Wednesday, April 22, 2009

上週末﹐是英國足總杯準決賽的日子。貪婪的英國足總為了在球迷身上搾取得更多金錢﹐為了在電視轉播權方面獲得更多利潤﹐於是當溫布萊球場重建完畢後﹐他們便放棄百年傳統﹐甘願貶低那個英國足球神聖典堂的地位﹐把兩場足總杯準決賽都安排在倫敦舉行。從前﹐只有打入決賽的球隊方能有資格在溫布萊球場比賽。

當然﹐贊成的那方面總能夠舉出許多許多的好處出來﹐支持這一個決定。他們有人甚至可能拿出了一件二十年前發生的悲劇﹐偷換概念地來證明這一個貶低溫布萊球場地位的做法﹐不是為了金錢利益﹐乃是為了廣大球迷。

二十年前﹐同樣是英國足總杯準決賽舉行的週末﹐一件永遠改變英國足球的事件發生了。

那天﹐四月十五日﹐是利物浦對森林。在希斯爾堡球場舉行。因為過多球迷擁往那些企位﹐造成看臺倒塌﹐有九十六條生命因此離開了這個世界。

二十年了﹐在這個日子﹐大家都開始紀念那九十六條生命。因為就是那九十六條生命﹐改變了英國足球。從此﹐英國的球場再不容許企位。都要有座位。所有球迷都要坐下看球賽。亦因為要迅速改善球場的設施﹐好讓自己的主場能夠合乎因為希斯爾堡球場而改變的標準﹐球會開始發覺將要有龐大的賬單要支付﹐球會經濟未必承受得了。當所有球會都有同感的時候﹐這便加速了英國超級聯賽的誕生。他們以為﹐只有成立一個以球會利益著眼的聯賽﹐方能解決球會面對的問題。到了二十年後的今天﹐望著英國球會一年復一年地再次霸佔了歐洲聯賽冠軍杯四強席位裡面的三個﹐他們那時候的想法當然很正確。英國聯賽已經成為了世界上最富有的足球聯賽。

那九十六條生命﹐不但換來了以後的球迷可以在安全的球場替自己擁護的球隊打氣﹐也為英國球會稱霸歐洲﹐以至世界球壇奠下了根基。於是﹐在這些日子﹐在英國﹐大家都曉得紀念那一個悲劇﹐紀念那九十六條生命。

當然﹐在這個道理裡面﹐沒有值得不值得的考慮。因為沒有一個人的什麼是值得犧牲的。不過﹐至少這九十六條短暫的生命也為自己的國家做了一點事情。

同樣是二十年前﹐在一個遙遠的遠東國家﹐也有許多人突然在一晚裡死掉。只是﹐在二十年後的今天﹐在那一個國家﹐大家依然不能光明正大地去紀念那些短暫的生命﹐甚至不能紀念那一晚發生的那一件事情 - 因為大家都不能放到口邊去﹐假如還有人堅持要把那一件悲劇放到口邊去。

在這一個關節眼上﹐明顯地﹐做一個英國人是幸福的。因為那個遠東國家的人實在太聰明了﹐聰明得曉得為了自己的利益﹐選擇忘掉那些曾經為了國家未來犧牲自己生命的年青人﹐選擇把整件悲劇當作從來沒有發生過般忘掉。

想到這裡﹐我慶幸自己能夠執著一本英國護照﹐做一個假洋鬼子﹐唱一唱天祐女皇。雖云﹕「個個執住個兜」﹐不過﹐望著那些財大氣粗而迷失對自己民族期望的人﹐至少﹐我還能夠體驗到貧亦樂。

14 comments:

michelle said...

hi The Man, this is a bit embarrassing... for the second time in a month i'm going to ask if you want to give the next title for 2weeks1gathering...

We have now decided to let even 'old hand' to give title to avoid any misunderstanding... However as 周游 has already given 2 titles, i would like to ask if you are interested to give that one for the 15th May... If not, i'll go and ask Chili mom...

The Man Who Loves Everton said...

michelle,

it's not that embarrassing. i don't mind if i am needed. and i always support 2weeks1gathering.

michelle said...

Thanks The Man, i count on you then :)

Snowdrops said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Snowdrops said...

