 | Forum
Reply | Blackburn Reflection
at 00:12 15 Feb 2026
I can't think of a team that has had as many injuries as us through this season. In terms of subs, his choice was so limited - Smyth and Kolli were his only true attacking options in addition to the players he had on the pitch. We're missing Dembele, Obikwu, Burrell, Poku, and Chair. That's in addition to Larkeche, Clarke-Salter (bench fit), and Varane.
Even if only 4 of these were available, it'd provide some rotation; Kone needs a break, and we have little variety in attack. With a 3-game week coming up and a possible injury to Madsen, it's not going to be pretty. |
| Forum
Reply | Charlton crowd issues
at 22:59 12 Feb 2026
AGreed - I have copied in our supporter services in to my follow up and happy to take it to them after. Different problem though - CAFC need to respond to this first. |
| Forum
Reply | Charlton crowd issues
at 21:53 12 Feb 2026
I would agree but the review goes classic DARVO - Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender - about halfway through:
"QPR supporters arrived via two party boats. Large numbers intoxicated.
Numerous supporters were intoxicated, with CCTV evidence of Class A
drug use.
Enforcement activity included: 25 ejections for various things resulting in 9
arrests.
Multiple tailgaters jumping the turnstiles without tickets.
Additional response teams were deployed at the compound to filter
supporters towards the turnstiles."
They're saying that, as a QPR fan, the activities of other QPR fans made their job difficult.
Tough
I said back at them:
The closing section of your response covers intoxication, drug use, arrests, and tailgating. I understand why that context is relevant to your overall operational picture. It is not relevant to my complaint, which concerns queue management and steward conduct at a specific location during a specific period. I would ask that it not be read as a response to the substance of my concerns. [Post edited 12 Feb 21:54]
|
| Forum
Reply | Charlton crowd issues
at 21:33 12 Feb 2026
For those interested:
Charlton have responded to my formal complaint about the Jimmy Seed Stand ingress on 6 February.
The short version: they have acknowledged the issues, committed to specific actions, and confirmed the matter will go to their Safety Advisory Group. That is a better outcome than I expected at this stage.
What they accepted:
Crowd conditions during the 19:30 to 20:00 period were uncomfortable and movement became restricted
The steward responses I described ("you should have got here earlier" and "write in") did not meet their expected standards, and this has been addressed with the contractor
Further proactive measures could reasonably have been taken to manage crowd flow and the interface with traffic
What they are committing to:
Updating risk assessments and contingency planning for late ingress scenarios
Reviewing external queue and crowd-flow management at the Jimmy Seed Stand
Reinforcing steward training on communication and escalation
Reviewing how they communicate with supporters during disruption
Where I am pushing back:
Their response states there was "no crushing." That is a categorical denial that does not reflect what the photographs from that evening show. I have three images taken at Entrance 4 during that period. They show a densely packed crowd with no queue structure, no lane separation, and no barriers. One image shows police officers embedded inside the crowd at the entrance pinch point rather than managing the approach from outside it.
I have sent a further reply attaching those photographs, asking that they be included in the SAG review. I have also asked Charlton to account for why no near-miss report was recorded given the conditions documented and to explain specifically whether the decision not to delay kick-off at 19:25 included a review of external crowd management at the away end.
I am not escalating to the EFL or Independent Football Ombudsman at this point. If the SAG review is substantive and the committed actions are implemented, that is a reasonable outcome from a complaint process.
I will update when I hear back. [Post edited 12 Feb 21:45]
|
| Forum
Reply | PCN
at 17:09 12 Feb 2026
The bad news is that paying the £90 means the chance of challenging it is significantly reduced – probably 5% or less.
If there was a lack of signage for the congestion zone AND the parking area, you might have a claim. For example, if there are missing entry signs, obscured or vandalised signs, non-compliant sign designs, or a new restriction introduced without a legally required notice period, this may lead to confusion.
The bad news is that using the road for years, or a nurse telling you, your character, or frustration don't affect liability. |
| Forum
Reply | QPR being sued
at 16:25 12 Feb 2026
The club will have insurance to pay any claim, but a condition will have been that we defend; I'd guess a before-action offer might have been made accepting no liability beforehand, which has been rejected. |
| Forum
Reply | Half decent tv
at 23:17 11 Feb 2026
Mrs E17 is into Lincoln Lawyer.
