Jump to content

bendan

Gold Members
  • Content count

    452
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

139 Excellent

About bendan

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Edinburgh
  • My Team
    St.Mirren
  • My World Cup Pick
    Germany

Recent Profile Visitors

3,599 profile views
  1. New Hampden

    If it was simply about moving seats nearer the pitch, I'd agree, but I'd say the three older sides of Hampden are out of date. The upgrade to these parts in the 1990s was simply to cover (or re-cover) and seat them, and it didn't cost that much. By far the biggest spend was for the new main stand, as that has all the extra facilities. I don't see many people saying we have to replace the main stand. The comparison with arts venues is interesting, as places like the Usher Hall in Edinburgh have had more than one upgrade in the same time frame; on each occasion because the facilities were said to be out of date. We've also added the Festival Theatre here in Edinburgh (which cost much more than the redevelopment of the N/E/W parts of Hampden), done a major upgrade to the Lyceum, and now have the Leith Theatre, a new addition to a city full of venues that struggle to cover even operational expenses, which would not be the case with Hampden. I support all of that, by the way. It's what modern, complex, progressive societies do. Hampden needs an upgrade, and when that gets done, everyone recognises that the seats should be brought closer to the pitch. If the upgrade is done properly, it would definitely enhance the local area, and it would also provide the possibility of other activities being incorporated into the new stands, just as the rebuilt main stand now has offices, a museum and other facilities that create more activity around the stadium on a day-to-day basis than before. As others have said, you'd hope the SFA could be ambitious and pro-active in raising funds themselves, for it should be possible to raise a lot without any support from the government. At the end of the day, though, if a lack of funds holds back redevelopment, there's absolutely nothing wrong with some money being provided by the government.
  2. New Hampden

    The issue of other stadiums in Glasgow is really an argument that has already been decided. I can see the argument for grassroots facilities, but I don't think the money should be coming from the same pot. The hospitals/schools argument is too simplistic. As I said only three sides need rebuilt. The main stand already houses the most expensive elements of a stadium, so rebuilding the other three doesn't need to be as expensive as some are implying. I'd say funds can come from a variety of sources, but it's completely appropriate for the government to contribute to something that will help develop that part of Glasgow, will support local employment,and is one of very few places that represent Scotland on the world stage. The government puts broadcasting restrictions on the Scottish Cup Final because of its social/cultural importance, so they should put at least a bit of funding in to reflect that importance.
  3. New Hampden

    Well we can agree that if public money is provided, there needs to be more scrutiny over what they are doing with it than last time.
  4. New Hampden

    I want money spent on a range of interests, too. There's nothing mutually exclusive about them. I'd agree that we shouldn't spend hundreds of millions of public money on Hampden, but it would be wrong if there's no contribution at all when funds can be found for other activities.
  5. New Hampden

    Completely disagree. We spend vast amounts of money on an array of useless pish or minority interests. To say there's no money in the public pot for upgrading the national stadium of an activity that is hugely more influential in Scottish society than any other would be ridiculous. If there's no public money for football then there shouldn't be any for opera, theatre, galleries and the rest.
  6. New Hampden

    Totally agree. Sounds like that typical reaction of rushing to judgement without any thought at all. Stuttgart is better than before but not a great stadium. We need to totally rebuild three sides. If we don't put any fancy facilities underneath the three sides, the cost shouldn't be more than about £1500 per seat. It could be designed so that extra hospitality or accommodation could be added underneath later.
  7. 2018/19 Challenge Cup

    Yes, the fact this promotes Irn Bru beyond Scotland's borders must have played no part in the decision and has no influence on the amount of sponsorship the SPFL receive.
  8. Because everyone says they hate playing the same team four times (or more) a season, yet we've had this arrangement for ages now. In the Premiership there is at least an argument that there's too big a gap between the top and bottom in a big league, but the gap between L1 and L2 is not that big. You'll probably say there will be lots of meaningless games, but that's because of the lack of movement allowed between the SPFL and the Lowland/Highland Leagues. I'd promote the champions of both each year. I can turn it round, and ask why anyone would want to arrange the 23rd (or 25th) to 42nd best teams in Scotland into two leagues of ten?
  9. Despite the fact my club were one of the two who voted against, I actually quite liked this idea. There's potentially more turnover each year rather than the same teams always struggling, there's more meaningful games, and combining L1 and L2 into one league is long overdue common sense. Most fans seem to oppose, which isn't surprising when you consider how ultra conservative most are.
  10. 2018/19 Challenge Cup

    Yes, I'd have thought it would be 5 to 6k, maybe 7-8k to add a bit of comfort. That would mean a 'loss' of 1.5 to 4.5k assuming absolutely zero sponsorship/support was generated. If it's 8k, there's been little effort to restrict spending.
  11. 2018/19 Challenge Cup

    Players share rooms, and you don't need to stay in central London, or London at all. I also thought the SPFL were giving more than 3k for cross border trips. Spending 11k + implies quite a luxurious trip.
  12. 2018/19 Challenge Cup

    So Dunfermline spent 11k to play a match in London? How?
  13. World Cup 2019 Qualifiers

    Fantastic achievement. The improvement the women have made over the last few years is incredible.
  14. tv coverage of Scottish Cup

    I really can't see them getting a good deal when discussions continue after the competition has begun. You'd think some journos might bother asking what's going on.
  15. TV Deal from 2020

    The international rights are going to be distributed by the Infront agency until 2020 following the collapse of the MP & Silva deal. I'd imagine it's revenue sharing rather than a fixed fee. It's good to see they are bringing the deal timings in line with the domestic rights. This seems sensible, and also allows the possibility of one organisation taking global rights.
×