Talk:Estadio Nacional disaster

Suggested Updates, based on BBC article
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-27540668

"No one who stayed inside the stadium died.[1][2] In the street, the crowd caused destruction on private property around the stadium."

This seems to be untrue, or at least very badly phrased, based on the news article :- "Salas thinks he spent some two hours in a human glacier that slowly edged down the stairs - so tightly packed, he says, that his feet did not touch the floor until he ended up at the bottom, trapped in a pile of bodies, some living some dead. Records state that most victims died from asphyxiation. But what makes this stadium disaster different from others is what happened on the streets outside."

The suggestion is that they died in the passage ways leading to the streets, which is still inside the stadium.

In addition :- "This decision angered the public, and violence began when a drunken local aficionado led a charge over the fence which separated the playing field from the public. The police fired tear gas canisters into the northern grandstand to prevent further enraged fans from invading the field. This caused panic and an attempt at a mass exodus to avoid the gas."

This implies that the violence was started by the pitch invasion, and that the police were only acting in self-defence when firing tear gas canisters.

However :- "In quick succession, two spectators entered the field of play. The first was a bouncer known as Bomba, who tried to hit the referee before being both stopped by police and manhandled off the field. The second, Edilberto Cuenca, then suffered a brutal assault. "Our very own policemen were kicking him and beating him as if he were the enemy. This is what raised everybody's anger - including mine," says one of the fans in the Estadio Nacional that day, Jose Salas. Within seconds, the crowd were launching a variety of missiles at the police. A couple of dozen more people were trying to reach the pitch."

The BBC article implies that - while a fan did invade the pitch - it was the police response to that one, lone fan invading that triggered the violence, rather than that one fan invading the pitch.

Which might seem like semantics, but one paints a very different picture from the other.

Finally - the links provided against the "No one who stayed inside the stadium died" actually provide any credible evidence that that claim is true. The first link to BBC sport doesn't mention how anyone died, and the second link to an Spanish site (which I concede google might have translated badly) says :- "The panicked fans who sought Stadium doors, closed doors found. The stampede and the subsequent clash between police and left more than 300 people dead, including children." suggesting again that they died inside the stadium, albeit at the doors.

I think, given Wikipedia's vain attempt to be accurate in all things, that all this was worth mentioning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.232.123 (talk) 00:54, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I read that article too, and came here to see what we had here. I must admit, I was disappointed with the lack of information. This BBC article is a good road map for expanding the current wiki article. I have taken note and will try to expand it in the coming days. Thank you very much for your help! - Mtmelendez (Talk) 15:13, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Here are more potential reference materials, albeit in Spanish: ,,, , , , , , , , , ,. - Mtmelendez (Talk) 15:25, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Grammar
The correction of "Argentina was" to "Argentina were" should be undone. Argentina is a country, therefore a single entity, therefore it is "was" (as in "I was, you were, he was, we were, you were, they were" - third person single). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.232.123 (talk) 01:02, 24 May 2014 (UTC)