Hampden Park has it had its Day ?

[EH75]

Sure I read before somewhere that the footprint of Hampden is about the same size as Twickenham. Bulldoze the lot and build something like that. Just gotta find someone to pay for it. And get planning permission without any objections from the locals... 

[EH75]

Make Hampden great again! 

[banana]

16 hours ago, lubo_blaha said:

The problem with flattening the East and West Stands is that they hold over 25,000 seats between them. Building two stands of 13,000 each on the current footprint partly dug into the ground with a steeper rake would be very difficult and costly. For comparison, the RDS at Pittodrie holds around 6200 and the stands behind the goals at Ibrox hold around 8000 each. The two stands behind the goals at Celtic Park hold 13,000 each but that includes the corners of both tiers which wouldn't fit in at Hampden. To avoid reducing the capacity significantly you would have to either have a shallow rake for the stands behind the goals or expand the North Stand, which may not be possible given the housing behind it. I don't see how it would be feasible, unfortunately. 

Two enormous Kops behind each goal is surely doable, rising from the north and south stands if necessary. Or extend the south stand around.

Preferably, annihilate W, N, E, move the pitch 20 yards towards the south stand to make room, then rebuild all three.

If space is a super concern, can create a full bowl rising up to the ceiling with everyone strapped in and cathetered.

[Nowhereman]

1 hour ago, banana said:

Two enormous Kops behind each goal is surely doable, rising from the north and south stands if necessary. Or extend the south stand around.

Preferably, annihilate W, N, E, move the pitch 20 yards towards the south stand to make room, then rebuild all three.

If space is a super concern, can create a full bowl rising up to the ceiling with everyone strapped in and cathetered.

Or everyone could just pee in to their empty tennents lager can and chuck it into the crowd like they did back in the seventies

[banana]

7 minutes ago, Nowhereman said:

Or everyone could just pee in to their empty tennents lager can and chuck it into the crowd like they did back in the seventies

Mods, P&B meta thread merge please.

Edited September 26, 2017 by banana

[The Moonster]

Could we potentially dig the pitch further down into the ground and add another tier of seating which could be designed to bring fans in the two ends closer to the pitch?

[EH75]

Think this would cause drainage issues. Also wouldn't solve how far away the rest of the stand is due to the shallow rake. 

[The Golden God]

I'd love for it to be rebuilt but don't know how viable that really is in terms of money. If it can't be done move to Murrayfield for Cup games,  Scotland only usually play home Rugby games during 6 Nations and November so you'd maybe have to move the LC final back a wee bit,  Wembley and various other grounds host multiple sports in short periods of time so it shouldn't be an issue to play rugby one week and football another. With Parkhead getting a hotel and other stuff being done outside I dont think it's outwith the realms of possibility for the main stand to be redeveloped also, which could lead to some sort of deal between Celtic/SFA to host games there permanently (would also improve chances of getting UEFA finals.

[Lurkst]

On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 22:12, lubo_blaha said:

The problem with flattening the East and West Stands is that they hold over 25,000 seats between them. Building two stands of 13,000 each on the current footprint partly dug into the ground with a steeper rake would be very difficult and costly. For comparison, the RDS at Pittodrie holds around 6200 and the stands behind the goals at Ibrox hold around 8000 each. The two stands behind the goals at Celtic Park hold 13,000 each but that includes the corners of both tiers which wouldn't fit in at Hampden. To avoid reducing the capacity significantly you would have to either have a shallow rake for the stands behind the goals or expand the North Stand, which may not be possible given the housing behind it. I don't see how it would be feasible, unfortunately. 

Aye you'd be looking at a stand the size of the Holte End at Villa Park behind each goal to replace the capacity of the East and West stands. These would tower over the rest of the stadium, and the neighbourhood for that matter...

 

[GeeJay]

Article in The Times today (Michael Grant)

 

 

Hampden might stage its last ever World Cup match tomorrow night. When the qualifiers come round for Qatar 2022 Scotland might be traipsing around Celtic Park and Ibrox, or hitting the road to Murrayfield, the new Tynecastle or the even newer Kingsford Stadium in Aberdeen. By then Hampden could be crumbling and unfit for purpose. Now, now, stop sniggering at the back: genuinely crumbling and literally unfit for purpose. It could be on its way to being an unused white elephant. It could be waiting for the wrecking ball.