TMWLE:

I'm amazed that you didn't seem to realise the real culprit behind the Hillsborough tragedy - police incompetence. I frankly can't believe that you think the lesson to be learnt from the man-made Hillsborough tragedy was simply that clubs need more money to build safe football grounds with seating capacity. The design of the stadium is only one small contributing factor to why 96 people died on that fateful day twenty years ago. You're doing a disservice to the victims' families by not informing yourself of the facts before commentating.

Please refer to the Lord Justice Taylor's report, and the continuing fight for justice campaign by the 96 victims' families (HFSG - Hillsborough Family Support Group - who were the main organizer of the 20th anniversay of the Hillsborough tragedy memorial service). They are readily available online and excerpts from the Taylor report are cited in all major UK newspapers (perhaps with the exception of the Sun, which is still referred to, with ample justification, as The Scum by Liverpudlians). Thanks.

By the way, the search for justice for the Hillsborough victims carry on, even 20 years later. Reminds me of a similarly tortuous fight for justice to overcome lies and cover-up for another man-made tragedy in my homeland 20 years ago...

森林 said...

不想回憶,不敢忘記...

願共勉...

The Man Who Loves Everton said...

Snowdrop,

Though it's not political correct, I have to say that I'm not surprised that I may not be as sympathetic as others towards the ninety six LFC fans twenty years ago - I belong to the blue half of Liverpool. But I'm surprised I don't hide it properly. So I re-read what i've written and I still believe that no one can see I'm not as sympathetic as others towards the ninety six lives.

Okie I admit that I didn't mention the name of David Dunkenfield, who decided to open the exit gate at Leppings Lane to relieve a crush at the turnstiles and hence created a flood of 2,000 LFC fans into the stadium and he didn't do anything to prevent the people from heading down a tunnel leading to the two central pens, already congested, in which 96 poeple would be crushed to death. And this is the only thing that may make you feel "amazed".

But, in fact, to hide my true feeling, I decided not to talk about the cause of the disaster. I am talking about the effect that brought to English football by the disaster.

I remember in the evening of 15th April 1989, when interviewed on Match of the Day (in BBC), Graham Kelly, then Chief Executive of the FA, said that there was a realisation that things had to change. He said football had to change and that football fans had to get used to sitting down in future.

I also remember a fortnight later, when LFC played Everton in the final, there was a powerful chant of "No seats" echoed around Wembley.

It was Hillsborough that radically shifted the games' view of itself. It was a catalyst to the change because of the requirement, stated by Loard Justice Taylor, for all-seater stadia. That left the clubs with a huge bill and in some senses it was a justification for talks about forming an FA Premier League.

I re-read what I've written,

二十年了﹐在這個日子﹐大家都開始紀念那九十六條生命。因為就是那九十六條生命﹐改變了英國足球。從此﹐英國的球場再不容許企位。都要有座位。所有球迷都要坐下看球賽。亦因為要迅速改善球場的設施﹐好讓自己的主場能夠合乎因為希斯爾堡球場而改變的標準﹐球會開始發覺將要有龐大的賬單要支付﹐球會經濟未必承受得了。當所有球會都有同感的時候﹐這便加速了英國超級聯賽的誕生。他們以為﹐只有成立一個以球會利益著眼的聯賽﹐方能解決球會面對的問題。到了二十年後的今天﹐望著英國球會一年復一年地再次霸佔了歐洲聯賽冠軍杯四強席位裡面的三個﹐他們那時候的想法當然很正確。英國聯賽已經成為了世界上最富有的足球聯賽。

I don't think what I talk about makes Dubliners feel shame.

Btw my theme of the whole article is the last paragraphs.

The Man Who Loves Everton said...

森林,

how can one forget that?

Snowdrops said...

TMWLE:

Being a football fan for "the other half" is no reason for not recognising the culpabilility of the police in the Hillsborough disaster. It is not a matter of political correctness - it is a matter of knowing right from wrong and standing up for justice. You do not have to be a Liverpool fan to understand the victims' families' continuing search for justice. I am not a LFC fan, in fact, football in general means very little to me. However, I can identify with the families of those 96 victims not because I'm Irish or a football fan, but because I can plainly see when the state and media colluded to cover up the police responsibility over the tragedy, which reminds me of an event that happened that very same year in Beijing also, when lies are propagated by the powers-that-be to cover the massacreing of their own citizens.

