Talk:Heysel Stadium disaster

message: "Liverpool players and fans later said that they were shocked at the abject conditions of the ground, despite reports from Arsenal  fans that the stadium was a "dump" when the Gunners played there a few years earlier." Is this part of the citation in the sentence immediately following? Or is it from another source? This needs attribution. Zminer (talk) 16:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Need Attribution of Quotes

message: "...The disaster is one of the most high profile and one of the worst cases of football hooliganism in European and world football..." - Says who? Surely this kind of statement needs to be cited? Andy86 (talk) 14:14, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Opening Paragraph

message: I've seen a few edits now that state that the main cause of death was suffocation from being trampled on. I have reverted the edit in question as it was not sourced, and neither have I ever read this from a reputable website. Could someone please point me to the relevent source, if indeed there is one? Cheers, aLii 23:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I found this video in which one can clearly see the accident as it happens. Especially the crowd crush that caused the deaths. I apologize for using an Italian spoken video, which I know is against Wikipedia policy. But the words aren't important. I which to use the images to clarify the events that occurred. This one simply had the best angles and quality and most full depiction of the tragedy. WARNING FOR EXTREMELY GRAPHIC IMAGES. Pay attention to the crushing crowd on the left side of the screen. You can clearly see the people trapped against the wall on the left and against the fences bordering the playing field on the bottom of the screen. Suffocating (gasping for breath and bluish lips and skin) and clearly in distress. They are pinned down and cannot escape unless pulled free. The wall has not collapsed yet on these images. But it is clear that the wall did not and never did collapse on the crowd. The crowd is pinned up against it. It eventually fell down onto a lower level (clear of crowd) and most importantly it fell away from the crowd. Again I warn for Graphic images. But this gross error should be corrected. It's a disgrace to the memory of the victims and survivors.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.134.92.189 (talk) 21:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cause of deaths?

message: I still don't understand why mention of match details is particularly relevant to the Heysel Stadium disaster? Sure mention the final score, but goal-scorers, and bad refereeing decisions seem to be taking it a bit too far.
*Friendship gestures and how they were received by Juventus fans is relevant.
*Crowd violence is relevant, as this is an article about crowd violence.
*The score is relevant, seeing as the match is mentioned.
Could you please explain why "although there was controversy since Juventus were disallowed a legit goal" is relevant? I can't even remember that a goal was disallowed. All I remember of the tie was that Liverpool won deservedly, and that Juventus were surprisingly poor in the match in Turin — neither of which are mentioned, and rightly so. aLii 19:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: you can read the link I supplied (Guardian transcript). Del Piero scored a perfectly legitimate header and the goal was disallowed. This is a fact that happened (not a question of memory I believe). The small relevance is because this goal was crucial for the final result. The BIG relevance is because controversy is mentioned about the original match in Heysel. What's the relevance that the penalty was supposedly undeserved to the disaster ? None. None of the riots happened because of the result... the riots were before the match , and there doesn't seem to be any relevance between the disaster and the alleged controversy in the heysel match. So as I see it, to remain WP:NPOV here, there are two choices. Either remove the criticizm over the penalty in heysel, or include this controversy as well - it shows that Juventus did not earn unjustly and that Livperpool eventually gained from a bad referre decision as well, all this in context of Juve Liverpool relations (there might have been hostile feelings over both results because of the bad referrering, and this might affect the future too) . Amoruso 21:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've taken out the two NPOV bits, which I found distasteful as well as unencyclopedic. --Guinnog 21:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough, removing both is probably the correct thing to do. I can't say I wrote that bit, and I've never seen the 1985 game, so can't comment, but like Guinnog implies; Who cares about the (1985) match? It can be written up in a match article if someone does. aLii 00:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 2005 Juventus vs. Liverpool tie

message: "UEFA, the organizer of the event, the owners of Heysel Stadium and the Belgian police were never investigated for culpability. There was no official inquiry into the causes of the disaster" is to the best of my knowledge not accurate. There was a parlementary inquiry in Belgium where heavy blame was put on the police and it was reorganised after this and other affairs. As far as UEFA is concerned, sporting organisations always seem to regard themselves as being above the law, so probably that is true. --Maarten1963 01:04, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. Got any belgian links to back that up? I (shamefully) only speak English. aLii 12:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately I can't find the text of their report online anywhere, let alone an English version. For what it's worth here are a couple of sites in Dutch referring to it and the police reorganisation in particular that followed Heysel and Marc Dutroux:   A Belgian court case following Heysel is mentioned (in English :-) here:  --Maarten1963 17:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inquiries 

message: Reads very differently from the current understanding of the events. The lack of free journal articles on the internet have seen this article become a bastardised version of events. Many scholars and academics would see this as a very limited examination of the events that led to the 39 deaths. Alexsanderson83 15:44, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So improve it then. aLii 16:16, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you serious?  This article is a joke.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.30.232 (talk) 05:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article is worse now

message: If the two frenchmen dead in Heysel are "Jacques François" and "Claude Robert", I must add that their names sound extremely common, too much I'd say. I sound like those name were invented just to preserve anonymity of their families. What are the sources ?
82.240.207.81 (talk) 15:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names 

message: "The Heysel Stadium disaster occurred owing to football hooliganism in which a retaining wall of the Heysel Stadium in Brussels collapsed on 29 May 1985 before a football match between Liverpool F.C. from England and Juventus F.C. from Italy."
Grammatically, that's not very good. Since when is hooliganism about walls collapsing? I know what you mean, because I know about the event, but if I didn't, I'd be scratching my head. The sentence is also overly long. The opening sentence is crucial. --Dweller (talk) 12:25, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar in opening sentence 

message: what has that section to do with anything? Loosmark (talk) 17:28, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: quite almost-instinct 01:11, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roma-Liverpool 

message: In the midst of the tragedy when the wall had collapsed and bodies were being carried away on makeshift stretchers, some Juventus fans unfolded a long banner with the words "REDS ANIMALS" emblazoned on it.  Such a banner was made prior to the match. It illustrated the tension between sections of both sets of supporters prior to the game, adding to it's volatility.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.58.66.194 (talk) 18:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Reds Animals" Banner 

message: This is, quite frankly, complete rubbish, at no English club is this applicable, it is however in the Netherlands. This article is poorly written, and poorly researched.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.212.157.15 (talk) 12:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  fans of clubs to be members to get tickets 

message: In section 4.3 "Teams affected by the ban", in the second table, it says that Arsenal missed out on the 1993-4 Cup Winners' Cup.  Not only did they compete that year, they won it.78.86.164.20 (talk) 16:10, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a source to back this up?Drew Smith What I've done 05:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: How about Wikipedia?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.250.22.8 (talk) 20:43, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual Error 

message: Is it worth mentioning somewhere how soon this happened after the Bradford fire disaster? I know the causes were different, but the conjunction of the two disasters made for a very dark time in English football. Rachel Pearce (talk) 08:14, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bradford 

message: This table in this article claims that in the first three years of the UEFA ban on English clubs that five teams from the country would have entered the UEFA Cup each season. This is nonsense, under normal circumstances the maximum number of teams who could enter the UEFA Cup from one country was four. The only way in which a country could have five teams was if the winners of the UEFA Cup did not re-qualify for the following years tournament through their own domestic league, in which case they were allowed to re-enter the tournament to defend it along with the other four qualifiers from that country. England did have five teams in the 1984-85 UEFA Cup, but that is the explanation for this, Tottenham had won the 1984 UEFA Cup but only finished eighth in the First Division so re-entered as holders. The League Cup winners such as Norwich City were not additional fifth entrants either, they would take the fourth UEFA Cup spot. Chelsea would not have contested the 1985-86 UEFA Cup and they shouldnt be listed there, and there are similar errors for the following two seasons as well. 92.8.170.196 (talk) 19:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I noticed this as well, I was wondering where England's magically inflated UEFA Cup entries were coming from for those two seasons. Seems nothings getting done about it though. Seems somebody just took a look at the leagues tables for each year and just made it up from there. Who says Wikipedia is unrealible eh? 92.9.27.102 (talk) 07:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Teams affected by the ban

