|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Apr 27, 2016 0:20:30 GMT 1
Delighted justice has finally been served.
As a total aside, this does also rather undermine the Taylor report and the case for all seater stadia.
|
|
|
Post by Dale on Apr 27, 2016 6:16:37 GMT 1
And hang your head in shame Sun newspaper - s**t scum rag of a redtop - I can't believe people still buy it Did the Scum ever apologise for their Hillsborough headline/report? If not then today should be the day for it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2016 7:17:06 GMT 1
And hang your head in shame Sun newspaper - s**t scum rag of a redtop - I can't believe people still buy it Did the Scum ever apologise for their Hillsborough headline/report? If not then today should be the day for it. Guess what....they are the only tabloid NOT to have Hillsborough as a headline! They've put it on page 8. An awful paper read by bigots and ignorant fools.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2016 7:18:48 GMT 1
I see old Boris Johnson is also being asked to apologise for similar accusations about Liverpool fans causing the disaster in a Spectator article. He's proving rather error prone this week Similarly it's exceptionally cowardly of rent a quote Mackenzie to go to play the victim card and claim his "truth" article was all down to the police feeding him the story. p**s poor excuse anyway as it's a journalist's job to hold power to account, not to act as their de facto PR machine. Agreed. But then again....this is the s*n.
|
|
Eric Rex
Midland League Division One
The Real King Eric
Posts: 405
|
Post by Eric Rex on Apr 27, 2016 11:07:55 GMT 1
And hang your head in shame Sun newspaper - s**t scum rag of a redtop - I can't believe people still buy it Did the Scum ever apologise for their Hillsborough headline/report? If not then today should be the day for it. I believe they apologised somewhere in the vicinity of 17 years after the fact
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Apr 27, 2016 11:58:33 GMT 1
Delighted justice has finally been served. As a total aside, this does also rather undermine the Taylor report and the case for all seater stadia. A very interesting thought Dave it had crossed my mind as well. It it was good to see you and your Dad again last night. I see you were right about the first half. MM has admitted he was wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2016 14:44:38 GMT 1
Did the Scum ever apologise for their Hillsborough headline/report? If not then today should be the day for it. Guess what....they are the only tabloid NOT to have Hillsborough as a headline! They've put it on page 8. An awful paper read by bigots and ignorant fools. As has the Times which I believe is the Sun's sister paper. JFT96.
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Apr 27, 2016 16:35:27 GMT 1
Right tin hat time, I'm sorry if this offends anyone, I really am but here goes. Why don't Liverpool Football Club have the balls to tell the Premiership hierarchy that they will no longer allow ANY Murdoch businesses access to Anfield. If the club TRULY wanted to send a message of support to the families of the 96 they should at least have the decency to refuse Murdochs tainted money. The problem is that money is more important in football than anything else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2016 17:28:02 GMT 1
What I would disagree with is the implication of that comment Liverpool have therefore not done enough for the families? Liverpool have been exemplary in supporting the families.
It isnt Liverpool's business to boycott news media. That is more the choice of the individual. I havent bought a national paper except when on holiday since I was 13 maybe. Most arent worth the paper they are printed on really.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 27, 2016 17:28:48 GMT 1
Whenever the subject of Hillsborough comes up, my mind drifts back to an afternoon at the Victoria Ground where we were playing Stoke.
A very large number of Shrewsbury fans were crammed into one pen on the terracing. It was far too overcrowded. And the fact it was a very hot afternoon didn't help matters either.
Yet the pens next to us were empty to keep us a fair distance from the home supporters.
That situation was very dangerous as far as I was concerned.
