Hillsborough - A Misplaced Trust & Justice

I haven’t posted a blog for a short while. I haven’t written about a non-Blades related subject for a long while. I have thought long and hard about posting this today but, after much consideration, I thought it best to be open, honest and truthful. Today has changed a lot of things for me. Most importantly, it changed my opinion of events in Sheffield just over 23 years ago.

 

I am a good lad, from a good family. Brought up with a strong moral code, I understand right from wrong. My parents taught me to respect the authorities, to do unto others and their property as you would want them to do to you and yours. This very same thinking is what I have tried to pass on to my children and hopefully they can live as happy, as successful and fulfilling life as I have to date but it is hard to feel quite the same about that code anymore.

 

Part of that respect was directed towards the Police. I grew up believing that you should be able to view the police as upholders of the law, there to prevent wrong-doing, to protect and serve the public.

 

I had grown up attending games with my Dad and, prior to that, my grandparents. We avoided trouble, sat in the seated areas and much of the problems of the time with policing of fans and hooliganism were unnoticed. Shoot and Match magazine, my reading of choice, did little to enlighten me of the issues. Out of sight, out of mind. Anyway, the police focused on the trouble causers – didn’t they?

 

Hooliganism was a shocking thing perpetuated by a mindless few that, which at its worst, you saw on the news. I remember visiting West Bar Police Station with the Boys' Brigade and seeing the collection of weapons confiscated at football grounds. I remember feeling shocked that such blades could be potentially used on opposition supporters and feeling thankful at the police doing their job and keeping me and other young fans safe.  

 

Moving forward to the 15^th April 1989.

 

 I remember watching and listening as the Hillsborough tragedy unfolded. I was 14 at the time, laid on my bed, with the radio on for updates of United's game at Northampton, alongside Des Lynam and Grandstand on the portable TV on top of the chest of drawers. Then, as Grandstand unexpectedly transferred to pictures from Hillsborough and John Motson attempted to describe the unravelling horror, the radio was off. United’s match didn’t matter anymore and I was trying to comprehend the catastrophe unravelling on the small screen.

 

That night I did my usual walk to the newsagents to pick up the Green Un. The front page image that greeted me was so graphic, so emotive it is indelibly burned into my retina. Young fans, a similar age as to what I was then, crushed against the fencing, gasping for breath, screaming for help. A shocking image that still feels wholly inappropriate now, even in an age where the boundaries of acceptability have been widely extended.

 

Young fans just like me that had gone to a match, who had stood where I would stand at Hillsborough and were now dead, through no fault of their own. Their final desperate moments captured by someone who could have helped but continued to do their job; taking pictures when people were having the life squeezed out of them. That newspaper image will stick with me forever.

 

Then the timeline of the day started to unfold, pieced together on TV, on radio, in local and national newspapers and, in Sheffield, from stories passed from neighbour to friend to colleague. These immediately started to paint a picture of problems caused by fans outside the ground, shocking behaviour in it. Stories perpetuated by 4 senior police officers feeding, what are now confirmed to be, lies to a Sheffield news agency. The "strenuous efforts" of the police and authorities to, in effect, deflect attention away from their failings successfully paid off.

 

I wasn't some sort of anti-establishment rebel in my youth, I trusted in law and order and a code of right and wrong. It was a case of; the police are telling us that is what had happened, therefore it must be right. The belief in the stories was perpetuated by anecdotal evidence from locals claiming to have witnessed events in and around Hillsborough that day. These stories still appear now in forum threads and discussions whenever the tragedy and the justice campaign are discussed.

 

Over the next few years I started to follow United away from home and saw first-hand the brutal and aggressive way in which football fans were treated at the time. Whether you were a designer clad casual, or a "shirter" (as I generally was), you were spoken to and approached with utter contempt. So incensed was I by my experience, I wrote an article for the Blades fanzine Flashing Blade about it. From bully boy tactics of the West Midlands force at Aston Villa, to the threats of Greater Manchester Police at City and aggressive mounted police outside the Goodison Park turnstiles, I was angry and upset at being treated so poorly.

 

Since then there have been many further examples, not least being filmed by police drinking outside a pub in Nottingham, not being allowed to leave for the ground in plenty of time for kick off and being held there until shortly before kick off when we were marched with the rest of the pub customers the long way to the turnstiles, filmed all the way.

 

Over the years I have heard first and second hand of the attitude of South Yorkshire Police towards fans at Bramall Lane and Hillsborough. I heard it and despaired, but it still didn't change my view on the Hillsborough disaster.

 

For the police to be treating fans with continued contempt is one thing, but to treat the death of 96 innocent people with such contempt in a deviously constructed act to cover their failings was unthinkable. How naïve I was.