It is rather disingenious of you to reduce the culpability of the police force down only to Duckenfield, he obviously played a huge part in the mismanagement and subsequent cover-up, but somehow you don't recognise that the whole police culture against football fans contributed to the deaths, and you strangely don't seem to feel the need to hold the police to account even if you concede their partial culpabiility. What's more, you don't seem to realise the part that the tabloid media played in this by spreading lies and conservative innuendo, shifing the blame away from the police and onto the football fans. Reducing everything to a matter of money and stadia design, as you have done in your blogpost, is a complete MISREPRESENTATION of the Lord Justice Taylor's report, where it was clearly stated that the primary responsibility for the tragedy lies with the police. The real tragedy of this, as is in Beijing, is that no-one is held accountable for this even 20 years later.

You may not be a LFC fan, but I'm amazed to see that you think that only a LFC fan could understand the anger and frustration of the victims' families for answers and justice. I am not a Beijinger also, but somehow I can completely empathise with those mothers who continue to mourn for their lost sons and daughters in the Tiananmen massacre.

The Man Who Loves Everton said...

Snowdrop,

Okie, I tried to add some sense of humour into my reply to your first comments to soften the tone. But, a bit obvious, it's backfired, no matter how hard I tried. So let me put it straight this time. Let me appologise in advance if I'm a bit rude.

Honestly, I don't know what you are talking, or complaining, about.

I'm not discussing the cause(s) of the disaster at Hillsborough twenty years ago. And it's not my intention to discuss the cause(s) of the disaster and the responsibility.

I am talking about the consequence(s) of the disaster. You know what I mean, don't you?

You mentioned several times about Lord Justice Taylor's report? Don't you know that one of the recommedation in that report is all-seater stadia? And it's this compulsory requirement which led the football clubs to kick start thinking of the establishment of FA Premier League - because they had to pay the huge bills for the refurbishment of their home grounds.

I don't understand how come quoting this matter of fact can make me a heartless man. Is it stipulated that if one has to talk about Hillsborough one has to mention the (major) cause of the disaster? I'm sorry I'm not shifting blame away from anybody because it was not my intention to touch the cause(s) and it is not (and will not be).

Hello, have I made myself a bit clearer this time?

Snowdrops said...

TMWLE:

Hmm, originally I was just amazed that you neglect to acknowledge the role of the police in the Hillsborough tragedy in your blogpost. This glaring omission I originally put it down to perhaps a lack of knowledge on your part (even though you must have realised this as you often claim to be an avid reader of UK newspapers), and so I refer you to the Taylor report.

Your response to the above are as follows:
1. Suggested that being sympathetic with the families of the Hillsborough victims is just a "politically-correct" position;
2. Reduced the culpability of the police force down only to the senior command in charge at the time, and only acknowledged his careless mismanagement at the start rather than the mismanagement of the rescue operation and the subsequent cover-up and the spreading of lies that the police force engaged in;
3. Suggested that I shouldn't be upset because you have not said anything offensive to Dubliners in your post. (how is being a dubliner relevant to the discussion I wonder?)

So excuse me for not falling about laughing at your stab at humour above. All I can say is, if I didn't know you as a blogger before, I'd have thought that you were simply trolling and wouldn't have responded at all.

Anyway, let's move away from the ad hominems ("you have a sense of humour failure!" "your jokes aren't funny!"), shall we? They are rather childish and unbecoming.

I am glad to see that you finally acknowledge the major responsibility of the police in the Hillsborugh disaster in your latest reply, even if you still feel the need to put that in brackets.

Again, my point from the beginning was simply that you saw fit to completely ignore the role of the police when you wrote about how Hillsborough change the view of the football game. Nobody is expecting that any talk about Hillsborough must be about the police involvement alone, but a complete omission of their role, especially when talking about the lessons to be drawn from the Hillsborough disaster twenty years on, is at the very least, disrespectful of the victims' families' continuing campaign to fight for justice. By airbrushing away the role of the police in your commentary and concentrating only on the one bullet point of the Taylor report about stadia design, it means that 96 lives have died in vain.