The Best in Me on Netflix is pretty good – 4 episodes in, and it's pretty twisty. |
| Forum
Reply | Bikes in London
at 12:47 9 Feb 2026
Same - finds the quiet routes really well. |
| Forum
Reply | It's the NFL..again.
at 00:42 9 Feb 2026
One for the defences – 7 punts in the first half so far. |
| Forum
Reply | Charlton crowd issues
at 20:18 8 Feb 2026
That's for Charlton to do. Like all the other people involved, Charlton retain accountability for this and if the security company are at fault, the issue rests with CAFC since that procured them.
I've had the acknowledgement from CAFC.
Thank you for contacting Charlton Athletic Football Club regarding your concerns about stewarding and crowd safety outside the away end at The Valley prior to our fixture against Queens Park Rangers on Friday, 6 February 2026, with a 20:01 KO.
Please accept this email as formal acknowledgement that your correspondence has been received and logged as a complaint relating to spectator safety, stewarding arrangements and crowd management at the Jimmy Seed Stand turnstiles, concourse and the external approach area, including Valley Grove, during the ingress period you have identified.
We take all matters relating to supporter safety extremely seriously. Your complaint has been passed to the Club’s Safety Management Team for investigation in accordance with our established procedures and responsibilities as Safety Certificate holder. As part of this process, we will review the relevant safety, stewarding and crowd management arrangements in place for this fixture, together with any available evidence and reports relating to the period in question.
We will now investigate the issues you have raised and will respond in due course with our findings and any appropriate actions arising from that review
*edit
Never have your company pìss me off btw. I complain REALLY well.
*edit 2
I've run their response through a proctoring tool designed to identify AI text and it came back as 100%. 🤔 [Post edited 8 Feb 20:28]
|
| Forum
Reply | Charlton crowd issues
at 11:55 8 Feb 2026
I have half a dozen pics or so, but any images or videos of the crush would be appreciated.
If people have stuff or links to it on social media, they can DM me here, and I'll sort out a way to collect them in case they become necessary. |
| Forum
Reply | Charlton crowd issues
at 11:46 8 Feb 2026
You may not have seen, but the complaints go to Charlton in the first instance. They have the safety certificate, employ the stewards, have the plans in place and have safety and safeguarding officers. They have to be given a chance to respond first. Complaining to people like the fire service will just get redirected to Charlton and ignored.
For info, the full complaint:
Dear Charlton Athletic FC Complaints/Safety Team,
I am writing as a Queens Park Rangers away supporter to make a formal safety complaint about stewarding and crowd safety outside the away end at The Valley before your match against QPR on Friday, 6 February 2026. In line with EFL guidance that incidents affecting supporters at EFL grounds are handled in the first instance by the home club through its established supporter contact and complaints procedures, I am raising this directly with Charlton Athletic FC for investigation and response, with escalation via the EFL and the Independent Football Ombudsman only if necessary.
Location and time
Location: Away section (Jimmy Seed Stand turnstiles and approach/concourse, including Valley Grove immediately outside the entrance gates)
Time: Approximately 19:30–20:00 for a 20:00 kick-off
What happened
Train issues and delays meant large numbers of away supporters arrived in a short period from around 19:30. This created a substantial surge of fans attempting to enter the Jimmy Seed Stand in the final 30 minutes before kick-off. I recognise that train disruption is outside Charlton’s control, but as the home club and safety certificate holder under the Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975, you remain responsible for managing ingress safely in accordance with your General Safety Certificate and Operations Manual. The conditions in this area created an obvious risk of injury, particularly for children, shorter supporters and older people caught in the middle of the surge. At points, movement in the crowd was largely involuntary, with people being pushed from behind and sideways, and there was very limited space to regain balance or avoid falling if someone had stumbled.
Outside the away end, including on the approach road immediately in front of the Jimmy Seed Stand entrance gates, there was:
Severe congestion, with crushing and surging in the queues. The build-up extended back into the roadway, with tightly packed supporters and moving traffic nearby.
No meaningful queue management. There were no clear lanes, no barriered structure, and no visible attempt to regulate flow into the ground, manage pressure points, or control the interface between the crowd and the road.
A lack of information or announcements to supporters about the causes of delay or how entry would be managed.
Trip and fall risks on uneven surfaces, kerbs and changes in level within a tightly packed crowd, with no visible efforts to identify or mitigate these hazards as numbers built up.
