite a long list of appearances from as far afield as the States, Nottingham and numerous places in between.

 

Slap bang in the middle of the list of enquiries he has acted as an expert witness is Yep, 'The Hillsborough enquiry'.

 

Now I do not in any shape or form suggest that Dr Still was not the right man for the job, his record speaks for itself. What i do question is that, in the light of the extreme nature of the Hillsborough enquiry and the traumatic evidence presented, is whether Dr Still (or one of his disciples) could feasibly present an unbiased report on present day Hillsborough when South Yorkshire Police came calling.  

 

 

 

SYP are currupt ,so  them using this bloke dosnt  surprise me one bit.

[WindygrOWLer]

1 hour ago, REDAs_biG_piECE said:

 

Youve just confirmed you have no understanding of Freemasonry (which if you haven't studied it why would you so that's ok) and most masons that you or I would happen to know are as harmless as the boy scouts. It's the high level ones that are the threat 

 

What degree mason was your boss?

You've just confirmed that YOU know nothing about freemasonry. The worshipful master is the caretaker of a lodge, with no power or authority and nothing more. 

[Guest REDAs_biG_piECE]

15 minutes ago, WindygrOWLer said:

You've just confirmed that YOU know nothing about freemasonry. The worshipful master is the caretaker of a lodge, with no power or authority and nothing more. 

 

Didnt say Ducknfield had power just said he was a mason. Presume you're fully researched on freemasonry yourself?

[WindygrOWLer]

1 minute ago, REDAs_biG_piECE said:

 

Didnt say Ducknfield had power just said he was a mason. Presume you're fully researched on freemasonry yourself?

Perhaps I am one. Or perhaps I don't claim to know anything about it based solely on Dan Brown novels....

[Guest REDAs_biG_piECE]

1 hour ago, WindygrOWLer said:

Perhaps I am one. Or perhaps I don't claim to know anything about it based solely on Dan Brown novels....

 

Condsecending and ignorant in the same sentence well done