message: One of the lines in Aftermath says: "source Date: 20/05/2005 Section : SPORTS Section: SPORTS Sous Section : FOOTBALL Sub Section: FOOTBALL www.dhnet.be/dhjournal/archive" I have no clue what this is trying to say, or if its a broken reference/citation. Can anyone clean it up? Coradon (talk) 09:54, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aftermath has a confusing entry 

message: Are we being PC for not mentioning UEFA's decissions? Liverpool was very critical for the standards of this stadium, and wanted a different stadium. Calling Heysel a National Stadium is a request for trouble. 
Just to mention another thing...nuetral supporters. Who invented that monstrosity of PC?
(83.108.30.141 (talk) 23:36, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: UEFA's decisions should be mentioned yes but I have no idea why you regard the term "neutral supporters" as "PC". The term refers to supporters in the stadium who support neither club involved in the game but who have simply gone along to watch the match out of interest. This is nothing unusual, there are such spectators at every cup final of every kind, the FA for instance keep a large of number of tickets back for neutrals for the FA Cup final, 200 are sent to each of the 92 football league clubs every year. European Cup finals were always attended by a large number of locals simply interested in watching such a big final when it was staged on their doorstep. Some people just like to watch football. If you doubt that search for Heysel on the web and you'll find plenty of recollections of neutral Belgians who were at the game. In fact one of the people killed was an Englishman who was a neutral, he wasn't a Liverpool fan, he happened to be living in Brussels and just bought a ticket for the game. The problem at Heysel was a large number of tickets for the neutral section were actually sold to Juventus fans on the day of the game so there was a sizable Juventus contingent next to the Liverpool fans, which wasn't supposed to happen. In fact it was a major contributing factor in the disaster. 92.9.27.102 (talk) 07:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  UEFA's role in thhis mash-up 

message: The answer is simple and clearcut: All excuses and stupid apologizes such as " the stadium was not suitable for a European Cup final" are typical British politeness.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.20.189.202 (talk) 20:13, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why did only Italians die and not a single English "fan"? 

message: There is a section titled "Consequences for football in England".
The last sentence says: "Further, English sides reached the final for 6 consecutive seasons between 2004/05 and 10/11 – Liverpool in 2005 and 2007, Arsenal in 2006, Manchester United in 2008, 2009 and 2011, and Chelsea in 2008." It' simply not true, because there was no english club in the 2010 UEFA Champions League Final.
:Sorry I forgot to login and sign it. --Simy69 (talk) 12:09, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  There was no english club involved in the 2010 Final 

message: I thought it had been established that not all of those who died were Juventus supporters, or Italian. Shouldn't this be reflected in the text of the article? Gwladys24 (talk) 19:01, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thirty-nine Juventus supporters ? 

message: As of today, the article contains statements as plain as "It concluded that blame should rest solely with the English fans.".  I find the article too much one-sided.  As conclusive as reports were on blaming the english, still belgian authorities are to blame for their failure to foresee the disaster, and their slow response to it.  Authorities are always expected to be smarter than fans, you know.  But don't take my word for it - take the facts.  Controversy about belgian authorities behavior _did_ exist.  I remember the english ministry speaking before the Commons, showing them a copy of a letter sent in advance to belgian authorities offering cooperation to avoid precisely this type of conflicts - an offer for cooperation which was said to be ignored.  I watched this on spanish TV news on 1985, on the days following the disaster.  So even tough afterwards official reports focused the blame on english fans (hooligans, I heard they are called), at the first moment it was belgian authorities who were widely criticised.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignacio.Agulló (talk • contribs) 18:36, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Because this isn't actually a fantasy world where Liverpool fans are never to blame for anything.  I suppose you also blame rape victims? Wannabe rockstar (talk) 05:46, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This kind of supports my view that authorities are expected to be smarter than fans, thank you.Ignacio.Agulló (talk) 23:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing controversy on Belgian authorities 

