Hillsborough Docudrama

[Terminal Boardom]

The overwhelming majority of incidents involving death and injury in football stadia can be attributed to terracing and circulation areas associated with terracing. The one major exception was Valley Parade. Complacency is a very dangerous animal.

As I mentioned previously, Simon Inglis has done some cracking work on football stadia. For example:
"At Anfield before 1994, typically there would be 10-25 injuries per game on the Kop ranging from bruised heads to broken limbs. Since conversion to seats, the numbers have fallen to 2-3 for the entire ground."

Is terracing really worth the risk?

Comparable stats for the safe standing areas in the Bundesliga would be of interest. Comparisons to old style terracing, which will never be re-introduced, are not really relevant.

But who pays for the conversion? Those clubs that bolted seats straight onto terracing as at Southend would be ok. But what about the Mad Stad? Whole swathes of the stadium would have to be completely replaced as the seating angle is way too steep for terracing.

The irony is that had the clubs and football authorities taken their responsibilities more seriously, there is every likelihood that there would still be terracing.

Legislation to consider:
Since 1992, FIFA have decreed that no standing would be permitted at World Cup qualifiers
Italian government decreed no standing for all stadia with a capacity greater than 10,000
Since 1998, no standing in UEFA sanctioned club fixtures (UEFA Cup, Champions League, Inter-Toto)

[Baines]

:-S

I was addressing the safety comparisons.

It seems to me that the Bundesliga experience stands as an obvious rebuke to arguments based on safety or "it's just not possible".

And who pays for it? The clubs/the FA/the Premier League, when the current, predominantly aged 40+, fanbase dies out and the clubs realise that by, to a large extent, pricing a generation out of football, they have significantly injured the health of the game.

[Dirk Gently]

:-S

I was addressing the safety comparisons.

It seems to me that the Bundesliga experience stands as an obvious rebuke to arguments based on safety or "it's just not possible".

And who pays for it? The clubs/the FA/the Premier League, when the current, predominantly aged 40+, fanbase dies out and the clubs realise that by, to a large extent, pricing a generation out of football, they have significantly injured the health of the game.

As long as a stadium is adaptable and at capacity, then it's quite easy to get round the economic argument. According to "The Green Guide", you can get safely get 18 people standing into the space required for 10 people when they're sitting. The rationale for that is that people standing move are 10% "wider" (they move sideways more) so you can only get 9 in a row which would take ten seated - but those 9 people, when seated, effectively require a row for the legs and a row for the bums, so you can get two sows of 9 standing where you had 1 row of ten sitting.

At capacity, that means a club could get 80% extra yield from that space , which could easily pay for conversion costs.

At the MadStad, it could be done quite easily - think of the "one row into two" idea, and simply put an intermediate step, half the depth, in where the seats are. Voilà!

(Having said that, I think the rake means this will only work at the lower levels, where the rake is less steep - but having the first 10 rows or so standing with seating behind it would be a glorious return to Archibald Leitch's initial design of paddock and stand!)

[The whole year inn]

90-odd people died, a lot of them kids..

Football fans that sing about it should be shot on the spot. Same for the utterly hilarious Munich/Heysel songs.

Zero tolerance policy with regard to retards..it would stop these people mating and diluting the country with even more retards

[who are ya?]

The overwhelming majority of incidents involving death and injury in football stadia can be attributed to terracing and circulation areas associated with terracing. The one major exception was Valley Parade. Complacency is a very dangerous animal.

As I mentioned previously, Simon Inglis has done some cracking work on football stadia. For example:
"At Anfield before 1994, typically there would be 10-25 injuries per game on the Kop ranging from bruised heads to broken limbs. Since conversion to seats, the numbers have fallen to 2-3 for the entire ground."

Is terracing really worth the risk?

Safe standing terraces would stop forward surging, the same as what rows of seats do, so it's not exactly a risk it's probably more to do with terraces being frowned upon these days. These new terraces would work in England, just as they do in Germany.

[cmonurz]

Do they safe-standing terraces have railings on each row?

[who are ya?]

Yeah, would make forward surges as impossible as being behind a row of seats.




Not sure where the risk is myself.

[Terminal Boardom]

Yeah, would make forward surges as impossible as being behind a row of seats.




Not sure where the risk is myself.

Now even an old sceptic like me has to acknowledge that these pics are encouraging. I can't see any British government being brave ebough to sanction this sort of conversion. This is something that FIFA and UEFA need to comprehend.

Any stats on injuries in these areas?

[Dirk Gently]

Any stats on injuries in these areas?

There aren't actually any reliable stats on injuries in stadia in the UK. It has been proven (via Freedom of Information requests) that the injury stats which the Football licensing Authority published on their website had no backing in fact.

[Terminal Boardom]

Any stats on injuries in these areas?

There aren't actually any reliable stats on injuries in stadia in the UK. It has been proven (via Freedom of Information requests) that the injury stats which the Football licensing Authority published on their website had no backing in fact.

Which pretty much confirms that the authorities still treat football and football supporters in general with complete and utter contempt.

[Deathy]

The overwhelming majority of incidents involving death and injury in football stadia can be attributed to terracing and circulation areas associated with terracing. The one major exception was Valley Parade. Complacency is a very dangerous animal.

As I mentioned previously, Simon Inglis has done some cracking work on football stadia. For example:
"At Anfield before 1994, typically there would be 10-25 injuries per game on the Kop ranging from bruised heads to broken limbs. Since conversion to seats, the numbers have fallen to 2-3 for the entire ground."

Is terracing really worth the risk?

Comparable stats for the safe standing areas in the Bundesliga would be of interest. Comparisons to old style terracing, which will never be re-introduced, are not really relevant.

