Rank: Super forum user 
|
On Sunday, Manchester United football ground was evacuated, 75000 fans. A realistic device had been found, game abandoned.
Controlled explosion, and then a few hours later it dawned on someone that the 'device' was one left over from a security training exercise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I was watching the coverage and one of the Sky pundits indicated that he had been subject to security measures, including physical firk type searches, way above the norm when he entered the stadium yesterday. I regularly go to footbal games in Scotland (including games involving the Old Firm) and it's not uncommon for normal fans to be subject to this type of search but the fact that they were going way beyond the norm for the TV Staff would suggest that something had happened to make them highten security in the first place.
Yes the facts as they now appear are a bit embarrasing and I can see someone getting severely reprimanded over it being left but surely with 75,000 fans within the stadium when it was found they did the right thing in evacuating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
It appears that the emergency plans were put in to action and carried out satisfactorily. Thankfully the real-life test passed off without obvious major flaws and i am certain that the security & stewarding staff will be looking at how they performed.
What is very worrying are the apparent failures that lead to the evacuation being necessary. The "left over" device not being accounted for post-exercise, the search dog teams not finding the device last week and the device itself being undiscovered until the stadium was full and then by a member of the public.
Situation vacant: Security manager. Essential qualification: Must be able to do the job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Security levels were raised last week due to an IRA (yes them again!) threat.
IRA have form in Manchester, so I guess thats why the clebs were frisked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Wouldn't you think that the private firm who run the exercise would of realised they had put so many out and had one missing at the end. Security should of asked how many were being put out so that they could ensure they all come back.
Security also completed a serch prior to opening the gates and still no-one picked it up.
At least only pride was hurt and no-one else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Yes there are both positives and negatives to be gained from the incident. The media have covered both well today, the security failure and the evacuation success.
Overall it will be a costly mistake for Utd some of which they should pass on to the security contractor.
Just a small but important point for Invictus. Say/write 'should have' or 'should've', not 'should of'.
JohnW
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
JohnW wrote:Yes there are both positives and negatives to be gained from the incident. The media have covered both well today, the security failure and the evacuation success.
Overall it will be a costly mistake for Utd some of which they should pass on to the security contractor.
Just a small but important point for Invictus. Say/write 'should have' or 'should've', not 'should of'.
JohnW
What was the point of your last sentence? as a reader of this forum I come here for safety advice not anal spell checks by grammar nazis. Who cares if he got his spelling wrong a little we all knew what he meant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
It's just a bit of friendly and professional advice. If Invictus writes reports or guidance for his business or customers then the same error should be avoided.
JohnW
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
stonecold wrote:[not anal spell checks by grammar nazis. Who cares if he got his spelling wrong a little we all knew what he meant.
Little early to be invoking godwins law ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Godwin's Law! (Every day's a School day).
The fact that a football stadium was evacuated without incident or injury (presumably) has to be a positive. That said, if the device had been found during the match, I wonder if the evac. would have been so orderly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
The training package was strapped to the inside of a toilet door, according to my information from the radio today.
Just imaging, pants down, sit down, look up then see the device, mobile phone with wires etc. stuck to the door you just locked.
The sniffer dog that failed to find that one will surely be severely reprimanded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
firesafety101 wrote:The training package was strapped to the inside of a toilet door, according to my information from the radio today.
Just imaging, pants down, sit down, look up then see the device, mobile phone with wires etc. stuck to the door you just locked.
The sniffer dog that failed to find that one will surely be severely reprimanded.
100% cure for constipation me thinks!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
mssy wrote:firesafety101 wrote:
The sniffer dog that failed to find that one will surely be severely reprimanded.
The dog will only pick up the scent of explosives, Dummy ones will not have any scent.
The Guy that runs the Security Training fears that this will put him out of business, MUFC is rumoured to lose 3 million as a result of all the refunds and the free entry next Tues to all that had already bought a ticket.
I think they would try and claim of his Liability Insurance, hence him closing the company down
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
gerrysharpe wrote:mssy wrote:firesafety101 wrote:
The sniffer dog that failed to find that one will surely be severely reprimanded.
The dog will only pick up the scent of explosives, Dummy ones will not have any scent.
The Guy that runs the Security Training fears that this will put him out of business, MUFC is rumoured to lose 3 million as a result of all the refunds and the free entry next Tues to all that had already bought a ticket.
I think they would try and claim of his Liability Insurance, hence him closing the company down
With the failure to qualify for the Champions League conservatively estimated at a revenue loss of £20 million, quite an expensive week for Man U.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
JohnW wrote:Yes there are both positives and negatives to be gained from the incident. The media have covered both well today, the security failure and the evacuation success.
Overall it will be a costly mistake for Utd some of which they should pass on to the security contractor.
Just a small but important point for Invictus. Say/write 'should have' or 'should've', not 'should of'.
JohnW
Thanks John, I should have/Should've unfortunately I did not/Didn't. But taken as it was meant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
gerrysharpe wrote:mssy wrote:firesafety101 wrote:
The sniffer dog that failed to find that one will surely be severely reprimanded.
The dog will only pick up the scent of explosives, Dummy ones will not have any scent.
The Guy that runs the Security Training fears that this will put him out of business, MUFC is rumoured to lose 3 million as a result of all the refunds and the free entry next Tues to all that had already bought a ticket.