message: I am quite sure that Freddy Thielemans was not the Brussels Mayor at the time of the disaster.  In my recollection, Hervé Brouhon was.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.18.27.131 (talk) 14:33, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brussels Mayor 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Heysel Stadium disaster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131012012438/http://www.sport.pl/pilka/1,65083,8536356,Nie_kibicow_dla_Bonka_na_stadionie_Juventusu.html to http://www.sport.pl/pilka/1,65083,8536356,Nie_kibicow_dla_Bonka_na_stadionie_Juventusu.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130527061653/http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/policing13.htm?w46 to http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/policing13.htm?w46
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120521054423/http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-victims/reducing-crime/football-disorder/ to http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-victims/reducing-crime/football-disorder/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:03, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "Liverpool fans began to throw stones across the divide, which they were able to pick up from the terraces beneath them."
This for sure needs a cit. It is a contentious statement of how the violence began, or likely to be one. It seems things weren't quite so clear on that day. There was sporadic brawling leading up to the crush for some time. I know it's popular to blame Liverpool fans, but it looks to me like a lot of the Juventus fans were all to eager to riot as well. I just watched this documentary by the BBC, and it's got me questioning a lot of my assumptions. At the very least, I think this article should acknowledge that the chain of events is murky, or that who was the first to do what isn't known - or cite the RS if it is known. Dcs002 (talk) 11:52, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cit needed if we're going to say who started the violence 

message: The article doesn't really state why ALL of the English league clubs were banned, rather than just Liverpool FC. Unless I missed it! thanks, 137.205.170.70 (talk) 12:40, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  All English clubs? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Heysel Stadium disaster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100329231137/http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk:80/policing13.htm?w46 to http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/policing13.htm?w46
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090318140521/http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk:80/crime-victims/reducing-crime/football-disorder/ to http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-victims/reducing-crime/football-disorder/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:16, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I understand that a "result" of this incident was several bans and convictions of manslaughter, but surely the actually loss of life (which is the cause of said bans and convictions) is more important to note. I expected a death count in the infobox. ~Mable (chat) 20:05, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox doesn't mention deathcount 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Heysel Stadium disaster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140322225627/http://www.saladellamemoriaheysel.it/Intervista_a_Ian_Rush.html to http://www.saladellamemoriaheysel.it/Intervista_a_Ian_Rush.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/lfc_story/a_1985.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sport.pl/pilka/1%2C65083%2C8536356%2CNie_kibicow_dla_Bonka_na_stadionie_Juventusu.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141106010508/http://www.gethitch.com.au/csf/Soccer%20Coaching/36865462-Science-and-Soccer-Thomas-Reilly.pdf to http://www.gethitch.com.au/csf/Soccer%20Coaching/36865462-Science-and-Soccer-Thomas-Reilly.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.saladellamemoriaheysel.it/Immagini/Lapide.jpg
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:32, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Heysel Stadium disaster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110321174959/http://www.lfconline.com/news/loadsngl.asp?cid=EDB3 to http://www.lfconline.com/news/loadsngl.asp?CID=EDB3
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:55, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: ...this is still a terrible article. BillhomEls (talk) 20:09, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Several years on

message: Without providing any citation the article claims the Coppieters report said it was all the fault of Liverpool fans.
Yet according to the Daily Mail (an outlet unlikely to be kind to Liverpool fans) 
"Indeed an initial inquiry by Marina Coppieters, a Belgian judge, found after 18 months that the police and the authorities should also face charges. The level of policing was inadequate, while the distribution of tickets, and the fact that so many Italians had obtained tickets to what was supposed to be a neutral zone, was also a major issue for which the authorities were held responsible.
Led by Otello, the families demanded justice and in the end Jacques Georges, the then UEFA president, and Hans Bangerter, his general secretary, were threatened with imprisonment but eventually received conditional discharges. Albert Roosens, the former secretary-general of the Belgian Football Union, received a six-month suspended prison sentence for ‘regrettable negligence’. Two senior police officers were given similar punishments."''
If no citation to the article's claim can be provided it should surely be amended accordingly? 86.6.194.189 (talk) 09:21, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Why does a source have to be “kind to Liverpool fans?” 2001:FB1:77:AE76:2896:F4B6:694A:CE79 (talk) 12:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coppieters Report. 

message: It was never used and wasn’t official in any way 2001:FB1:77:61E4:85EF:73E7:2DB8:7C7F (talk) 10:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  What’s the relevance of Gerry Clarkson’s report? 

message: The purpose of this page is not to exonerate Liverpool fans 153.231.87.213 (talk) 21:43, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The purpose of this page?