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Apr 27, 2016 19:09:35 GMT 1
Whenever the subject of Hillsborough comes up, my mind drifts back to an afternoon at the Victoria Ground where we were playing Stoke. A very large number of Shrewsbury fans were crammed into one pen on the terracing. It was far too overcrowded. And the fact it was a very hot afternoon didn't help matters either. Yet the pens next to us were empty to keep us a fair distance from the home supporters. That situation was very dangerous as far as I was concerned. Pilch was recalling that last night and it is strange I don't really remember. I was probably there
|
|
|
Post by Worthingshrew on Apr 27, 2016 20:55:01 GMT 1
Similar situation occurred at Villa Park when we played there, I think in late 80's.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Apr 27, 2016 21:11:59 GMT 1
Right tin hat time, I'm sorry if this offends anyone, I really am but here goes. Why don't Liverpool Football Club have the balls to tell the Premiership hierarchy that they will no longer allow ANY Murdoch businesses access to Anfield. If the club TRULY wanted to send a message of support to the families of the 96 they should at least have the decency to refuse Murdochs tainted money. The problem is that money is more important in football than anything else. It seems to me Liverpool FC have supported the families throughout their ordeal and, given that this involved standing by them at times when the establishment cover up was causing many to question the innocence of the fans, I think this does the club more credit than just about anything it's ever achieved on or off the pitch. And I'm no Liverpool supporter! I really don't think it's fair to Liverpool to suggest that money has coloured the club's behaviour. And this is not only a Liverpool FC matter anyway. This is the British establishment at its corrupt worst - police, politicians, sections of the media - and it should offend us all. To be fair and consistent, you should suggest that solution to every club that takes Sky money and every citizen that subscribes to Sky (although I don't see how Sky can be implicated in the wrongdoing) or buys the Times or the Sun. No, for me it's simpler - don't buy the Sun (easy) and, now that the inquest is over, don't consider the matter closed. Don't let it be closed and filed away as history. The whole rotten edifice that allowed this huge injustice to occur must be exposed and cleansed.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Claridge on Apr 27, 2016 22:28:38 GMT 1
Indeed. Don't buy The Sun (or The Times) and don't subscribe (or cancel if you already do) to Sky.
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Apr 27, 2016 23:15:56 GMT 1
Right tin hat time, I'm sorry if this offends anyone, I really am but here goes. Why don't Liverpool Football Club have the balls to tell the Premiership hierarchy that they will no longer allow ANY Murdoch businesses access to Anfield. If the club TRULY wanted to send a message of support to the families of the 96 they should at least have the decency to refuse Murdochs tainted money. The problem is that money is more important in football than anything else. Think it's a reasonable point, but the FA negotiate the tv deal collectively and as a member of the Premier League Liverpool have to agree to give the broadcaster access to the stadium. Although I suppose it would be possible to give Sky TV access to their games but not actually accept the money! It's a slightly convoluted point but at the time of Hillsborough BskyB as it was then wasn't actually owned by Murdoch, it only came into his ownership a few years later, and even now his News Corporation company only earns 39% of Sky which hold the tv rights. So as an organisation they aren't quite as tightly linked to Murdoch as The Sun is
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Apr 28, 2016 9:38:37 GMT 1
Right tin hat time, I'm sorry if this offends anyone, I really am but here goes. Why don't Liverpool Football Club have the balls to tell the Premiership hierarchy that they will no longer allow ANY Murdoch businesses access to Anfield. If the club TRULY wanted to send a message of support to the families of the 96 they should at least have the decency to refuse Murdochs tainted money. The problem is that money is more important in football than anything else. thats not a tin hat, this is why are so many still talking about a bloody tabloid newspaper ? and yet no one mentions Heysel the taboo, forgotten, silent tragedy
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Apr 28, 2016 9:59:52 GMT 1
Indeed. Don't buy The Sun (or The Times) and don't subscribe (or cancel if you already do) to Sky. And can you (or others) honestly say you'd walk out of a pub if Sky was on cos your still supporting it and creating demand by being in the audiance?
|
|
|
Post by salop999 on Apr 28, 2016 10:02:28 GMT 1
Right tin hat time, I'm sorry if this offends anyone, I really am but here goes. Why don't Liverpool Football Club have the balls to tell the Premiership hierarchy that they will no longer allow ANY Murdoch businesses access to Anfield. If the club TRULY wanted to send a message of support to the families of the 96 they should at least have the decency to refuse Murdochs tainted money. The problem is that money is more important in football than anything else. thats not a tin hat, this is why are so many still talking about a bloody tabloid newspaper ? and yet no one mentions Heysel the taboo, forgotten, silent tragedy The Police Officer in charge and 15 Liverpool fans were convicted of manslaughter. It wasn't forgotten , and it certainly isn't a taboo is it?
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 28, 2016 10:06:26 GMT 1
thats not a tin hat, this is why are so many still talking about a bloody tabloid newspaper ? and yet no one mentions Heysel the taboo, forgotten, silent tragedy The Police Officer in charge and 15 Liverpool fans were convicted of manslaughter. It wasn't forgotten , and it certainly isn't a taboo is it? This article suggests that questions still need to be asked about Heysel. And that indeed it is a taboo subject. www.theanfieldwrap.com/2013/05/what-about-justice-for-heysel/
|
|
|
Post by salop999 on Apr 28, 2016 10:13:40 GMT 1
Good interesting article that.
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Apr 28, 2016 11:11:14 GMT 1
Right tin hat time, I'm sorry if this offends anyone, I really am but here goes. Why don't Liverpool Football Club have the balls to tell the Premiership hierarchy that they will no longer allow ANY Murdoch businesses access to Anfield. If the club TRULY wanted to send a message of support to the families of the 96 they should at least have the decency to refuse Murdochs tainted money. The problem is that money is more important in football than anything else. thats not a tin hat, this is why are so many still talking about a bloody tabloid newspaper ? and yet no one mentions Heysel the taboo, forgotten, silent tragedy If you feel personally aggrieved and wronged by what went on that day, then by all means campaign for justice. Or just use it as a cheap shot.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Apr 28, 2016 11:45:40 GMT 1
The Police Officer in charge and 15 Liverpool fans were convicted of manslaughter. It wasn't forgotten , and it certainly isn't a taboo is it? This article suggests that questions still need to be asked about Heysel. And that indeed it is a taboo subject. www.theanfieldwrap.com/2013/05/what-about-justice-for-heysel/What an excellent, thought provoking piece. As Oliver Kay says, it does nothing to diminish what has happened around Hillsborough. It's a telling contrast that trials were held after Heysel whereas Hillsborough has now been confirmed as an establishment cover up, for which nobody has yet been held directly accountable. Beyond the tragic loss of life in both cases, that's why Hillsborough has continued to be so important. If the cover up and smear campaign hadn't happened, Hillsborough wouldn't be in the news today. And that's another telling contrast. The police, politicians and media at Heysel didn't blame Juventus fans for what happened. That's what happened after Hillsborough - the powers that be hid their own negligence and inadequacy and colluded with sections of the media, not just in denying responsibility, but in attaching blame to other fans who have now been proven entirely innocent. As the article says, Heysel will always be the blackest of marks in Liverpool's history and Juventus fans are entitled to reject all apologies, although their own club's scant acknowledgement of it would also offend me if I were a Juve fan. But it's not a trade off and Heysel doesn't in any way lessen or invalidate Liverpool's grievance over Hillsborough (which, as I've said earlier, should be everyone's grievance because of the seriousness of the cover up and what it says about our country).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2016 12:15:58 GMT 1
Right tin hat time, I'm sorry if this offends anyone, I really am but here goes. Why don't Liverpool Football Club have the balls to tell the Premiership hierarchy that they will no longer allow ANY Murdoch businesses access to Anfield. If the club TRULY wanted to send a message of support to the families of the 96 they should at least have the decency to refuse Murdochs tainted money. The problem is that money is more important in football than anything else. thats not a tin hat, this is why are so many still talking about a bloody tabloid newspaper ? and yet no one mentions Heysel the taboo, forgotten, silent tragedy On Heysel: Were any of the 96 victims even at Heysel? No Were any of the 96 victims responsible for Heysel? No Was the Heysel disaster covered up by the then British Govt, Police and media? No Did a well know British tabloid (run by a vile media baron who has a heavy influence on our current govt) print a smear story about Heysel within days of the disaster reeling off false accusations and accusing supporters of attacking police etc? No On Hillsborough: Were the people responsible for this disaster quickly brought to account? No Was there even a hint of hooliganism being to blame at Hillsborough? No Have the police officers and politicians responsible lost a days pay or a penny's worth of pension cash? No Does the then editor of the tabloid A. Still have a job and B. Make regular comical references to how much he is hated? YES Did the families of the victims have to contend with threats and smears? YES What if the ends had been reversed and 96 Nottingham Forrest fans had died? There is no comparison between the two incidents - both were appalling and avoidable losses (Heysel was caused as much by 'neutral' tickets falling into the hands of rival fans as it was to hooliganism) of human life. But to some how use the one to detract from the other is an act of "Hand-waving" that many spin doctors would be proud of.