egafd.com

I was chatting to someone from Liverpool today who has a relative who lost a friend at Hillsborough back in 1989. This was a very dark hour in the history of not only football but in the recent history of our country, and our hearts go out to the relatives of the 96 people who tragically lost loved ones on that terrible day.

He mentioned something that interested me though, he said that the Heysel stadium disaster in 1985, where (I think this is the correct number) 39 Juventus fans were crushed to death when a wall collapsed after Liverpool and Juventus fans confronted each other - something subsequently blamed on Liverpool and got all English clubs banned from European competitions for years - the people of Liverpool did not have the same "Justice for..." campaign that they later had in 1989 after Hillsborough. There was never a call for one either.

He said this was inconsistent and, if Liverpool fans were to blame for Heysel, then surely people in his home town should be lobbying for a "Justice for..." campaign to happen just like they did after the tragic events of 1989. Was there possibly a bit of bias, and non-objectivety, involved in the decision to call for such an inquiry following Hillsborough (and ever since), but not after Heysel? This guy told me that the Liverpool Echo newspaper sometime in the 1990's ran a "We're Sorry" front page where they apoligised for Liverpool fans' involvement (and, what looks like, cause) of the Heysel disaster in 1985.

This guy I was chatting to raised some interesting points. What are other people's views on all this?

Why would Liverpool have a 'justice for' campaign for the Juventus victims? I don't see the hypocrisy you speak of.

Horrible tragedy though it was, what gets me about the attitude of many in Liverpool towards Hillsborough is their refusal to blame the conduct of the club's fans **at all** for what happened.

And not only that, some even go so far as to claim that Heysel in '85 wasn't caused by Liverpool fans either. That was Chelsea fans disguised in Liverpool scarves and the National Front (apparently !confused!).

In short: It's always somebody else's fault - never their own.

Whatever failings there may have been at Hillsborough on the part of the police / SWFC (and there were undoubtedly mistakes made), how anyone can deny the obvious and state that hordes of unruly "supporters" stampeding into the ground couldn't possibly have played a part needs their head examining.

If these "fans" didn't have tickets, they had no business even being anywhere near the ground. And they certainly didn't have any business at all to essentially lay siege to the Leppings Lane end to the point where the police (tragically, as it turned out) felt that they had no alternative but to open the gates in order to prevent a fatal crush outside.

So how can the "fans" in some way NOT be (collectively) culpable?

No doubt if Plod **hadn't** opened the gates and people had died outside, they'd have been crucified for that as well!! "THEY SHOULD HAVE OPENED THE GATES!" would have been the inevitable reaction.

And before someone shouts "Taylor Report!", I believe that its failure to attach any blame to "supporters" forcing their way in was pure politics in order to avoid offending Merseyside "sensitivities".

How does being numerous, in many cases ticketless and in some cases tanked up exempt Liverpool fans from some element of responsibility for their own behaviour and for what happened?

Maybe Lord Justice Taylor would like to explain it as well, because I'm sorry - his report reeks of political correctness and of pandering to the myth of Scouse "victimhood" that's been allowed to develop over the years.

Basically, the actions of the fans that day have been airbrushed out of history: It's simply not politically acceptable to even suggest that they played a role (this is Liverpool after all, which for some reason seems to have enjoyed some sort of totally undeserved mythical status among UK cities since the '60s).

Yes, some fans outside had tickets - but many didn't. So why were they there, and why were they trying to force their way in?

I've often wondered whether - had Forest had the Leppings Lane end - there would have been such trouble on such a scale? I honestly don't think that there would have been.

In fact, had Forest had that part of the ground, there would most probably have been no Hillsborough disaster (Liverpool would then presumably have had the Kop end, which is (a) much bigger and (b) involves a steep uphill climb to get to, so it would have been much less likely that a fatal crush would have occurred).

It's this "holier than thou" stance that gets me. Because what we end up with is hypocritical moaners using a brick wall of 'Scouse grit' against a nation too scared to point the finger.

Why Liverpool fans expect others to shoulder the blame for Hillsborough - a disaster in which they played a crucial part - when they refuse to take any responsibility for Heysel is beyond me.

Where indeed (you ask) is their "Justice for (Heysel)" campaign? And where is their prominent memorial to the Juventus fans who died at Heysel in '85?

I think that there's a small plaque tucked away somewhere in the club's museum, but nothing on the scale of the Hillsborough memorials. Do they hold a minute's silence every year on that anniversary? As far as I'm aware they don't. The club has certainly never held its hands up and issued an apology.

Double fucking standards at play I'm afraid, Max.

- Eric

Obviously it is not as personal to them, as it was fans from the other side who perished, but what this guy said to me today (and he is from Liverpool) is that there may have been less of a call from the people of Merseyside for the thing to be investigated further because it was largely Reds fans who were to blame. He was basically saying that whether your fans are the victims of something, or the causers, you should be just as keen for the whole thing to be looked into.

Eric, you and I seem to be thinking along the same lines. Basically the Heysel disaster and the ongoing pain for the families of the Junventus fans (and the 600 odd who were injured) has kind of been forgotten, yet the "Justice For The 96" campaign still has a very loud voice and will probably be chanted for ever more. It is likely that part of the reason why football fans were penned-in behind fencing with spikes on the top was because of fans rampaging around stadiums, and attacking the rival fans just for the hell of it, and they thought that penning them in would stop that occuring. Without the fencing Hillsborough would not have happened - but what would have been the alternative at that time when hooliganism was so rife? Maybe the conduct of people at Heysel contributed to the decision to keep the fans penned-in at all games in England - it only occured 4 years earlier. I remember the late-80's very well. Football violence was on the news pretty much every Saturday evening. Luckily we dont hear about it ever now.

I have been on about this double standard a bit recently having been researching Heysel and realising the Liverpool connection between the events. I don't know if it's hypocrisy, but it seems very poor the way they almost milk Hillsborough now and yet no one mentions Heysel, which was certainly not an accident...

I feel a bit sorry for Alan Hansen, present at both events as captain of the team, explains a lot

max_tranmere wrote:

>>>


Well on the continent Max, a lot of those fences were designed as - essentially - massive gates that could be fully swung open outwards onto the pitch to prevent just such a dsisater from ever happening.

In the UK though (going for the half-arsed solution as usual), if you had gates in them at all, they were just farty little wicket-type gates through which only one or (at most) two people could pass at a time.

So bad design played a role as well.

- Eric

I have had an internal debate tonight with myself about whether to reply to this, mainly because I don't want to get into an argument with anyone or fall out with anyone on this board, as I really enjoy contributing to it and basically it's a good board to come and have a laugh and chat about British porn.

However, I'm from Liverpool originally, am a Liverpool fan and had a schoolfriend killed at Hillsborough. For these reasons, I tend to get very emotional about Hillsborough, so I'm just going to post this, and I'm not going to get into a debate about 'murdering, self-pitying scousers' and the like.

So, sorry about the length of this post - I just want to try and put my point of view and really don't want to get into any slanging match. I probably won't post again in this thread for this reason.

Firstly, Heysel was a horrible tragedy that, yes, was the fault of Liverpool fans. You could argue, and many have, that there were other contributory factors - crumbling stadium, appalling ticketing, bad blood between English and Italian supporters following the previous year's final in Rome (where Roma fans stabbed Liverpool fans without provocation). However, none of this answers the fact that Liverpool fans caused Heysel. I think even the most blinkered Liverpool fan will agree with this. There was a lot of unfortunate talk in the months afterwards blaming Chelsea and the NF - I don't know where this came from, but I would agree that it's rubbish. We caused Heysel and there is sadly no denying that.

However, the difference between Heysel and Hillsborough was that people were punished and brought to account for their actions. After Heysel, 14 Liverpool supporters were charged and convicted of manslaughter. Yes, the sentences (3 years, half of which were suspended) were appallingly light. But people were brought to account for what they did. In addition, as you know, English clubs were banned from European competition, and Liverpool were given an additional 3 year ban. Obviously, none of this can bring the 39 people killed (yes, murdered, if you wish) back. But there was something done by the authorities.

At Hillsborough, the Taylor Report blamed the failure of South Yorkshire Police to control the crowd. So, it was, in effect, negligent manslaughter. A decision was taken by David Duckenfield, the officer in charge on that day, to open a gate, and then the thousands of Liverpool supporters outside were directed down one main tunnel into one main pen. This was despite the fact that tunnels leading to two, seperate, virtually empty pens were there and weren't utilized.

I don't know whether Taylor was told to 'tone down' his report to avoid upsetting Merseyside sensitivies, as Eric has alleged. I'd be interested to read any evidence about this, as it's the first I've heard of it. As for the allegations of "drunken, ticketless fans", both the Taylor report and Sheffield Wednesday said that the total number of fans in the Leppings Lane did NOT exceed capacity. There was over-capacity in pens 3 & 4, the side pens were empty.

The interim Taylor Report quotes "?I have already found that there was not an abnormally large number of fans without tickets on this occasion. With one or two exceptions, the police witnesses themselves did not subscribe to the ?conspiracy? theory (of a large number of late-arriving ticketless supporters). I am satisfied that the large concentration at Leppings Lane from 2.30 pm to 2.50 pm did not arrive as a result of any concerted plan. There were, I accept, small groups without tickets who were willing to exploit any adventitious chance of getting into the ground. They, together with the minority who had drunk too much, certainly aggravated the problem faced by the police. But that main problem was simply one of large numbers packed into the small area outside the turnstiles" (para 208)

To this day, not one police officer has been held to account for their negligent actions that day. There is also significant evidence to suggest that the circumstances of 96 people's deaths was, for want of a better word, covered up. At the inquest, it was determined that a 3.15 'cut-off' point should be implemented - in other words, that everyone who died did so before 3.15. This is despite evidence that a number of fans remained alive - such as Kevin Williams, aged 15, who died after this time (for reasons of space and time, I'd refer anyone interested to this link for more details of this:

Basically, 96 people went to see a football match, and didn't come back. Their families still don't know why. It's not about 'whinging scousers' or 'self-pity city', it's a basic human tragedy.

Anyway, it's very late now, and I just wanted to say my piece. Max, and anyone else who's interested, there is an excellent website here - - which has more information about Hillsborough and why people are still fighting for justice. If you want to read it, feel free.

Again, sorry about the length of this post - it's a subject close to my heart as it deeply affected me as a 16 year old schoolkid, who had to go through the death of a mate at a very young age.

And with that, I disappear to talk about how fit Angel Long is looking

Eric/Max

Agree.I went to a semi final at Villa Park in the 80s.Liverpool fans were vile scum.Trying to rush the turnstiles,spitting at the operators who dared to hold them back.Many at Hillsborough should not have been in the ground and were just as responsible as stupid plod for fucking up the operation .I dont know what Liverpool fans are like now but then many were total trash.