Jump to content
Nero

Another night of safety. Thanks SAG!

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Mus said:

Radio Sheffield news have just said Sheffield City Council are still not happy with the 'crowd control' at Hillsborough and there may be more action taken.  Whatever that means!

It may be that we are forced to attend a full council meeting which are held on Fridays and are open to the public. We can make a little noise too !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The MP for Hillsborough needs to get involved as there is clearly an agenda.

 

IMO the statement released by the CEO of SCC is in retaliation to the club submitting papers to the courts. So he is trying to undermine the case by painting the club as the bad ones without acknowledging that the new exits from the stadium are down to them. 

 

Id like to ask him what the difference is between Hillsborough and Bramall lane extinguisher after the match.

 

Especially when you read around on forums and read the press on the assaults at Bramall lane to the away fans in the form of physical attacks or objects being thrown and there are numerous videos on the web confirming this. Away fans on forums already say Hillsborough is a safer place to exit and they don’t feel in fear of attack or abuse. 

 

And both sets sets of fans and clubs at the last Derby condemned the approach by police in the way they treated fans at Hillsborough. 

 

Its about time the SAG and SYP had a long hard look in the mirror at the agenda they have because it will unfold eventually. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...when I see an actual flesh-and-blood worker in conflict with her natural enemy, the policeman, I do not have to ask myself which side I am on.” 

― George Orwell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also think there might be another reason. I don’t think SCC want to see us have a higher attendance than the pigs whilst they are in the promised land

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does not help that some idiot threw a glass bottom on the way out from the upper concourse ramp to the GF area. It just missed a man by inches and smashed on the floor

 

This is the sort of thing that they will use against us and impose more restrictions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So looking at the star report it appears that SAG employed an expert from Manchester Met to observe the crowd after the Villa match. The Star quotes:

 

‘The prohibition notice comes after a report by Ben Cowcill, a crowd expert at Manchester Metropolitan University, who visited Hillsborough during Wednesday’s game with Aston Villa on April 6 – just a month after trouble flared at the Steel City derby.’

 

I came out onto the Lep concourse after the Villa match, just before the full time whistle was blown. There were 3 very drunk Villa fans on the Leppings lane bridge shouting at Wednesday fans. The police did nothing about them until there was a flashpoint. Surely moving them on, or even warning them about their behaviour would have been pro active. 

 

I for for one am not surprised that an expert commissioned by SAG/SYP/SCC to find if there is a problem at Leppings Lane finds there is a problem at Leppings Lane! I am pretty certain that this expert was not employed to see if there is an issue at Bramall Lane when Wednesday fans complained, Norwich fans were hospitalised, or they had twice as many arrests as SWFC.

It suits SYP’s agenda to call Leppings Lane unsafe. They are still trying to dodge, and minimise, the blame for their incompetence that lead to the disaster of 1989.

Edited by Swifty75
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, southportdc said:

Saw quite a few people tweeting about problems on Penistone Road with the additional crowds.

 

I think the intention is the SAG see that and decide to reverse their decision since it's made the situation worse.

 

This is misguided.

 

The SAG will see those tweets and cut capacity further to account for it. 

Problem with pointing out issues on penistone rd is might give sag reason to reduce capacity even further. Funny how blades can close off bramall lane though 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Mus said:

Radio Sheffield news have just said Sheffield City Council are still not happy with the 'crowd control' at Hillsborough and there may be more action taken.  Whatever that means!

we should be taking them and SYP to court. Bunch of flipping muppets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Road Runner said:

The SAG are causing this not the club.

 

If i was the club I would be requesting that Penistone Road is shut one hour before kick off and one hour after to safeguard fans leaving the stadium and averting an accident waiting to happen, if they won’t comply they are not interested in supporter safety.

 

First it was the West stand, now it’s the North stand.

 

Next year it will be the South stand and last but not least the Kop. 

 

 

 

I posted similar the other day, when SAG stated the roads around the ground were the club's responsibility. Simple solution get 100 stewards stood across Penistone Rd North bound at the end of Bradfield Rd from 4.40 until 5.30.

Block the traffic coming from town. See how long it remains the club's responsibility.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shut penistone Road at the junction of herries Road. Any traffic going towards A61 can turn right onto Herries then left along past Jenx and that posh car place, turn right at the end and they're back on Halifax road. Simple detour. 

Shut it at the crossroads wher Law Brothers is, any traffic going towards town can go left to Herries then turn right before turning left onto Penistone Road. Leppings lane can be closed as normal so coaches can be parked and away fans can ingress and egress safely. 