In fact, when you quote the FA chairperson as saying that fans "need to get used to sitting down" in future, you're again playing a part in the official propaganda that it is unruly football fans who were to blame for their own deaths and injuries. The Chief Executive of the FA was briefed by none other than Duckenfield when the scale of the Hillsborough disaster unfolded, who blamed the deaths on fans "rushing" the gates (when his own officers opened it on his command), on "ticketless" fans adding to the crush, and on "drunken" fans not doing what they are told. These are all lies spread to shift the spotlight away from the actual mismanagement by the police.

And it seems these lies have worked, even 20 years later, as it is apparent from your post that you didn't recognise the role of the police in the disaster until prompted to do so.

Even a simple acknowledgement that the police mismanagement was a key factor in the deaths of 96 people would have sufficed, but talking about the Hillsborough disaster only in terms of its contribution to the change in stadia design meant that all 96 people have died in vain. It is a bit like saying that the deaths of protesters at Tiannamen square helped to secure a more united China, never mind the role of the Communist regime in ordering the tanks in.

In fact, I guess what really irks me about your blogpost is that all the arguments you have made in your post and in your subsequent replies here can be applied to airbrushing away not only the role of the police in the Hillsborough disaster, but can also be used (indeed are being used) by the Communist regime to airbrush away their culpability of the Tiannamen square massacre:

"You know, the [chaos at Hillsborough] [Tiannamen square protests] are instigated by a bunch of unruly, good-for-nothing [football fans] [students], but as a result of that tragedy and immense loss of life, [seating became standard in all English stadia, making the games safer] [China has become stronger and better, with a more stable government]."

"Oh, what about the [role of the police] [the fact that the government sent in the tanks], how could you completely ignore this?"

"Oh, I'm not talking about that, even though I do concede that that is a (major) detail. Let's not mention that at all. I'm talking about the effect that the tragedy has on [English football] [China], why mention [the police] [the tanks]?"

The Man Who Loves Everton said...

Snowdrop,

I like your argument. I do like it. I haven't thought of it before.

Originally I wanted to say that the death of the ninety six people at least brings the prosperity of English football but how about those countless in Tiananmen Sq massacre? They died for nothing and no one cares about them now. In England, people gather to memorise the dead in the disaster. In China, if there are still some who care, they are prohibited to do so in public.

Yes, I do like your argument. But I think you've twisted mine a bit.

It is the death of the football fans which led all the people to think of the ways they had treated the football fans. Any loss of life is too many. It came to a realisation that things had to change. Is it same as "You know, the [chaos at Hillsborough] [Tiannamen square protests] are instigated by a bunch of unruly, good-for-nothing [football fans] [students], but as a result of that tragedy and immense loss of life, [seating became standard in all English stadia, making the games safer] [China has become stronger and better, with a more stable government]"? I doubt.

Maybe you do. But i think one's an apple and the other's an orange. Yes, they are all fruits. You can say so.

Snowdrops said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Snowdrops said...

Thanks for seeing the points I've tried to make in my replies here.

I do agree that there is a difference between police mismanaging the crowd control in a football match and then subsequently covering it up; and a government actually sending in tanks to crush a peaceful demonstration by its citizens in the main square in its capital city. However, the difference there exists between the two is one of degree, not of type. As the saying goes, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The power corruption in the UK is not to the same extent as that in China, purely because there is a democratic tradition there (that has not been completely destroyed - yet - by the Blair/Brown governments), so that there are official enquiries and judicial means of redress available to UK citizens, which are denied to Chinese citizens. However, as you are probably well aware, these official inquiries are a lot of times little more than window-dressing and white-wash (such as the Hutton inquiry into the Iraq war). The Lord Justice Taylor report at least was able to lay out the facts, which clearly refuted the lies about football fans being propagated by the police and the media at the time, but there remains to this day no-one being held accountable for these clearly-detailed police mistakes and perversion of the course of justice, and not even Duckenfield was being charged.

Yes, it is good to see that 20 years later, there could be a proper memorial service organised to commemorate the victims of the Hillsborough disaster. However, if public at large still believe that it is the victims who were to blame for their own deaths, then what difference there are really between the candlelight vigil held by Hong Kong people every June 4th to demand answers and justice from the Chinese government for the Tiananmen victims, with this memorial service organised by the Hillsborough Families Support Group who are still to this very day fighting for answers and justice from the UK government?