Jump to content

Was that Hampden's last hurrah?


HibeeJibee

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Booker-T said:

Hampden is a shit stadium, easily the worst league ground in Glasgow when it comes to watching a game of football... and even if you live in Glasgow, getting to it is a pain in the arse.

It's easier to get to than Firhill and Parkhead. Don't be a tit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Booker-T said:

Firhill and Parkhead are walkable from city centre... 

Hampden is almost not in Glasgow at all

Eh? :lol: 

I'll give you Firhill, but it takes roughly the same length of time to walk to Hampden as it does Parkhead (and Ibrox for that matter).

In terms of public transport, Hampden and Ibrox are by some distance the easiest two to get to, then Firhill, with Parkhead lagging miles behind.

There's plenty of things to slag Hampden for, but saying it's the hardest to get to from the city centre is a load of shite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Booker-T said:

ok, lets keep things as they are with shit attendances at internationals or just switch to the SFA paying Celtic and Rangers rent 

Our Internationals are pretty well attended, despite the absurd pricing.

Our finals certainly are, which is what you were dribbling incoherently about Aberdeen, in relation to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CBA reading the whole thread to see if this has already been addressed, but I keep seeing/hearing the suggestion that "big games" (however you define them) could be rotated between Murrayfield, Celtic Park and Ibrox.

Presumably this suggestion is because big games would attract the biggest crowds, in which case having Ibrox on the rotation would be daft given the capacity is 10k lower than CP and 17k lower than MF.

Other than "need to satisfy both cheeks", is there another reason why Ibrox would be included on that rotation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Mark Connolly said:

CBA reading the whole thread to see if this has already been addressed, but I keep seeing/hearing the suggestion that "big games" (however you define them) could be rotated between Murrayfield, Celtic Park and Ibrox.

Presumably this suggestion is because big games would attract the biggest crowds, in which case having Ibrox on the rotation would be daft given the capacity is 10k lower than CP and 17k lower than MF.

Other than "need to satisfy both cheeks", is there another reason why Ibrox would be included on that rotation?

You mean Ibrox over Hampden? Better atmosphere, more pubs, better transport links for me. None of which is of great concern to the SFA though I would imagine.

Edited by gannonball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was there yesterday, love going when you’re sitting in the main stand and north, great views, shite behind goal. Love the history and the atmosphere on big games, think I’d really miss that about it, the museum is supposedly absolutely brilliant too, not sure where that would be moved to, they must make a lot of money from the visitors.

I’m on the fence about it, I thought the games at Celtic Park and Ibrox provided me with a much better view however it didn’t have the same special feel to it as a game at Hampden did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



You also have to consider the more positive impression travelling fans will have visiting Edinburgh over Glasgow. The old town, the Georgian splendour of the new town, better art galleries and museums and nicer hotels. We need to sell Scotland to the world and Edinburgh is a better place to do that.

There’s far more to the Hampden v Murrayfield argument than any personal preference. I sit in the upper tier of the North Stand for rugby internationals and it’s a great view. I’ve sat at the back behind the goals at Hampden and you’d need binoculars or a telescope. Murrayfield is also much larger and would create a better atmosphere.



Absolutely no foreign football fans are attending art galleries during their time here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/11/2017 at 18:30, Monkey Tennis said:

The overriding concern for me, is not to feed the OF the financial advantage of hosting Scotland games, or the competitive advantage of staging key 'neutral' cup ties.

The idea of taking qualifiers round the country would have some mileage if we had a few grounds with thirty thousand odd seats, but as we all know, we don't.  There's a few of around twenty thousand and then nothing until we reach about fifty.  That means that other than friendlies, we probably wouldn't much do it, although we did play qualifiers against Estonia at both Tynecastle and Rugby Park in the late 90s.  

If Hampden really had to go, I'd much prefer Murrayfield to the OF grounds.  Even if Hampden isn't great though (and it's not, due to the shallow angle presented by seats being bolted to terracing in a big bowl) surely its history is of some value.  

That history is huge, not just in Scottish terms, but genuinely in world ones.  Hampden holds all the European attendance records and it's been staging international matches longer than pretty much anywhere.

That shouldn't be let go lightly.

Thanks MT. Most folk on here don't seem to realise that Hampden is actually the home of Queen's Park FC. The game of football wouldn't be what it is without QP.  I'm talking about the game itself, not the pantomime it's become off the pitch. If the stadium was redesigned would that make all the other negatives like public transport (two train stations, loads of bus routes), overpriced food, puddles in the street etc go away.

Seems also to be a focus on what the SFA will do. They actually have very little to trade with. The SPFL is on a sustained campaign to throttle the rest of Scottish football outside what they refer to as the 'Big Five'. Make no mistake, there are many clubs in peril if they get their way. Queen's Park have the solution in their hands if they want to use it. Be careful what you wish for gentlemen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not much of a debate, nobody supported Hampden!

Also, when discussing the distance fans are from the pitch at Hampden nobody pointed out fans behind the goals at Murrayfield are miles away from the pitch as well when it’s set out for football.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/12/2017 at 20:46, Donathan said:

 

 


Absolutely no foreign football fans are attending art galleries during their time here.

 

 

 

On 11/12/2017 at 20:53, 1320Lichtie said:

 


Or museums, and they certainly don’t give a flying f**k about hotels. Even if that was true, leaving the Edinburgh snobbery aside.

Still think it was a wind up though.

 

Think you might be projecting a bit here, chaps.  Just because you don't go to galleries abroad, and you don't care about the quality of hotels, doesn't necessarily make it true.

Hampden is a crap stadium that, even with the free buses, is a nightmare to get to if there's a full house.  It was built on the cheap, has a terrible atmosphere and even the south stand needs renovating.  Murrayfield is well connected, much easier to get to, bigger, much more atmospheric and general a better stadium.

The only reasons for staying at Hampden are 1. it's in Glasgow and 2. That's where they've always played.  Neither of those are remotely convincing, yet I would imagine they'd hold sway at the SFA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...