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Apr 28, 2016 13:19:55 GMT 1
thats not a tin hat, this is why are so many still talking about a bloody tabloid newspaper ? and yet no one mentions Heysel the taboo, forgotten, silent tragedy On Heysel: There is no comparison between the two incidents - both were appalling and avoidable losses (Heysel was caused as much by 'neutral' tickets falling into the hands of rival fans as it was to hooliganism) of human life. But to some how use the one to detract from the other is an act of "Hand-waving" that many spin doctors would be proud of.Sums it up for me.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 28, 2016 15:10:14 GMT 1
On Heysel: There is no comparison between the two incidents - both were appalling and avoidable losses (Heysel was caused as much by 'neutral' tickets falling into the hands of rival fans as it was to hooliganism) of human life. But to some how use the one to detract from the other is an act of "Hand-waving" that many spin doctors would be proud of.Sums it up for me. I do wonder how do they came to this conclusion? That... Heysel was caused as much by 'neutral' tickets falling into the hands of rival fans as it was to hooliganism.
That's nonsense. It was caused by hooliganism. Nowt else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2016 15:48:51 GMT 1
I do wonder how do they came to this conclusion? That... Heysel was caused as much by 'neutral' tickets falling into the hands of rival fans as it was to hooliganism.
That's nonsense. It was caused by hooliganism. Nowt else. Because they were in a mixed enclosure - IE not separated from each other. Thats the whole point of segregation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2016 15:50:09 GMT 1
I do wonder how do they came to this conclusion? That... Heysel was caused as much by 'neutral' tickets falling into the hands of rival fans as it was to hooliganism.
That's nonsense. It was caused by hooliganism. Nowt else. Because they were in a mixed enclosure - IE not separated from each other. Thats the whole point of segregation. And also I did say it was as much to blame - was not denying that hooliganism was not also to blame.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 28, 2016 19:03:04 GMT 1
I do wonder how do they came to this conclusion? That... Heysel was caused as much by 'neutral' tickets falling into the hands of rival fans as it was to hooliganism.
That's nonsense. It was caused by hooliganism. Nowt else. Because they were in a mixed enclosure - IE not separated from each other. Thats the whole point of segregation. And? You know it is quite possible to stand next to someone at the match who happens to support the other side without having the need to kick the s**t out of them. They could have simply stood together and watched the match, right? It was hooliganism that caused the issues. **** me their adults aren't they, they should of been well capable of watching the game stood to next to a supporter of the opposition. Instead they played up and people lost their lives as a result.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Apr 28, 2016 19:19:58 GMT 1
Heysel is a different story and a different discussion altogether.
Anyone who responds with 'yeah, but what about Heysel' after the heartbroken families of those 96 fans finally get justice following 27 years of lies and cover ups is a bell end unable to separate footballing rivalry from genuine tragedy.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Apr 28, 2016 19:22:13 GMT 1
I do wonder how do they came to this conclusion? That... Heysel was caused as much by 'neutral' tickets falling into the hands of rival fans as it was to hooliganism.
That's nonsense. It was caused by hooliganism. Nowt else. i totally agree , i watched it happen live i really don't mind getting shot down just because i have my own opinion and it differs to others i really could say a lot on this but i'll make life easy and pretend heysel never happened
|
|