GordonS Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 It's not an easy decision. My big problem with the whole thing though is how the SFA is keeping us in the dark. As the governing body, the SFA should do what a government would do. They should publish a consultation paper setting out the options - continuation of the lease, renovating Hampden, using Murrayfield, using Parkhead/Ibrox. For each they should set out the costs and benefits in terms of finance, football and community. How much will the maintenance costs of staying at Hampden be? How much would it cost to renovate Hampden by digging down (as Rangers did) to bring the stands closer to the pitch, and rebuilding the ends (as Stuttgart did)? How much will the rental be at Hampden, Parkhead, Ibrox and Murrayfield? If we leave Hampden will it be left as a white elephant, what's the likely value of the site and can QPFC be re-homed at Lesser Hampden? For each of the options, what's the net income from a typical round of qualifiers? Where does the current fanbase live? The SFA have, or ought to have, answers to all of these questions. They should set these out in a consultation paper and seek online responses in a formal way, from clubs, fans and other interested bodies. They should act as custodians of the national game instead of its masters. Instead they intend to make their own decision and leave us all here, bickering in the dark. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Spider Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 2 hours ago, GordonS said: It's not an easy decision. My big problem with the whole thing though is how the SFA is keeping us in the dark. As the governing body, the SFA should do what a government would do. They should publish a consultation paper setting out the options - continuation of the lease, renovating Hampden, using Murrayfield, using Parkhead/Ibrox. For each they should set out the costs and benefits in terms of finance, football and community. How much will the maintenance costs of staying at Hampden be? How much would it cost to renovate Hampden by digging down (as Rangers did) to bring the stands closer to the pitch, and rebuilding the ends (as Stuttgart did)? How much will the rental be at Hampden, Parkhead, Ibrox and Murrayfield? If we leave Hampden will it be left as a white elephant, what's the likely value of the site and can QPFC be re-homed at Lesser Hampden? For each of the options, what's the net income from a typical round of qualifiers? Where does the current fanbase live? The SFA have, or ought to have, answers to all of these questions. They should set these out in a consultation paper and seek online responses in a formal way, from clubs, fans and other interested bodies. They should act as custodians of the national game instead of its masters. Instead they intend to make their own decision and leave us all here, bickering in the dark. Carlsberg don't do "future of Hampden" posts on P&B, but if they did their's would probably be the second-best post ever on this particular subject. The easiest greenie I've ever awarded. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Ibrox and Celtic Park are no longer in the running; http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42879577 Absolutely excellent news. Have the SFA discovered a spine? It would have been an astronomically awful and corrupt decision to have given this to the joint cheeks bid. I'd far rather money went to the SRU than either of the two scum 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lubo_blaha Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 On 29/01/2018 at 14:55, JTS98 said: If we do move from Hampden, it will be viewed from the future as one of Scottish football's biggest mistakes and a very short-sighted decision. As others have mentioned, hardly any competitive Scotland games ever draw a crowd small enough to be played anywhere but Ibrox, Parkhead, or Murrayfield. The advent of the Nations' League means there will be even fewer friendlies than before, so even less chance of a Scotland game ever being staged at Rugby Park, or Pittodrie, or Easter Road. Maybe one friendly a year or something. Worthless. So, what about the cups? Not many of our recent cup semi finals would be suitable for a smaller ground. Especially with the new trend for playing League Cup semi finals at the weekend. More games and more money for the Old Firm and/or SRU. Suddenly it's hard to see where any games going anywhere else are going to come from. However, the Old Firm can expect a bundle of games each per season, taking money that should be Scottish Football's money and making it Rangers' money or Celtic's money. Or the SRU's money. I just can't understand why any genuine fan would want that. Look at the figures for the 2014 Scottish Cup final. Celtic made more than the finalists. That's simply not an acceptable long-term situation. That money should stay in the game and not go to two big clubs or to rugby. If we leave Hampden, we'll look back on it as a terrible mistake. None of the Nations League games should be at a 50k+ stadium unless its a decisive match, against a big side or on an attractive weekend kick off time. We're unlikely to get more than 25k or so for a midweek game against Albania or Israel so why not play them at Pittodrie/Tynecastle/Easter Road/Rugby Park? Sell games out and create demand whilst also letting fans from around the country have a game closer to home. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JinglinGeordie Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 hour ago, lubo_blaha said: None of the Nations League games should be at a 50k+ stadium unless its a decisive match, against a big side or on an attractive weekend kick off time. We're unlikely to get more than 25k or so for a midweek game against Albania or Israel so why not play them at Pittodrie/Tynecastle/Easter Road/Rugby Park? Sell games out and create demand whilst also letting fans from around the country have a game closer to home. Well there are only two home matches in the group, one of which is the final match against Israel which we hope to be a decider. The other at home to Albania will still easily attract over 25k fans. It's going to be the first competitive match with a new manager (we hope) and potentially new faces in the squad, it'll easily attract over 25k fans so why on earth would the SFA put it to a smaller stadium? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JTS98 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 hour ago, lubo_blaha said: None of the Nations League games should be at a 50k+ stadium unless its a decisive match, against a big side or on an attractive weekend kick off time. We're unlikely to get more than 25k or so for a midweek game against Albania or Israel so why not play them at Pittodrie/Tynecastle/Easter Road/Rugby Park? Sell games out and create demand whilst also letting fans from around the country have a game closer to home. Even if you're right about the Nations League crowds (and I'm not convinced you are) then that means maybe two games every couple of years being played elsewhere. Hardly worth binning Hampden for. Meanwhile, all our qualifiers, cup finals and cup semi finals go to the Old Firm. Free money for them forever into the future. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arch Stanton Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 7 hours ago, DA Baracus said: Ibrox and Celtic Park are no longer in the running; http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42879577 Absolutely excellent news. Have the SFA discovered a spine? It would have been an astronomically awful and corrupt decision to have given this to the joint cheeks bid. I'd far rather money went to the SRU than either of the two scum Good...f**k the b(h)igot brothers taking even more money out of Scottish football. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lubo_blaha Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 22 hours ago, JTS98 said: Even if you're right about the Nations League crowds (and I'm not convinced you are) then that means maybe two games every couple of years being played elsewhere. Hardly worth binning Hampden for. Meanwhile, all our qualifiers, cup finals and cup semi finals go to the Old Firm. Free money for them forever into the future. When did I say we should bin Hampden? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merkie84 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 (edited) I think we should keep Hampden for big internationals and cup finals but bin it for Scottish cup Semis unless both clubs want it there. Especially if the authorities insist on 12.15 kick offs for TV. A rush for tickets and 20,000 inside Tynecastle where generally those with the highest loyalty points will get tickets will be a far better match to attend than 30,000 inside Hampden with a load of day trippers. Edited March 16, 2018 by Merkie84 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 7 minutes ago, Merkie84 said: I think we should keep Hampden for big internationals and cup finals but bin it for Scottish cup Semis unless both clubs want it there. Especially if the authorities insist on 12.15 kick offs for TV. A rush for tickets and 20,000 inside Tynecastle where generally those with the highest loyalty points will get tickets will be a far better match to attend than 30,000 inside Hampden with a load of day trippers. You think the SFA can afford to turn away 10,000 punters paying £30 a pop? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merkie84 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 I suppose not . The real problem here isn't Hamden, it is the lack of any stadium in Scotland with a capacity of 30,000. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonanist Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 Punt. Don't know if a decision's been made on this yet, but I'd...detonate and howk out the Hampden pitch and all infrastructure below it to a depth of, say, 10.02 metres, so that the pitch could be lowered and new seating installed from the current bottom tier down to the new, lowered pitch edge...thus bringing the support closer to the action and generating a better atmosphere? Maybe they could look at just opening a certain number of rows of lower seating, but around the whole ground in order, effectively, to create a lower tier right around the ground for the matches with expected lower attendances - could be better than sparse pockets of fans or yawning gaps about the place - since fans side-by-side create more atmosphere. Can't see a half-empty Murrayfield being any better for atmosphere than the equivalent at Hampden, and Murrayfield is even less likely to be filled than Hampden for most games, particularly with the SFA's ticket prices. Also thought that the SFA taking charge of building a new stadium for Queen's Park in case they spent the dosh on players seemed a wee bit paternalistic, but I may have the wrong impression about that one. Anyway, stay at Hampden for the biggest international matches and Scottish Cup Final; for everything else, find appropriate stadia for the expected size of crowd and locality of support. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 19 minutes ago, anonanist said: Punt. Don't know if a decision's been made on this yet, but I'd...detonate and howk out the Hampden pitch and all infrastructure below it to a depth of, say, 10.02 metres, so that the pitch could be lowered and new seating installed from the current bottom tier down to the new, lowered pitch edge...thus bringing the support closer to the action and generating a better atmosphere? Maybe they could look at just opening a certain number of rows of lower seating, but around the whole ground in order, effectively, to create a lower tier right around the ground for the matches with expected lower attendances - could be better than sparse pockets of fans or yawning gaps about the place - since fans side-by-side create more atmosphere. Can't see a half-empty Murrayfield being any better for atmosphere than the equivalent at Hampden, and Murrayfield is even less likely to be filled than Hampden for most games, particularly with the SFA's ticket prices. Also thought that the SFA taking charge of building a new stadium for Queen's Park in case they spent the dosh on players seemed a wee bit paternalistic, but I may have the wrong impression about that one. Anyway, stay at Hampden for the biggest international matches and Scottish Cup Final; for everything else, find appropriate stadia for the expected size of crowd and locality of support. Queens Park can't spend money on players. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonanist Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 Aye, they can! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PELE Posted August 29, 2018 Share Posted August 29, 2018 Hampden is a dump. For the younger generation, it has no attraction whatsoever. All these ex players and pundits who claim there will be outrage if the SFA stop using Hamdump are living in a fantasy world. How can rugby have a large stadium with the finances they have, where club rugby is woefully supported, yet the SFA could not build a brand new stadium in the Edinburgh area over the years. If a new stadium was built now, it would take money away from the game, but what are we gaining from the investment in youth football? The set up just now is worse than it has ever been. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David990 Posted August 29, 2018 Share Posted August 29, 2018 2 hours ago, PELE said: Hampden is a dump. For the younger generation, it has no attraction whatsoever. All these ex players and pundits who claim there will be outrage if the SFA stop using Hamdump are living in a fantasy world. How can rugby have a large stadium with the finances they have, where club rugby is woefully supported, yet the SFA could not build a brand new stadium in the Edinburgh area over the years. If a new stadium was built now, it would take money away from the game, but what are we gaining from the investment in youth football? The set up just now is worse than it has ever been. There are people born since ‘98 who are now adults who’ve yet to see Scotland play in a major tournament. How disconnected from the National team can they be because of the lack of success? To be fair the SRU left themselves in huge debt which they have around £2.5mil of it left to pay off by redeveloping Murrayfield when they did. Club rugby, especially Glasgow has saw massive increases in support both from supporters and financially from the Union and sponsors over the last few years ultimately due to success. Can remember attending Glasgow games where you’d only get 300 supporters going along when the played at Hughendon. That was only 10 years ago. They’ve now sold out every home game at Scotstoun since 2015 which is capped at 7351 currently. There’s talk now of redeveloping the North stand to increase capacity to 12000, which if Glasgow manage to sell out as they do now would be unprecedented for club rugby in Scotland. Ultimately this is all due to success, both on and off the field and the success of the International team recently has certainly helped to. Unfortunatly any attempt to redevelop or build a new stadium will take money away from the game unless they manage to get investment from a Scottish sugar daddy, which there are little to none. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PELE Posted August 29, 2018 Share Posted August 29, 2018 40 minutes ago, David990 said: There are people born since ‘98 who are now adults who’ve yet to see Scotland play in a major tournament. How disconnected from the National team can they be because of the lack of success? To be fair the SRU left themselves in huge debt which they have around £2.5mil of it left to pay off by redeveloping Murrayfield when they did. Club rugby, especially Glasgow has saw massive increases in support both from supporters and financially from the Union and sponsors over the last few years ultimately due to success. Can remember attending Glasgow games where you’d only get 300 supporters going along when the played at Hughendon. That was only 10 years ago. They’ve now sold out every home game at Scotstoun since 2015 which is capped at 7351 currently. There’s talk now of redeveloping the North stand to increase capacity to 12000, which if Glasgow manage to sell out as they do now would be unprecedented for club rugby in Scotland. Ultimately this is all due to success, both on and off the field and the success of the International team recently has certainly helped to. Unfortunatly any attempt to redevelop or build a new stadium will take money away from the game unless they manage to get investment from a Scottish sugar daddy, which there are little to none. Good luck to the rugby teams. I know people who go along to games in Edinburgh now regularly. There are a few billionaires in Scotland, but not stupid enough to waste their money. You never know though, how about the Glenfiddich stadium? I don't think the stadium is that important. It would be nice having a fancy stadium, but investment in kids football is more important and to say it is currently woeful would be a huge compliment. Never mind though, Manky is in charge! Sadly, I think most people under the age of thirty have little interest or affinity for the national team. Even when I was at school, the best pitch at the school was referred to as Wembley. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirvy Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 If Murrayfield is so good, why is the Pro14 final at Parkhead? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonS Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 33 minutes ago, dirvy said: If Murrayfield is so good, why is the Pro14 final at Parkhead? The SRU want to grow rugby in the west. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 1 hour ago, dirvy said: If Murrayfield is so good, why is the Pro14 final at Parkhead? Currying favour with the decision maker. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.