Saturday April 15 1989. A date that will forever be engraved in the memories of football fans as the occasion of the game's greatest tragedy. Ten years on, as hundreds flocked to Sheffield to remember, the decision of Home Secretary Jack Straw not to re-open the inquiry into the events of that terrible day still leaves a sour taste in the mouths of many.

The bereaved families claim they have new evidence which implicates the South Yorkshire Police as solely responsible. The Taylor Report made suggestions to such effect in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy, but the official inquest recorded a verdict of accidental death.

That cannot be right. Hillsborough was no accident.

But whereas the ongoing campaign for a new public inquiry seeks only to implicate the Police, there are wider issues which remain unadressed.

Hillsborough signalled the end of two decades of carnage and destruction as English football fans forged a reputation for drunkeness and violence. Football supporters are blamed unequivocally for the Dublin riots at the England v Ireland friendly, blamed by everyone outside Merseyside for the Heysel disaster, and considered largely responsible for the scuffles at the 1997 Italy v England World Cup qualifier. And yet public opinion is united over Hillsborough - the fans were innocent.

The facts do not support the incrimination of fans alone, but should they not shoulder some responsibility for what happened? Eighties football culture dictated that fans turned up at the last minute, many drunk, many ticketless. The match on April 15 1989 was no different. Liverpool fans, lest we forget, had killed 39 Juventus fans just five years earlier at Heysel and were at the forefront of Eighties football violence. They were no angels.

The Police that day were grossly negligent. They failed to forsee the consequences of opening Gate C and failed to distribute the fans equally amongst the pens. But their shortcomings were in failing to prevent the tragedy. They did not cause it.

The crush outside the Leppings Lane end was caused by hordes of fans arriving late. The Police had taken action to prevent a crush on the forecourt as the throng pushed and shoved to get in. Their decision to open the gate was the wrong one - and they should be called to account for it - but it was the influx of supporters that necessitated the opening of the gate, and the influx of supporters which crushed the victims on the terrace.

John King, in his book 'The Football Factory', says of Hillsborough: "But who gets killed at the end of the day? It is the people who are there to watch a game of football and who aren't interested in causing trouble." He is probably right. The majority of the victims were at the front, had got into the ground early and had probably not had a single drink. But it is naive to place those who steamed onto the back of the terrace at the last minute in the same category. Daily Mail columnist Jeff Powell shrewdly described those who died as: "The unsuspecting," who, "had the life squeezed out of them by the scant regard of those pressing from behind in search of their own vantage points."

The controversial Hillsborough drama documentary was touted as being 'a serious exposition of the issues', but in reality, master dramatist Jimmy McGovern created nothing more than an enraged document of blame which turned into a rant of Police castigation.

Nobody should be fooled by McGovern's portrayal of the Police. With the new image of the 'brave new world' all seater stadiums in mind, those watching the Hillsborough documentary were disgusted at the revelation that the Police assumed the unfolding tragedy was a pitch invasion. But was it really any wonder that they feared the worst when Liverpool fans spilled onto the pitch?

Speaking to Lord Justice Stuart-Smith as part of the process of the compilation of the latest investigation, Hillsborough camera operator Roger Houldsworth said: "I certainly did not think that people were being seriously injured. Liverpool did have a reputation, same as virtually all teams. It was in the height of the hooligan period and it was just something you thought was happening; yes, it's a pitch invasion. I was in the same mind then as, I suppose, all the policemen who went on the ground. I think that we all thought exactly the same."

Portrayed in this light, the Police do not seem as callous and insensitive as many believe they were. Perhaps they were merely human beings doing their job, afraid of the task they faced, and guilty of making terrible mistakes that contributed to the deaths of 96 people.

Jimmy McGovern's documentary would also have us believe that the fans should be entirely exonerated from blame. In his original statement (before it was altered by his unscrupulous seniors), PC David Frost admitted the Police were "useless bastards" and described how he "began to cry" when the enormity of the situation sunk in and he realised how "inadequate" he was.

Frost at no point even hints that the fans played any part in the catastrophe, but, through his observations, a picture of the crowd can be drawn up. "A number of fans had cans of beer," he noted, and he described how he had to: "eject a fan for jumping the turnstile," and arrest a "very drunken fan."

Frost's observations support the theory that there were many ticketless fans outside the ground. "Many people asked about tickets," he recalled. More significantly, he remembers: "how busy the charge room was - very noisy with a lot of scouse accents." The cells, he recollects, were "full of drunken, blood covered fans."

Most crucially of all, Frost's description of the atmosphere amongst the fans outside the ground hints at the pressure which Superintendant Duckenfield was under when he made the decision to open the gate. There were thousands pushing against the turnstiles and PC Frost remembers: "The atmosphere was very volatile. It seemed these crazed animals would die if the game went on without them. I remember hating them for their mentality."

Whether Frost's testimony is believable is a subject for speculation, but anyone who attended football matches in the Eighties will recognise the scene he describes, whatever team they follow. The Police had to do something to ease the crush outside the ground. They made a horrendous error, but it was a mistake they were forced into.

And yet the behaviour of Liverpool fans that day was not intrinsically bad. They were merely conforming to football culture - the drinking and the violence which made tragedy inevitable - and football culture should shoulder the blame for Hillsborough. The perimeter fences that caged and crushed were necessitated by the behaviour of football fans collectively. Had Hillsborough been a cricket ground, the fans would have formed an orderly queue, would have been sober and would all have had tickets. But it was a football ground, and football culture dictated that it was the norm to turn up late, drunk and ticketless.

The general concensus remains that the fans were innocent. How ironic, then, that the press so vehemently highlighted the role of the fans in the trouble at England's World Cup qualifier in Rome. The Telegraph's Henry Winter could so easily have been speaking of Hillsborough when he wrote: "The innocent majority were punished for the excesses of the malignant minority."

Winter goes on to say of the Rome affair that: "Defending the fans is a laudable aim, but a one-eyed stance allows the trouble makers to escape censure." Wise words. The innocent may have been clubbed by Police batons in Italy, but the Carabinieri's over zealous reaction was prompted by the appalling hooliganism manifest in the English minority which had been graphically illustrated before the game and in previous days.

So why is the same logic not applied to Hillsborough? In similar circumstances, a select few were responsible for the detriment of others - and have escaped without reprimand.

The widespread dissatisfaction at the initial conclusions of the inquest warrants a new inquiry, but it must not be a witch hunt hell bent on laying the blame solely at the door of the Police. Speaking on Nicky Campbell's show on Five Live, South Yorkshire's Chief Constable, Richard Wells, said: "Some supporters did not behave well, some policemen did not behave well. What we need to introduce to proceedings is a feeling of mutual responsibility."

It is time that an objective and dispassionate review of what happened at Hillsborough was conducted by informed people who are not afraid to reveal unpopular findings. The innocent people who died that day deserve nothing less.