A FEATURE on the Bradford fire in a national newspaper this weekend stirred up a predictably powerful reaction among fans.

The moving account of Martin Fletcher, who lost four relatives that day, will be the first of many remembering its horrors and the continuing struggle to come to terms with its aftermath.

It will be 30 years in May since the disaster. As with the 20th and 25th anniversaries, any "significant" number will naturally attract a larger spotlight.

This next one, in particular, will be commemorated nationally with the planned minute's silence at every Premier League and Football League game to tie in with City's final home fixture on April 25. All eyes will be fixed on Valley Parade.

It is impossible to imagine what Martin went through – and is still going through – unless you happened to have been there.

As someone who was not, writing about the disaster is therefore always very difficult. You are always aware that there are many different thoughts on what unfolded.

That is why there has been so much comment about the Guardian's story. Nobody is questioning Martin's personal view but there are many opinions to be considered.

There are no rights or wrongs in any grieving process.

While some find it best to show their respect in public, others would rather remember quietly and behind a closed door. There are also those who find the best way of coping is by trying not to remember at all.

But many City fans have taken exception to the implication in the article that the disaster was "hushed up" in some way.

Maybe to the outside world, the stoicism of a city having to deal with one of British football's greatest disasters could be viewed as denial. But not to those having to live and breathe it every day.

The fire had affected so many, not just physically but with the mental trauma, it was felt more appropriate not to make a big deal of it. But Bradford did not forget.

Supporter Paul Firth questions the comment that the accepted method of coping was to "clamp their jaw shut and stare ahead".

He argued: "I don't know if (the author) means the football club, the supporters or the city as a whole, but what he insists is 'true' is not something I recognise as an accurate and fair description of reactions to the fire.

"I would be surprised if many Bradfordians agree with that statement of what purports to be fact."

The article questioned City for waiting 16 years before the present fire memorial was put up. Yet a sculpture was unveiled when Valley Parade reopened in December 1986 – it is still there above the 1911 club main reception.

It was an understated mark of respect, not just to commemorate the 56 who died but also those who survived. The focus now is on the deceased but back then it was about a whole community trying to keep going.

The fact that there was no ostentatious element was almost to protect the survivors struggling to carry on with some kind of "normal" life. The stress of that moment should never be underestimated when looking back in hindsight.

Speaking to some of those who escaped injury, they admitted to massive feelings of guilt in the immediate aftermath and a sense of awkwardness when seeing others who had been burned.

You sense many survivors feel a similar discomfort now at the way the annual remembrance is being portrayed. Many would rather Bradford be left alone to grieve in the dignified and private manner it always has.

Hillsborough was kept in the headlines as the families fought for justice. Valley Parade's tragedy should not be viewed in the same way.

It is no excuse, far from it, but the fire could have happened at many lower-division grounds of that era. The fact that the wooden stand was about to be rebuilt – the steel work was in the car park waiting for work to start on the Monday – was the cruellest irony.

In the modern era of social media and Twitter hash tags, many who were there do not want May 11 turned into some kind of "event" for all.

Writing in the excellent book 'A History of Bradford City AFC in Objects', author John Dewhirst describes how the emphasis towards remembrance appears to be changing.

He said: "The fire has been described as the forgotten tragedy of the 1980s yet while that might be the case in the national tabloids, I don't believe that it is in Bradford.

"As we approach the 30th anniversary, I do not want the measure of our grief to be judged by column inches in the red top comics and the passing interest of patronising hack journalists.

"Nor do I believe that match-day displays are appropriate. To express grief or solidarity through chants or 56th-minute silences is to encourage a counter-reaction by opposing fans, much the same as the Munich tragedy is now sadly commemorated by rival songs and jeers.

"Thankfully the Bradford fire and the memory thereof has been kept out of that sort of environment, for which we should be grateful."

Joint-chairman Mark Lawn, who was also there at the fire as a fan, stressed the club will listen to the views of the bereaved families when it comes to plans for next year.

He said: "I can't comment about something that's been done in the past. But it was a different time.

"But every year we consult the families of the deceased through the council list and get their feedback about what they want to happen. We personally believe that it's right we should always do what they want us to.

"But under the custodianship of myself and Julian (Rhodes), there will never be a time when we will not hold a minute's silence or not have the players attend the memorial service."