Eyes will turn to this sacred football venue for the Slovakia game. The old place will be full, or as near as damn it. The atmosphere? Well that will be down to what’s happening on the pitch. It’s not fashionable to say so but a major game at a full Hampden is as noisy, electric and exciting as it gets.

Think Scotland-England in June and Hibs-Rangers last year for recent confirmation of that. Poor public transport, scant parking, inadequate food provision, bad sight lines, the shallow banking, being too far from the pitch: none of that goes away but it is all forgotten and overcome when there is high octane stuff down on the pitch. When they’re packed and bouncing those vast, sweeping ends, inviting goalscorers to leap the advertising boards and race towards them like ants across a sandpit, offer a visual backdrop second to none.

Every big ground loses something when it is well short of capacity but the Hampden experience falls off a cliff. The more empty seats you see the more it sucks the life out of everything. Hampden is about the worst ground in Britain when it’s anything less than half full. Cup semi-finals are killed. Friendlies die.

One of Hampden’s problems is that it’s often on public display when it is a million miles from its best. Celtic Park and Ibrox are usually pretty full; we rarely see them with the sub-20,000 attendances so often used to damn Hampden. But the stuff that’s wrong with it is genuine and exasperating, and it seems like the majority of fans want better.

The Scottish Football Association’s 20-year, £800,000 per annum lease on Hampden was due to end in March 2020. It was renegotiated, but only until the July to cover the Euro 2020 finals (Hampden will be one of 13 host venues for that). Over the coming ten weeks we’ll start to find out what happens next.

The SFA employed consultants and are sounding out member clubs and other stakeholders to find out what they want to do. They can stay at Hampden on the current terms by sign a new long-term lease with owners and landlords Queen’s Park.

They can seek to buy out the lease and take control of the stadium and its operation (maybe for a token £1 given they would need to take on a £5.5 million dilapidations liability and £6 million debentures liability).

Or they can thank Queen’s Park, walk away in 2020 and take Scotland games and cup semis and finals on a tour of the country while finding new venues for their staff, museum and sports medicine facilities. Those who run and operate Celtic Park, Ibrox, Murrayfield and Hampden have been asked to submit tenders in a mini-procurement exercise: what can their stadium offer, how much would that cost, what is its availability, what are its restraints?

The SFA will make a recommendation to its board members ahead of their meeting in December. At the very least the ruling body feels it should be a tenant on better terms. It believes it has an awful lot of the responsibilities — maintenance, running and operational costs — but little control and no ownership. The SFA is a tenant doing a lot of the “landlord” stuff for which Queen’s Park has neither the infrastructure nor the expertise. And Queen’s Park collects the rent. Without Hampden the amateurs are screwed.

The SFA want to change things but it’s an almighty psychological leap to then consider leaving Hampden altogether and start paying Celtic or Rangers occasional rentals to use their grounds instead. The biggest and currently the best football stadium in the country is Celtic Park: would every other club happily accept it hosting every cup final, season after season? Alternating between Celtic Park and Ibrox would look craven and expedient, and alienate many other fans.

Murrayfield is the biggest sports stadium in the country and is in the capital, but symbolically Scottish football’s home always has been in the west (besides, Murrayfield shares some of Hampden’s problems). None of this is straightforward. Incidentally, neither the SFA nor the Scottish government have the dough to raze Hampden to the ground and replace it with a modern stadium.

Count me in the minority who recognises and has endured all of Hampden’s flaws but still wants it to survive. Even into a fourth decade of going there it still delivers a wee kick to go through the turnstiles and see the pitch and that vast bowl of seats spreading out below. It’s where cup finals and the big Scotland games should be. The importance and symbolism of a neutral venue will be more obvious than ever if Hampden is done away with. But that’s not a popular view.

What will the SFA do? Probably try to negotiate something relatively short term to buy a bit more thinking time. Maybe Slovakia tomorrow and hopefully the home leg of the play-off next month won’t be the end of Hampden and the World Cup. But it’s possible. After 114 years some in the SFA want to cut the umbilical cord.

[Shotgun]

On 9/27/2017 at 06:42, The Moonster said:

Could we potentially dig the pitch further down into the ground and add another tier of seating which could be designed to bring fans in the two ends closer to the pitch?