When supporters, including myself, raised concerns about the crush and the lack of control, one steward responded, “You should have got here earlier.” When I attempted to escalate the matter to a supervisor, the response was that I should “write in”. There was no attempt to address the safety issues on the ground.
I appreciate that the congestion on the road outside was created by the volume and timing of arriving supporters. However, as event organiser and safety certificate holder you retain responsibility, alongside the local authority and police, for co‑ordinating and implementing reasonable crowd‑ and traffic‑management controls on the approaches to the away end (the external or arrival zone) to prevent dangerous congestion and unsafe interaction with vehicles. The lack of steward intervention or structured queuing on the road outside the Jimmy Seed entrance therefore appears inconsistent with those duties.
Why this is a safety concern
The situation described above appears inconsistent with your obligations under the Charlton Athletic FC General Safety Certificate (Issue 3, 28 September 2018), including:
Clause 4 – the Holder must “take all necessary precautions for the reasonable safety of people present at the sports ground”, with responsibility for safety resting at all times with the Holder or their appointed representatives.
Clause 7 – the terms and conditions apply from three hours before kick-off, which clearly covers the 19:30–20:00 period.
Clause 11 – the Holder must ensure that “any measures for managing crowds prescribed in the Operations Manual and this certificate are observed”.
Clause 15 – the Holder must, based on risk assessment, identify and provide sufficient stewards and safety management personnel “to monitor, direct, guide, manage and assist spectators” during specified activities.
Given the known risk of late surges caused by transport disruption, I am concerned that either:
the risk assessment, Event Management Plan, Stewarding Plan, Contingency Plans and Traffic Management Plan did not adequately address this foreseeable scenario, including queues and crowding on the approach road; or
the plans were not implemented in practice for this fixture, particularly at the away end.
What I am requesting
Acknowledge this complaint
Confirm in writing, within three working days, that this has been logged as a formal complaint relating to stewarding and spectator safety at the Jimmy Seed Stand (turnstiles, concourse and Valley Grove) on 6 February 2026.
Explain your investigation
Set out the steps you will take, including as a minimum:
Review of CCTV and/or body‑worn video, traffic cameras or other recorded monitoring covering the away turnstiles, concourse and approach road between 19:30 and 20:00.
Review of stewarding and safety officer logs, deployment plans and briefings for this match, particularly for the away end and its external approaches.
Obtaining statements from relevant stewards and supervisors who were attempting to manage the crowd.
Identification of any incident or near‑miss reports raised in relation to this ingress period.
Provide your findings and actions
Within 15 working days, provide a written response that explains:
Your findings on crowd density, queue management, traffic‑and‑crowd interface, and staff conduct in the away area, including the road outside, during the period in question.
Whether, in your view, the arrangements were compliant with clauses 4, 7, 11 and 15 of your General Safety Certificate and the associated Operations Manual, including the Stewarding Plan, Event Management Plan, Contingency Plans and Traffic Management Plan.
What remedial actions you will take to prevent a recurrence, for example, changes to steward deployment, queue‑ and traffic‑management arrangements, communications with supporters during disruption, and staff training.
Confirm engagement with the Safety Advisory Group
Confirm whether this incident will be reported to the Charlton Athletic Football Club Safety Advisory Group (SAG). If it will not be reported, please explain why it does not meet the threshold for SAG consideration given the safety concerns raised in this complaint and the requirements of the General Safety Certificate.
Copies
I am copying this complaint to the Football Supporters’ Association, as they support away fans with safety and stewarding concerns, and my own club, QPR, so they are aware of the safety issues affecting their travelling supporters.
Please respond by email. I am retaining a copy of this complaint and your response in case escalation is required via the SAG at the Royal Borough of Greenwich, EFL or the Independent Football Ombudsman.
Yours faithfully, |
| Forum
Reply | Charlton crowd issues
at 00:20 8 Feb 2026
Searching is limited to external clothing, pat-downs, xray electronic wands, etc. They are not allowed to search a wallet, and it is likely illegal under the Theft Act |
| Forum
Reply | Six Nations Thread anyone?
at 17:09 7 Feb 2026
Points betting is 55+ right now. Can see that being England's score alone. |
| | E17hoop
|
Site Scores| Prediction League: | 2 | | TOTAL: | 2 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