 

Before anyone suggests otherwise; I didn't read tabloid newspapers, so the sensationalised headlines in The Sun were viewed as headline grabbing slurs, rather than anything of any substance. This wasn't some petty points scoring based on football rivalries, or an attempt to stigmatise the people of Liverpool and the club’s supporters. It was a viewpoint arrived at from a fundamental (misplaced) trust in our authorities and the locally shared opinions of those who were in and around Hillsborough that day.

 

You only have to look on Sheffield football forums and read twitter today to see the maelstrom of opinions the disaster generates and even after the findings were made public, many still do not concur with what the independent report says.  I have never expressed any opinions publicly, only within my circle of friends - some of whom agreed, others vehemently didn't. With such a sensitive subject, to do so would set me up for abuse and hassle that were just not worth it. Amongst peers my view was in the minority, locally it was much more prevalent.

 

Driving into work this morning I caught the end of an interview with the mother of one of the victims. She was hoping for truth and justice, but warned that people must be prepared for the fact that it might come warts and all. In my mind I agreed, I thought that yes the police and authority failings would be highlighted which was important, but Liverpool fans might be seen to remain partly culpable. A culpability that might not be welcomed. Today, the warts are firmly on the face of South Yorkshire; from the Police, to the coroner, from the council to the then administrators of Sheffield Wednesday Football Club. 

 

This morning we had the news on the TV at home and, before I was asked the inevitable question, I explained to my son, in simple terms, what happened at Hillsborough. Thankfully he hasn't asked anymore since and I haven’t had to explain the context of the story. That strong moral code and respect for the work of the police force has been irrevocably damaged today. I would like to think that this is a one off incident, but I can't. Not when this malevolence towards the general public is on such a horrific scale. Detailed and damning in black and white. How much more have they lied about and got away with?

 

Today the Hillsborough Disaster has been shown to be far more than a human tragedy. Culpability is widespread and with many parties to varying degrees, but the confirmation of the wicked and disgraceful cover-up of police and authority failings is soul destroying. They are the sort of illegal and corrupt actions you might expect of a tinpot dictatorship, not from the guardians of law and order in our country. If this was an accident in a factory or business people would be facing criminal charges and I can only hope that it will follow here

 

Credit to all those who pursued Justice for the 96. They were right to. I was naively wrong and I am sorry for that.

 

Until today, I never quite understood what Justice they were after. What would it achieve? In reality, what good it would actually do? I understood the importance of the Coroner’s cut off point of 3:16 and could see why that caused much upset when evidence was demonstrating that lives could have been saved after that time and that the cause of death could not have been applied to all. Beyond that? Now it is more than clear to me and hopefully the criminal justice should soon follow.

 

They shouldn’t have had to wait 23 years for their beliefs to be confirmed as fact. They deserved the truth much sooner, the British public deserved to know the truth rather than let these lies be perpetuated into something many, myself included, believed in. If the MPs, the local authorities and the police are all demonstrably lacking credibility in modern society where the hell are we all heading? Who can we believe and trust? The answer in this case was the people I had turned a deaf ear to for 23 years.

 

May the 96 rest in peace

Charting the Week in Football 8

As the domestic and European seasons come to an end, I leave you with a bumper selection of charts and graphs covering the stats that tell different stories for some teams' seasons, the anonymous footballer, an anonymous (and expensive) striker, rent-a-quote managers, Teflon Blatter, the truth about Premiership relegation, the composition of Scottish football and a conundrum for Jeff.

There may be a few intermittent Charting the Weeks over the Summer if the stories warrant it and if you the readers want it. Until then, enjoy these.......

Coming later this week: A new series for the Summer as various writers select their own "My Dislikable XI"

 

If you want a recap of the seven previous weeks of charts:

Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

Week 5

Week 6

Week 7

Charting the week in football - Week 2

After the positive feedback on last week's graphs. By popular demand, the last week in football is charted here:

Appraising the Scapegoats

Yesterday Richard Bevan, Chief Executive of the League Managers Association called for the scapegoating of football managers to stop. He called for appraisals of manager performance where "the strengths and weaknesses of how the football-side of the club is performing might be assessed against realistic expectations and previously, mutually agreed goals.

Richard Bevan c Mirror

"In any other sector, there is a recognition that the highest performing organizations are those who build winning organizational culture - shared beliefs, goals and ways of behaving - coupled with a long-term vision." Fair enough, so what would this mean for some of those Bevan represents?

When Roy Hodgson joined Liverpool in the summer, he was employed by different owners, Gillet and Hicks and a Chief Executive, Christian Purslow, who is yet to be replaced. He joined on the back of their worst season for a decade, the LMA Manager of the Year stating, “I'm here for the long haul and to do the job that needs to be done, hopefully winning trophies very quickly." So what were the expectations and objectives when he took over? Did they change with new ownership? And do any new objectives take account of the changes above him?

By stating an aim for trophies and quickly he has personally set an objective that, as things stand, he is still on to achieve. You have to assume that such statements are made in line with directors' expectations. Trophies are not won in January and Liverpool remains in both the Europa League and the FA Cup - okay so they only join the latter on Sunday! 

Hodgson's shock as objectives revealed c Mirror

With an inadequate squad and limited funds to change things, could he realistically be expected to improve on 7th and a 23 point deficit on Champions Chelsea? To be fair, at the very least, he should have been capable of maintaining the status quo. With Liverpool sitting 12th, 19 points behind Manchester United and with 9 defeats to their name (just 2 less than the number over the whole of last season), it could be said that Roy has failed, to date. Yet does he not need more time to impose his ways, to sign more of his own his own players? Neutrals and the few Liverpool fans in the Paul Konchesky Fan Club might suggest so; an increasingly vocal majority at Anfield would not. 

Carlo Ancelloti is being talked of in some quarters as at risk. Unfounded rumours swept the country yesterday that both he and Roy were heading for the exit door. The reigning champions sit 5th. 9 points off top spot, having won less than half of their games and having suffered 6 defeats - as many as they suffered in the whole of last season. On paper - Carlo is not achieving objectives, but should other factors come into play. With an ageing and injury riddled squad this season it has not been easy. Some of the more flexible squad members left in the Summer, with few replacements brought in, and youngsters, like McEachran, Sturridge and Bruma, have been blooded, probably more readily than the manager might have anticipated.

You would think that given last season and the enforced turnover within the playing squad he will be given n the chance to re-group and re-challenge. But this is football, where there is an expectation level to be maintained, firmly in the public eye.

A more cut and dried case perhaps is that of Roy Keane at Ipswich. Having splashed around £9m of Marcus Evans' cash around on players who failed to make an impact, with, since dismissed, rumours of unrest with star prospect Connor Wickham and Damien Delaney (amongst others) and a plummet down the table to 19th, 3 points above the relegation places, Keane can hardly claim to have met expectations. However, on his departure he expressed "a genuine belief that we were making progress".  Unfortunately for Roy his objectives were league based and, however nice a Carling Cup semi-final appearance is, the progress the club made was downwards.

More time to walk the dog c SkySports

At the end of the day football is a results business, unless you are an Arsenal fan and watching aesthetically pleasing football from both sides also appears to be required. (Mind you when you are paying close to a £100 per ticket, it is probably a not unreasonable request). Results = points. And we all know what points make............

Well it should be trophies, a place in the record books. That is how it would have been previously, but with significant money on offer for an improvement of just one league place in today's game the pressure for points intensifies. Bevan states that a manager's average tenure during the 2009-10 campaign was one year and four months, compared to three and a half years in 1992, yet football has changed tremendously in that time. The rewards for improving results are greater but the risks that clubs are willing to take are much smaller.

There is always someone else ready to take on the challenge and the cost of change is much less than the potential financial impact of failure. There are 79 "available" managers listed on the LMA website. I looked at the list, prior to the Blades appointing Micky Adams, and what an un-inspiring list it is. Aside from Martin O'Neill , maybe Rafa Benitez, who would you want at your club. Take a look. Why not comment your choice for your club below. I doubt we will see a great deal of variety.

However uninspiring they are, they are LMA members looking for work. If average tenures increase, then the longer these managers and others like them will be redundant. As respected journalist Gabriele Marcotti tweeted on Thursday night it is "funny how LMA worry about sacked managers more than out-of-work ones who might seize opportunity of job opening." Bevan is acting like most union officials, looking after those in jobs, but does he not owe a bit more to those who are awaiting a new opportunity, aside from giving them advice on their statements to the media following their last departure.

Football takes much more of a short-term view than other businesses, probably due to the propensity of stakeholders involved, opinions given and the media spotlight. Managers will have objectives and they will know how they are performing against those objectives. With the odd notable exception, Chris Hughton for instance, can many managers really be that surprised by the sack? Well, maybe Roy Keane. But as we know and as Louise Taylor so wonderfully states in this article in the Guardian, young Roy doesn't take constructive criticism very well.

We as fans might not like some of the changes to the game in recent years; I made my feelings known here. Richard Bevan might not like the impact it is having on its members, but in a world where so many people's jobs are at risk, where often it is nothing to do with their own personal performance, where decisions are made regardless of achievement of objectives and where they earn a wage much lower than the average manager, I'll give him an objective. Keep calm, keep quiet and carry on with your job.