 

Enact these road closures 1 hour before the game until 1 hour after. Public safety is a priority. Traffic management around the ground is the clubs responsiblity. Let's see how much they actually want to protect us. I don't like walking out onto penistone Road when there is traffic. I like exiting onto leppings lane when it is closed. I always have my son with me. As he is small he has a reduced field of vision when In a crowd. His safety is my priority. I feel safer walking out past away fans than into traffic. 

 

At the derby last season we waited a few minutes and exited onto penistone Road instead of past the United fans. I didn't like the fact traffic was present but it wasn't bad as we could stay on the pavement. Exiting on Tuesday night, even after waiting a few minutes, was far more crowded. Penistone road needs to be closed while fans arrive and leave otherwise we are swapping a non existent problem for a very real and present one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven’t read all of this so apologies if already covered.

 

Is the crux of the report that the LL forecourt isn’t big enough to hold a full capacity away crowd?

 

If so, how therefore is Bramhall Lane and numerous other grounds able to meet this criteria when there is no forecourt at all with fans existing directly onto a road where home and away fans mix immediately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, sw1867 said:

I haven’t read all of this so apologies if already covered.

 

Is the crux of the report that the LL forecourt isn’t big enough to hold a full capacity away crowd?

 

If so, how therefore is Bramhall Lane and numerous other grounds able to meet this criteria when there is no forecourt at all with fans existing directly onto a road where home and away fans mix immediately.

Nobody knows the answer to this. I listened to football heaven last night and the issue was discussed, nobody raised this issue though. Giddings seemed to be siding with the club over it in some ways but didn't really seem like he wanted to investigate it as a journalist. 

 

Personally I feel let down by the star and local media. Either nobody has looked into it or they've been warned off. IV eseen there is a report on that new athletic website whatever it is. Seems its an opinion piece that brings up 1989 again but I haven't read it. I'm sure someone with links to the site will be along soon to tell us how good it is and how they think we should sign up to it cos it looks like a decent publication and they've got some good writers and they aren't linked to the site honest. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we just not limit the number of away supporters we let into the ground... rather than limiting our own supporters? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also intrigued as to why we can't sell tickets for the North stand. Is this due to the leppings lane exits issue or for another reason? The north stand capacity isn't raised as an issue in the report is it? How is our north stand different to other stands in the city, county or country? Are the concourses that much smaller than any other stand or is it that its capacity is that much bigger? And why is it only now becoming an issue? Have guidelines changed? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harrysgame said:

Problem with pointing out issues on penistone rd is might give sag reason to reduce capacity even further. Funny how blades can close off bramall lane though 

 

 

 

You cannot drive down Bramall lane before or after the game , its closed . Ive asked Mothersole this question in my email to him.

 

" Why is Bramall lane closed to traffic in the lead up to , and directly after a Sufc home game to allow crowds to safely enter and leave the stadium , but Penistone Rd , a busy duel carriageway remains open when Wednesday are playing at home ? " 

 

I don't expect an answer .

Edited by S36 OWL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, S36 OWL said:

Although SY plod and SAG will try to blame the club when the inevitable accident hapoens on Penistone Rd , the blood will be on their hands. Quite regular Bramall lane is closed before and after a game to traffic to allow fans to enter and leave the stadium. Surely the same policy should be applied to Penistone Rd .

 

And when we've played at the Lane recently our fans have been kept behind after the game, in an area smaller than the West Stand concourse. 

 

I love the consistency. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Hirstys Salopettes said:

There’s no agenda.  Absolutely not.  We’re most certainly not being discriminated against.  Absolutely not. 

 

Randomly have a look at https://mobile.twitter.com/sypiag

 

We are the independent advisory group for South Yorkshire Police, dedicated to improving football relationships between supporters and SYP in the county.

 

The look at the fourth tweet down.  It’s a retweet.  Very independent indeed. 

 

 

 

C460A36C-4CC2-4AE3-B753-7DC3A2476EBF.png

 

That group are getting on my nerves now. They’re really quick to advise people of their remit, but don’t actually provide any answers to the questions being answered. Simply referring to the report that was commissioned without the club’s knowledge, and conducted by a bloke who’s been to S6 once. 

 

They seem to be nothing more than a mouth piece for SYP at the moment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 'issues' identified are apparent with a big away contingent or clubs known for anti-social behaviour.

 

The author of this 'independant' report goes into some depth about keeping the LL exit and routes away from that part of the stadium as wide as possible and to disperse people away from the exits.

So,

 

SYP park their vans on the opposite side of the road to the coaches already constricting Leppings Lane...

SYP don't seem to be interested in keeping people moving away from the turnstile aprons.

SYP are content to increase pressure and allow 'flashpoints' to occur.

Authorities are happy to still park coaches immediately in front of the out-spill area as opposed to along Catch Bar Lane.

Authorities are happy to insist on almost 10000 people to spill out onto an open dual carriageway.

SAG insist these measures apply even when there is less leaving the ground at the LL end than the safe limits calculated in their 'report'.

SAG have acted on an incomplete 'report' without appearing to give due consideration to wider causes and effects elsewhere and could attempt to dismiss these obvious impacts as 'unforeseen' consequences.

 

The report is limited and incomplete.

The 'report' is myopic in scope and does not investigate the layout, position and relationships of other exits.

The 'report' is silent on current material regulations and guidelines already in place for existing stadia.

The 'report' only offers  limited number of solutions for one exit and does not explore other solutions or assesses the impact of Police/SAG measures on crowd behaviour.

Has the report explored possible road closures except for emergency vehicles e.g of Penistone Road or Catch Bar Lane either side of a match.

 

SAG seem to be trying to address a single issue and have consequently created problems elsewhere that is dressed up as an overall 'overcrowding / capacity' issue.

 

It is not the ground that is unmanageable - It is the mismanagement, poor organisation and incoherent 'solutions' that are increasing and perpetuating what was a relatively small problem caused by anti-social behaviour when the stadium is approaching full capacity.   IMO this has caused the Club to shut large swathes of the stadium on two sides of the ground at significant financial loss to SWFC yet the flashpoint 'problem' remains.

 

Do all areas of the stadium comply with the Green Guide for existing stadia or not.

Does this 'report' reflect the numbers, concourse dimensions, dispersal routes and number of exits as recommended in the latest edition of the Green Guide for existing premises or does it assert the authors own 'interpretation and measures'.

Does this 'independent report' invite and take account of representations from the club or users of the stadium?

 

Poorly devised, poorly reasoned and poorly implemented IMO.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Flat Owl said:

The 'issues' identified are apparent with a big away contingent or clubs known for anti-social behaviour.

 

The author of this 'independant' report goes into some depth about keeping the LL exit and routes away from that part of the stadium as wide as possible and to disperse people away from the exits.

So,

 

SYP park their vans on the opposite side of the road to the coaches already constricting Leppings Lane...

SYP don't seem to be interested in keeping people moving away from the turnstile aprons.

SYP are content to increase pressure and allow 'flashpoints' to occur.

Authorities are happy to still park coaches immediately in front of the out-spill area as opposed to along Catch Bar Lane.

Authorities are happy to insist on almost 10000 people to spill out onto an open dual carriageway.

SAG insist these measures apply even when there is less leaving the ground at the LL end than the safe limits calculated in their 'report'.

SAG have acted on an incomplete 'report' without appearing to give due consideration to wider causes and effects elsewhere and could attempt to dismiss these obvious impacts as 'unforeseen' consequences.

 

The report is limited and incomplete.

The 'report' is myopic in scope and does not investigate the layout, position and relationships of other exits.

The 'report' is silent on current material regulations and guidelines already in place for existing stadia.

The 'report' only offers  limited number of solutions for one exit and does not explore other solutions or assesses the impact of Police/SAG measures on crowd behaviour.

Has the report explored possible road closures except for emergency vehicles e.g of Penistone Road or Catch Bar Lane either side of a match.

 

SAG seem to be trying to address a single issue and have consequently created problems elsewhere that is dressed up as an overall 'overcrowding / capacity' issue.

 

It is not the ground that is unmanageable - It is the mismanagement, poor organisation and incoherent 'solutions' that are increasing and perpetuating what was a relatively small problem caused by anti-social behaviour when the stadium is approaching full capacity.   IMO this has caused the Club to shut large swathes of the stadium on two sides of the ground at significant financial loss to SWFC yet the flashpoint 'problem' remains.

 

Do all areas of the stadium comply with the Green Guide for existing stadia or not.

Does this 'report' reflect the numbers, concourse dimensions, dispersal routes and number of exits as recommended in the latest edition of the Green Guide for existing premises or does it assert the authors own 'interpretation and measures'.

Does this 'independent report' invite and take account of representations from the club or users of the stadium?

 

Poorly devised, poorly reasoned and poorly implemented IMO.

 

 

 

 

Have you sent that anywhere?

 

Seems like you should be representing the club here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...