THERE is no doubt Martin Fletcher, a survivor of the Bradford City fire disaster who lost his father, brother, uncle and grandfather, deserves the opportunity to tell his story, and his brave book Fifty Six – The Story of the Bradford Fire does that.

It is unfortunate though that one issue – the suggestion the blaze may not have been accidental – has been allowed to dominate headlines surrounding it.

The way the story was broken yesterday created a social media storm, with many people comparing it to a Hillsborough-style cover-up. Let us be absolutely clear – this is not another Hillsborough.

Mr Fletcher is entitled to ask questions about the investigation and subsequent inquiry, but was the timing of it – in the build-up to the 30th anniversary commemorations for the fire and on the day of the Hillsborough memorial – absolutely necessary? And is there really enough new evidence to merit a front page story in a national paper?

The wounds are still very raw for many, but no one would want to hide from the truth. However, despite the painstaking years of research, there seems to be no new evidence that this was anything other than a terrible tragedy that started accidentally. Yes, there is supposition and theory, but no hard factual evidence.

As we said at the start, Mr Fletcher is entitled to his say – but so are the vast majority of City fans, many of whom were at the game themselves or know of people affected, and their views seem to be clear – there is not enough here to justify re-opening these very painful wounds.