I recall reading that there's a stream running under the pitch which would this cost prohibitive.

I'm following this from afar so I don't know too much about the topic other than what I read on P&B. While I'd be loathe to see Scotland games being played at Celtic Park or Ibrox, could someone explain the objection to rotating games between the larger grounds in Scotland? Those two plus Pittodrie, Easter Road and Tynecastle and maybe Rugby Park? OK, the last one might be a reach but is there a particular reason we have to lock into a 'national' stadium?

[Lurkst]

3 hours ago, Shotgun said:

is there a particular reason we have to lock into a 'national' stadium?

Old Firm cup games.

[kiddy]

Hampden should never have been redeveloped in the first place.

[Salvo Montalbano]

I recall reading that there's a stream running under the pitch which would this cost prohibitive.
I'm following this from afar so I don't know too much about the topic other than what I read on P&B. While I'd be loathe to see Scotland games being played at Celtic Park or Ibrox, could someone explain the objection to rotating games between the larger grounds in Scotland? Those two plus Pittodrie, Easter Road and Tynecastle and maybe Rugby Park? OK, the last one might be a reach but is there a particular reason we have to lock into a 'national' stadium?

Pretty much every Scotland games get over 20,000 when played at Hampden so you wouldn't have a stadium big enough for competitive games apart from Ibrox and Parkhead. Most semi-finals get over 20,000 (at least in the Scottish Cup, the League Cup has had lower crowds in recent years) so you have the same situation. Realistically you'd be looking at maybe one minor friendly per year taken on the road and possibly one cup semi final depending on who gets there. On top of that, Celtic v Sevco semis and finals would presumably have to rotate between the two. And on top of all that, the amount of money made by those two through rent is more than is made by a team that wins the cup (St Johnstone earned less than Celtic when they won the cup at Parkhead, or at least that has been reported several times) so you'd be further lining their pockets at a time when redistribution of revenue is as important as it's ever been.

[Shotgun]

4 hours ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

Pretty much every Scotland games get over 20,000 when played at Hampden so you wouldn't have a stadium big enough for competitive games apart from Ibrox and Parkhead. Most semi-finals get over 20,000 (at least in the Scottish Cup, the League Cup has had lower crowds in recent years) so you have the same situation. Realistically you'd be looking at maybe one minor friendly per year taken on the road and possibly one cup semi final depending on who gets there. On top of that, Celtic v Sevco semis and finals would presumably have to rotate between the two. And on top of all that, the amount of money made by those two through rent is more than is made by a team that wins the cup (St Johnstone earned less than Celtic when they won the cup at Parkhead, or at least that has been reported several times) so you'd be further lining their pockets at a time when redistribution of revenue is as important as it's ever been.

Got it, thanks.

[Hampden Diehard]

Why would you want to play a Scotland game at Ibrox when it has a smaller capacity than Hampden and the infrastructure is poorer?

[Burnie_man]

4 hours ago, Hampden Diehard said:

Why would you want to play a Scotland game at Ibrox when it has a smaller capacity than Hampden and the infrastructure is poorer?

The capacities are not far apart, and it's a better viewing experience for three sides of the stadium as it currently stands.  Not that I'm advocating using OF stadia.

[edinabear]

Not a fan of hampden but I still believe it can be salvaged to an extent. I only just realised that the north stand has an upper tier. You can barely notice it. To maximise the amount of decent seats this stand should really be expanded. The fact that most of the seats are behind the goal is very rare in most grounds. 

[Lurkst]

10 hours ago, edinabear said:

 I only just realised that the north stand has an upper tier. You can barely notice it. To maximise the amount of decent seats this stand should really be expanded. The fact that most of the seats are behind the goal is very rare in most grounds. 

It's only a row or two of seats, I'm not even sure if it's used any more. I think the press went in there while the South Stand was being redeveloped.

I don't know about the possibility of expanding the North Stand, the road behind gets busy enough with people trying to enter...

[banana]

4 minutes ago, Lurkst said:

I don't know about the possibility of expanding the North Stand, the road behind gets busy enough with people trying to enter...

It's been mentioned a few times that the pitch can be moved 15-20 meters towards the South Stand, giving plenty of breathing space for an expanded North Stand also built closer to the pitch than currently.