I think they would try and claim of his Liability Insurance, hence him closing the company down
Or take on board that the mistake will never be repeated and therefore could make the company the perfect one to use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
A mistake. Human error. Happens all the time somewhere, with lesser consequences obviously.
The security company boss has taken responsibility, (a lesson to others?) although he may regret this.
I think we may all have learnt something about 'searching' toilets - how easy to miss the back of the door - including when collecting back all the dummies. Valuable lesson. May save someone's life one day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
But whoever was in charge of the day should of been able to count how many were put out and how many returned!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Invictus,
The security guy said there was 'a spare one in the bag' which got counted...... Clearly his checklist for device locations was not well-managed, a total failure of procedure or total lack of one. He will not come out of this well.
Thanks for polite reply on the grammar thing (but see you have done it again :o)))
JohnW
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Ref Post #18 Posted Yes it was "Human Error" but everything we are about is to do with ensuring that human error does not happen. The operative should have been aware of the possible consequences of leaving one of these dummy devices on site and should of as a consequence established and maintained a robust system for distributing and collecting them after use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Surely lots of people working for the club were aware of the security exercise that happened a few days before the match.
When the device as discovered therefore, it should not have been beyond the wit of man to think "hang on a minute, I wonder if this device is connected to this week's exercise?".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Mr Insurance wrote:Surely lots of people working for the club were aware of the security exercise that happened a few days before the match.
When the device as discovered therefore, it should not have been beyond the wit of man to think "hang on a minute, I wonder if this device is connected to this week's exercise?".
Why would this make any difference? The chances are it could have been a whole list of things, but why take the chance with that many lives at risk?
The bomb squad don't simply open it up and have a look, they secure it and undertake a controlled explosion, and once this is done, they examine the remains.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Chris Reid's statement and apology is one of (perhaps the only?) the most sincere and impressive I've ever heard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
There are many lessons to be learnt from this incident. I am surprised the device was left behind after the training. I am surprised the device was not found in the time between the training event and the match - were the toilets not cleaned? I am surprised the device was not found during the pre-match security checks and I am surprised to see an example of the device being exhibited and paraded in the papers - that is, in my view, just inviting copy cat trouble makers to do something similar in the future. I am not surprised that it was treated as the real thing on the day. The personnel on site had no choice but to treat it as being real.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Slightly going off at a tangent, one would assume that those who train the sniffer dogs and others involved with ordnance wok will have to handle explosives during training and exercises - and of course, for real in certain parts of the world.
Having just returned from a job in Oman and having my bag swabbed to death for traces of explosives, I wonder how this group of workers (and their families) travel around the world without raising suspicion
It may be difficult to explain. For example, would you really want to announce you were a soldier if passing through Belfast airport for example ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
mssy wrote:Slightly going off at a tangent, one would assume that those who train the sniffer dogs and others involved with ordnance wok will have to handle explosives during training and exercises - and of course, for real in certain parts of the world.
Having just returned from a job in Oman and having my bag swabbed to death for traces of explosives, I wonder how this group of workers (and their families) travel around the world without raising suspicion
It may be difficult to explain. For example, would you really want to announce you were a soldier if passing through Belfast airport for example ?
Probably best not to wear your work clothes to the airport!
But seriously, where does your job role or employment status come up at an airport? I'm sure someone is going to tell me I am wrong but I can't think of any situation during a normal visit through an airport, where this information is relevant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
WatsonD wrote: But seriously, where does your job role or employment status come up at an airport? I'm sure someone is going to tell me I am wrong but I can't think of any situation during a normal visit through an airport, where this information is relevant.
Did you actually read the comment you replied to? Mssy was suggesting that if somebody was stopped at an airport because they had traces of explosives on them, they may need to explain where the traces came from rather than just sailing through the gate like anybody else on a "normal visit through an airport". I'm sure that nowadays the presence of explosives in airports is probably frowned upon...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
gramsay wrote:Chris Reid's statement and apology is one of (perhaps the only?) the most sincere and impressive I've ever heard.
Yes I noted that too
Very rare these days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
JohnW wrote:Invictus,
The security guy said there was 'a spare one in the bag' which got counted...... Clearly his checklist for device locations was not well-managed, a total failure of procedure or total lack of one. He will not come out of this well.
Thanks for polite reply on the grammar thing (but see you have done it again :o)))
JohnW
No I have not! Anyway They should know how many devices they have taken, it's basic security. In a prison even with a contractor he would not be allowed to say I think I have two! no prove you have two and only two of what ever tool it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Mr Insurance wrote:WatsonD wrote: But seriously, where does your job role or employment status come up at an airport? I'm sure someone is going to tell me I am wrong but I can't think of any situation during a normal visit through an airport, where this information is relevant.
Did you actually read the comment you replied to? Mssy was suggesting that if somebody was stopped at an airport because they had traces of explosives on them, they may need to explain where the traces came from rather than just sailing through the gate like anybody else on a "normal visit through an airport". I'm sure that nowadays the presence of explosives in airports is probably frowned upon...
Yes I did. Which is why I made the initial comment about clothes, where trace would most likely be be picked up.
However, I doubt Identifying yourself as a soldier would result in any leeway. Hence my comment about employment status. I also made a point of saying that I am sure someone will tell me I am wrong. Maybe there is a system or procedure.
Mssy made a good point and I was making comment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.