But who pays for the conversion? Those clubs that bolted seats straight onto terracing as at Southend would be ok. But what about the Mad Stad?

What about the Madstad?! We have more standing room than most. I can't see it being difficult for us to add barriers. Would it? The picture below would seem to suggest we could accomodate such a change with ease.

[Terminal Boardom]

Yeah, would make forward surges as impossible as being behind a row of seats.




Not sure where the risk is myself.

Interesting to notice the fencing in front of the seats I think that we have proven that fencing is unnecessary.

[Super_horns]

Footballers are stupid part 512.

Liverpool resevrve keeper Charles Itandje is unlikely to play for the club again after being filmed dancing during the memorial service for Hillsborough.


Idiot.

ghey

I too think that incident was disrepectful and merits some form of warning but what about this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3l6iNg2gwbw

[Dr Hfuhruhurr]

If you really think that Hillsborough is proper retribution for Heysel, then you really ought to donate your brain to Medical Research so we can all see whats wrong with it. Playground football rivalries are one thing. Persisting with such childishness in the face of 96 people being crushed to death, well just have a word with yourself. And why get bothered by Liverpool FC holding an event to commerate Hillsborough. Exactly, in what way does it effect you? Or is this an attention thing?

[susieroyal]

Yeah, would make forward surges as impossible as being behind a row of seats.




Not sure where the risk is myself.

Interesting to notice the fencing in front of the seats I think that we have proven that fencing is unnecessary.

My dad would probably sit down and keep shouting at everyone else to!!

[working class hero]

Read Phil Scraton's Hillsborough: The Truth.

The truth is unlikely to ever be proved.

I suspect that the truth lies in the police being correct in some assertions - and also that they made a number of serious mistakes.

I think it is crystal clear that fans at the time had a [deservedly] poor reputation. Scouse fans were tarred after the Heysel debacle. Thus it is easy to see why hooliganism was suspected at the outset. I don't think that the police wilfully stood and watched a massacre of the innocents. I think many must feel guilty now - but at the time presumably acted with good intentions.

As for the copper who ordered the gates to be opened I would imagine he too has huge regrets. However, I think it is only the most blinkered fans who are unwilling to accept that there were substantial numbers trying to gate surf into the ground. I think many also accept there was some truth in the stories of fans arriving late from the pubs [and why not].
Granted that CCTV and comms were much more primitive I would imagine that the decision to open gates was made to try to alleviate crushing risks at the gates. Sadly the crush then moved inside. However, there is an inherently sickening aspect to the screams for 'justice' which means a copper or so has to be prosecuted. This would not provide justice for anyone. If the cops deliberately made bad decisions then I would feel this would be realistically achievable. But to seek retribution against people who were trying to stop risks seems a bit fatuous.

Inevitably there will be some who see this as a slur on the '96'.... not at all. These deaths were tragic and should not have happened. The fact that grounds are now safe is the finest imaginable memorial for them - a memorial that millions see every season. This is far more important than a granite edifiice and the families should try to take solace that their loss was not in vain.

[bobby1413]

Footballers are stupid part 512.

Liverpool resevrve keeper Charles Itandje is unlikely to play for the club again after being filmed dancing during the memorial service for Hillsborough.


Idiot.

ghey

What an Idiot.

You can see the player next to him thinking "wtf are you doing?" and also the people behind him thinking "you tosser".

I think it's way over-the-top to say he shouldn't play again, it's effectively sacking him for one stupid act whilst he wasn't in the "limelight" (not that that makes it any better).

[Archie's penalty]

The problem was that song is way too upbeat! Not his fault his body moved along with it. How could you cry to a song like that?!?

[Jerry St Clair]

This would not provide justice for anyone. If the cops deliberately made bad decisions then I would feel this would be realistically achievable. But to seek retribution against people who were trying to stop risks seems a bit fatuous.

You've missed the crucial point.

The call for "justice" centres almost entirely around events after 3.15 which have never been investigated. Largely this consists of a deliberate and systematic attempt to cover-up police failings and to deliberate attempts to transfer blame from the authorities to the fans.

This is an utter disgrace and I certainly think it's worth investigating.

[working class hero]

This would not provide justice for anyone. If the cops deliberately made bad decisions then I would feel this would be realistically achievable. But to seek retribution against people who were trying to stop risks seems a bit fatuous.

You've missed the crucial point.

The call for "justice" centres almost entirely around events after 3.15 which have never been investigated. Largely this consists of a deliberate and systematic attempt to cover-up police failings and to deliberate attempts to transfer blame from the authorities to the fans.

This is an utter disgrace and I certainly think it's worth investigating.

I accept this. But sadly fans were part of the problem. If fans without tickets had not been there then the police would not have panicked. Is it possible to have a justice where fans are seen as a part of the problem - or is justice only to be found in the complete exoneration of the fans and the vilification of the authorities?
FWIW I believe the authorities made a number of decisions which [with the benefit of hindsight] were catastrophic. But can any fan really say there woiuld not have been a similar claim if the gate had not been opened and fans were crushed outside? As a Liverpool supporting mate put it 'at least the dead then wouldn't have been the ones who had a right to be there...'

Given the fact that cages were only around pitches because so many fans misbehaved is there not a reason for officers believing that mischief was afoot? I think if I had been in charge I would have been much more likely to believe hooligans were at work than that almost 100 were being crushed to death due to a stewarding debacle.

I am only surprised that there were so few serious injuries in old style terraces. I can remember not being able to breathe in surges, feet off the ground, and being squashed against barriers. Hopefully the govt will release info earlier and closure can occur for the families.