A Letter From GMP

A Letter From Greater Manchester Police

Much has been said on the message board about the actions of Greater Manchester Police after the Bury game that sealed our promotion to League One. I'm sure that many Swans fans wrote and e-mailed their concerns to the police department themselves.

One of those fans has received written communication back from Greater Manchester Police in response to his letter and for your interest we reproduce this below

Dear Mr White

Bury FC - v- Swansea City FC, 7th May 2005

I am in receipt of the text of your e-mail message, forwarded to the Chief Constable's office and acknowledged on 11th May.

As you might expect, the unfortunate incidents at the end of the above game have generated a good deal of attention, and I apologise for the delay in responding to your comments. May I, first of all, take the opportunity to agree with you that the majority of football fans (whether from Swansea or otherwise) are generally well behaved and intent on enjoying their day out - particularly, as in this instance, when celebrating a promotion to a higher division.

Bury FC, together with GMP police officers at Bury, worked hard before and during the game, to facilitate such celebrations, providing that they could take place in safety. I understand that Swansea FC agreed to the Bury club's request to publish an item in the match programme for the final fixture at the Vetch Field reminding the fans that they must stay off the pitch, and that compliance would allow the Swansea players to re-appear and acknowledge the fans' support after the final whistle. The players and management of the club were fully aware that they would be welcome to celebrate with a 'lap of honour' but only if they fans stayed off the pitch. Notices were prominently displayed at Gigg Lane reminding fans not only that pitch encroachment was a criminal offence, but also that "the players will not be allowed to come out to acknowledge your support if any fans enter the field of play" Loudspeaker announcements reinforced that message throughout the game, and after.

Nevertheless, despite all the above, it was always recognised that a pitch invasion was very possible, or even probable, particularly after earlier incidents during the game itself. The contingency plan for that event was to allow the fans onto the pitch (it would have been provocative and hazardous to attempt to prevent them physically) and to remain there, in safety, until such time as they dispersed of their own accord. The Swansea club were fully aware that the players should not re-appear; and, in fact, a specific instruction was given that they must not leave the dressing room. This was never intended as an attempt to 'spoil the party' but rather to preserve public safety.

In the event, not only did the players appear in the directors box, contrary to specific instructions, but also they (and others) climbed onto the flat roof above the executive rooms (which, as you say, was not strong enough to support them) You may not be aware that immediately prior to the players re-appearance significant numbers of fans were, in fact, leaving the ground as intended, but their direction reversed and a crowd surge occurred in the area immediately beneath the directors box itself. It was at that time that a very real threat to public safety did occur. In face, young children were at the risk of being crushed, and were pulled away by police officers and stewards. Missiles were being thrown. A police officer was pushed to the ground and injured. Whilst this was going on club stewards attempted to direct the players out of the directors box and back to the dressing room, but were unsuccessful. It was for that reason (you say in your letter "for some unknown reason") that police officers were deployed to remove the Swansea players from the directors box.

I cannot discuss, in detail, the specific incident which led to Mr Gueret's arrest, but I can assure you that there was no 'small mindedness', nor 'fame seeking', on the part of the officers concerned; nor is it correct that the arrest was "for no reason whatsoever". In fact, the offence for which Mr Gueret was arrested is one which carries a statutory requirement for a warning not to continue the disorderly conduct before any arrest may take place.

As you may appreciate, I have studied video recordings of the relevant incident, as well as reports from police officers and club officials. Having done so, I cannot agree with your assessment of the situation. My information tends to support the view that in mitigating the provocative and irresponsible behaviour occurring in the directors box the officers concerned were attempting to restore order and preserve the public safety threatened by the players' actions in ignoring the requirement to remain out of sight.

I trust the information contained in this letter will be of some assistance

Supt. P.D. Scofield

Superintendent - Operations

I was going to reproduce that letter without comment but a few things did spring to mind

• The constant usage of the statement "In fact" as if to say what do you know you are just a football fan and I am justifying some heavy handed police work

• JackArmy.net will never condone any actions that endanger the safety of children. But I do have to say that I did not see any crowd surge of significance inside the ground. And most definitely there was not a mass change of heart from the Swansea fans to turn and re-enter the ground when the players reappeared

• 2/3 players stood on the said flat roof which is not strong enough to support them but clearly strong enough to support the 4/5 stewards/police that stood on it once they had moved the players off

• The clear stupidity of the police to say that forcing the players to move in a heavy handed manner is likely to reduce the potential crowd disorder. Umm, yeah OK then.

• Missiles were being thrown. Again, we cannot condone it but the missiles only started being thrown when the heavy handedness started.

This will be water under the bridge by the time the new season started but clearly this superintendent has decided to back his own officers as we would have expected but most certainly his reasons do not justify the actions taken on that day.

Savages the lot of us ;-)

What to read next: