Title – Concert-goers condemn crush chaosSource – www.bbc.co.uk
Date – 15th November 2009
What seems remarkable about this story is the fact that the organisers of this event were very lucky to get away with as few injuries as they did. The simple fact is that the result could have been much much worse and could easily have resulted in fatalities.
Now my comments which will follow are based on assumption, we were not involved in this event or witness to it and I comment from the news coverage and information which has so far been made available; it is for the inquiry to look at the detail.
There seem to be a few key errors from the information we have so far.
The first and possibly the worst is the estimation of the numbers who would attend. With the line up of artistes playing appealing to a range of the demographic (including JLS currently appearing top of the charts with a large fan base of young people and Natalie Imbruglia appealing to a older section of the population), the concert would attract not just one section of the community but the whole community. This may be good as far as variety of the event goes, but will naturally attract more people in total. In addition the concert was free which removes another barrier for young people, especially those who may not be able to afford the usual concert ticket price.
The only real surprise with the numbers is that only 20,000 turned out and here is the first place where the organisers had some luck, had the weather been better they may well have had many more attend. JLS alone could sell out an arena tour at the moment, with 10,000 – 15,000 attendees each and at £30+ a ticket… who didn’t envisage that a free concert may attract twice this number?
Now we are not privy to the police plan or the risk assessments that must have been carried out by the organisers and the security companies involved. However the other questions which we must ask from what is seen in the cctv footage is how entry to the event was protected.
Presumably the cctv footage which is out there is of the holding area outside the event itself. It should have been predicted that thousands of people would be in this area. One of the main questions for us is what type of barrier was used, because from the evidence an unsuitable choice was made and led to collapse without too much pressure being exerted on it. This is probably the second area where the organisers got very lucky, although many of the injuries occurred during the barrier collapse, had the barriers been slightly stronger (not the correct barrier choice which would have withstood the pressure but something in-between) the effect of the collapse could have been catastrophic.
By collapsing when they did, this failure actually relieved the pressure in the crowd (what occurred in the event itself where those people moved to we are unaware, but could have caused further problems). Here again we feel that the organisers got a little lucky.
The way the barriers were set up in this area meant that as the crowd built up there was no way for people at the front to leave. There is a distinct ‘V’ shape and ‘right angle’ at the focal point of this crowd towards which the entire crowd is pushing, thus trapping those at the front. Even with a much smaller crowd this would have caused significant problems; especially without suitable crowd management behind the barriers and first aid facilities to deal with crush injuries.
Crush injuries can be very serious and a few broken bones are far from the worst consequence. Crush injuries often lead to breathing difficulties and death over very short time scales. Without experienced crowd management and paramedic support who understand crowd dynamics, these are the inevitable outcomes.
The questions here should not be about the numbers of police or private sector security nor should any blame be put on ‘people being determined to get in…’ as there is no indication that those in the crowds were behaving in any other way than would be expected for such an event. This was not a riot, civil disturbance or protest, it was enthusiastic (mainly young) people trying to get into a free event. Initially at least the cause does seem to be poor planning and execution.
Beyond The Blue provide training and Consultancy in a number of different areas including Event Security Planning and Event Management.Date – 15th November 2009
What seems remarkable about this story is the fact that the organisers of this event were very lucky to get away with as few injuries as they did. The simple fact is that the result could have been much much worse and could easily have resulted in fatalities.
Now my comments which will follow are based on assumption, we were not involved in this event or witness to it and I comment from the news coverage and information which has so far been made available; it is for the inquiry to look at the detail.
There seem to be a few key errors from the information we have so far.
The first and possibly the worst is the estimation of the numbers who would attend. With the line up of artistes playing appealing to a range of the demographic (including JLS currently appearing top of the charts with a large fan base of young people and Natalie Imbruglia appealing to a older section of the population), the concert would attract not just one section of the community but the whole community. This may be good as far as variety of the event goes, but will naturally attract more people in total. In addition the concert was free which removes another barrier for young people, especially those who may not be able to afford the usual concert ticket price.
The only real surprise with the numbers is that only 20,000 turned out and here is the first place where the organisers had some luck, had the weather been better they may well have had many more attend. JLS alone could sell out an arena tour at the moment, with 10,000 – 15,000 attendees each and at £30+ a ticket… who didn’t envisage that a free concert may attract twice this number?
Now we are not privy to the police plan or the risk assessments that must have been carried out by the organisers and the security companies involved. However the other questions which we must ask from what is seen in the cctv footage is how entry to the event was protected.
Presumably the cctv footage which is out there is of the holding area outside the event itself. It should have been predicted that thousands of people would be in this area. One of the main questions for us is what type of barrier was used, because from the evidence an unsuitable choice was made and led to collapse without too much pressure being exerted on it. This is probably the second area where the organisers got very lucky, although many of the injuries occurred during the barrier collapse, had the barriers been slightly stronger (not the correct barrier choice which would have withstood the pressure but something in-between) the effect of the collapse could have been catastrophic.
By collapsing when they did, this failure actually relieved the pressure in the crowd (what occurred in the event itself where those people moved to we are unaware, but could have caused further problems). Here again we feel that the organisers got a little lucky.
The way the barriers were set up in this area meant that as the crowd built up there was no way for people at the front to leave. There is a distinct ‘V’ shape and ‘right angle’ at the focal point of this crowd towards which the entire crowd is pushing, thus trapping those at the front. Even with a much smaller crowd this would have caused significant problems; especially without suitable crowd management behind the barriers and first aid facilities to deal with crush injuries.
Crush injuries can be very serious and a few broken bones are far from the worst consequence. Crush injuries often lead to breathing difficulties and death over very short time scales. Without experienced crowd management and paramedic support who understand crowd dynamics, these are the inevitable outcomes.
The questions here should not be about the numbers of police or private sector security nor should any blame be put on ‘people being determined to get in…’ as there is no indication that those in the crowds were behaving in any other way than would be expected for such an event. This was not a riot, civil disturbance or protest, it was enthusiastic (mainly young) people trying to get into a free event. Initially at least the cause does seem to be poor planning and execution.
Please visit our website at www.btbl.co.uk. For a complete list of Blog entries visit our National Press Archive page.
For more information on any of our services, please call us on 0845 602 55 95 or Contact Us.
No comments:
Post a Comment