How to gain friends and influence people?

In the past, the fans had a voice, in the literal sense, and the way to effect change was to use it. Cries of "Sack the board", "[Insert name of failing manager] out!" would echo from the terrace and often that would be enough to make the boardroom quake and eventually give way to the wishes of the faithful. But the times are a changing, the nature of football club ownership is changing and society is changing, both in terms of behaviour and culture.

At my club, the death knell for any manager used to be when the fans took to the South Stand car park. Chanting for change right underneath the directors' suite. But this is less effective than it once was.   

It was enough to lead to the departure of Adrian Heath, but not even the waving of shoes, "Shoes off if you want Robson out", led to the immediate departure of Bryan Robson and, despite periodic demands for the head of Kevin Blackwell, the timing of his departure was surprising to the majority.

South Stand protest Copyright:The Sun 

Across the city, Owls fans protested in a traditional manner, outside the ground, following last week's home defeat to Southampton. It got a reaction, with chairman (and former player & manager) Howard Wilkinson coming out to make his points and state the reasons why the board would not be going anywhere. But the behaviour of some of the supporters, some of the questions they asked, the points they made and the manner in which they made them  were embarrassing. Mobile phones and the Internet now mean actions like this have a wider audience. Is witnessing this going to attract the potential investment that Wednesday need?

What is more noticeable is the vitriolic outpourings within these demonstrations. Fuelled by alcohol and changes in what the public consider acceptable behaviour, some of the vicious personal abuse, targeted at Robson in particular, did not sit comfortably with a majority of Blades fans.  With Internet forums and social networking sites giving free reign to fans wanting to proffer their opinions on players, management, club staff, fellow fans and the tea lady, the boundaries are further extended and this permeates the outside world. The Internet also gives fans the opportunity to mobilise themselves in a much more organised way and this is not limited to just physical mobilisation.

When dealing with the new breed of football club owner, not used to English football culture, the traditional methods of protest appear to be no longer effective. With Manchester United and Liverpool fans unhappy with the way their clubs are being run, marches and protests have been arranged. These gain publicity and media coverage for the cause, but seemingly had little impact on those that they were targeting.

Some may suggest that the protests might be more effective if the fans march went away from the ground to another location, leaving empty seats in the ground. The recent example from Germany, where Borussia Dortmund fans boycotted their game at Schalke in protest at hikes taking the cheapest ticket prices above 20 Euros, was effective, but only because it was against their rival club and not against their own. It would be difficult to make it work over here, particularly when so many fans have season tickets and the club has the money banked already. All they would lose out on is the discretionary spend at the match and the fans would miss out on a match they have paid at least £30 to attend.

The exception might be cup games, which already suffer from lower attendances anyway, and the Liverpool crowd of 25,000 against Steaua in the Europa League could be seen as a combination of supporter apathy with both the club's owners and competition. I have to say though, the idea of a "supporter" voluntarily choosing not to watch their team, doesn't sit easily with me.

Now things are moving on and more innovative fan mobilisation has come to the fore. This includes an email bombardment of Deutsche Bank and JP Morgan, from Liverpool fans who perceived them to be a potential source of financing for Messrs Gillet and Hicks. On the Kop Faithful website there is a standard email to send to Stephen Hester (Group Chief Executive of RBS) along with many others who might be able to call off any potential re-financing of the Americans' RBS loans. In summary, it suggests the sender will seek a parliamentary or public enquiry if RBS fail to seize the assets (Liverpool FC) and force a sale at a market price. Extreme threats.

Whilst their upset is understandable and their determination and organisation is to be applauded, their actions have to be perceived as risky.  In not just targeting the owners and the directors, but involving financiers and other professionals who may well end up working for/influencing new owners down the line, are they not having a potentially negative impact on any sale and on the club's working relationships with these entities afterwards?  

Might these protests and organised disruption to business cause potential owners to walk away? Do these wealthy investors look at what the fans are doing and question whether they should put themselves in that situation, potentially becoming the recipients of such actions when things turn sour at some future date? Many of these investors come from deeply religious countries/states with moral codes of conduct, the negative attention and bad publicity may well scare them off. Would you want to buy a club that has clearly inherent problems with its fan base? A fan base that is well organised and reacts so aggressively to a lack of success. Could you honestly believe that you will be given the, probably quite lengthy, time needed to effect change in those circumstances?

Fans need to have a voice, they are the major stakeholder in a football club, but what they say and do with it is important. The fans are revolting, but they need to be careful. What they don't need, is for those who might save them to view them as revolting in an entirely different way.