The New Stadiums Thread

[gav-ffc]

4 hours ago, Sherrif John Bunnell said:

Here's another pic of the new Edinburgh stadium.

Tinpot.

Rotten, minds me or the temporary stands we had at the Falkirk stadium.

[thekorean]

Nashville SC stadium is underway.

 

Edited February 17, 2021 by thekorean

[Barry Ferguson's Hat]

Marina Bay Floating Stadium, Singapore

[GordonS]

20 hours ago, gav-ffc said:

Rotten, minds me or the temporary stands we had at the Falkirk stadium.

That's exactly what it is - four Highland Games stands round a pitch. It doesn't have changing rooms, offices or any indoor space other than the wee cabin for commentators - all of that is over in the main stadium and the players will walk across the car park from there. The catering is just vans round the outside, as is normal at Murrayfield, but at least you have cover to stand and eat.

Edinburgh Rugby fans are very defensive about it, but it really is shite. As that picture shows, if you're at one end of a long stand looking at action at the opposite end and on the nearside touchline, you're looking through a forest of poles. The poles are thicker front-to-back than side-to-side too, so it's even worse. I'm a Glasgow-Edinburgh half-and-half scarf douchebag and I watch most of my club rugby at Murrayfield because it's near work, and I'd rather they were continuing to play in front of 60,000 empty seats than this. The only good thing about it is 2,000 covered standing places.

When was the last time a Scottish football club put up a stand with pillars? Celtic in the mid 90s? Certainly none of the new grounds since and including McDiarmid Park have any pillars.

I'm not a fan of Scotstoun either, the main stand is good but the stands behind the goals are temporary stands with pillars and the north stand is about 300 miles from the pitch.

[Sergeant Wilson]

11 minutes ago, GordonS said:

That's exactly what it is - four Highland Games stands round a pitch. It doesn't have changing rooms, offices or any indoor space other than the wee cabin for commentators - all of that is over in the main stadium and the players will walk across the car park from there. The catering is just vans round the outside, as is normal at Murrayfield, but at least you have cover to stand and eat.

Edinburgh Rugby fans are very defensive about it, but it really is shite. As that picture shows, if you're at one end of a long stand looking at action at the opposite end and on the nearside touchline, you're looking through a forest of poles. The poles are thicker front-to-back than side-to-side too, so it's even worse. I'm a Glasgow-Edinburgh half-and-half scarf douchebag and I watch most of my club rugby at Murrayfield because it's near work, and I'd rather they were continuing to play in front of 60,000 empty seats than this. The only good thing about it is 2,000 covered standing places.

When was the last time a Scottish football club put up a stand with pillars? Celtic in the mid 90s? Certainly none of the new grounds since and including McDiarmid Park have any pillars.

I'm not a fan of Scotstoun either, the main stand is good but the stands behind the goals are temporary stands with pillars and the north stand is about 300 miles from the pitch.

I take it the pillars are a reflection of the budget, ie cantilever style cost too much?

[Le Tout P'ti FC]

Like watching rugby through a fork was the most apt reply I read on twitter @BurgessHillRFC.

The Edinburgh rugby punters are quite easily taken in. One guy claiming the East Stand at Murrayfield (which dates from 80s) was built deliberately low to give the other three 90s stands a nicer view to the Castle.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

I take it the pillars are a reflection of the budget, ie cantilever style cost too much?

Presumably cantilever construction would require deep foundations. Which would be another reason you don’t see them on temporary structures

[GordonS]

34 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

I take it the pillars are a reflection of the budget, ie cantilever style cost too much?

As TC says above, you need to anchor cantilevers into the ground and this is literally four pop-up stands. Some people aren't bothered by them but I'd rather not have a roof if it means pillars.

Had a look at when I first moaned about the pillars on Twitter - June 2018. I called it the worst ground in Scotland of its size.

My theory on why they want a smaller ground is so that they can charge higher ticket prices. As soon as Glasgow started filling their ground they hugely hiked the prices, because they could, and they're now more than a third higher than Edinburgh's prices.. There's only so much you can charge when there's 15 seats to every customer. 

[topcat(The most tip top)]

16 minutes ago, GordonS said:

As TC says above, you need to anchor cantilevers into the ground and this is literally four pop-up stands. Some people aren't bothered by them but I'd rather not have a roof if it means pillars.

Had a look at when I first moaned about the pillars on Twitter - June 2018. I called it the worst ground in Scotland of its size.

My theory on why they want a smaller ground is so that they can charge higher ticket prices. As soon as Glasgow started filling their ground they hugely hiked the prices, because they could, and they're now more than a third higher than Edinburgh's prices.. There's only so much you can charge when there's 15 seats to every customer. 

The big question with the Edinburgh Rugby stadium is ...

How temporary is "temporary"

If it's is a stage that Edinburgh rugby have to go through for a few years between playing in a good stadium thats's10 times to big and playing in a good stadium that's about the right size then briefly playing in a shit stadium that's about the right size is probably a price worth paying

There were some pretty rubbish interim solutions in Scottish football in the '90s as clubs went all seater

 

 

 

 

Edited February 17, 2021 by topcat(The most tip top)

[GordonS]

28 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

The big question with the Edinburgh Rugby stadium is ...

How temporary is "temporary"

If it's is a stage that Edinburgh rugby have to go through for a few years between playing in a good stadium thats's10 times to big and playing in a good stadium that's about the right size then briefly playing in a shit stadium that's about the right size is probably a price worth paying

There were some pretty rubbish interim solutions in Scottish football in the '90s as clubs went all seater

I don't think it will be temporary at all really, I think it will be pretty permanent. There are similar stands at Scotstoun and the RDS in Dublin, and they've been up for years. But it won't be as long-lasting as a concrete stadium, obviously, that stuff will age much quicker.

Very good point about the 90s grounds, I remember seats being bolted onto existing terracing at Hampden, Parkhead, Tynecastle and elsewhere (and Hampden is pretty much the same today). Didn't they give out foam cushions for the uncovered seats at the Gorgie Road end? 

[Mark Connolly]

1 hour ago, GordonS said:

I don't think it will be temporary at all really, I think it will be pretty permanent. There are similar stands at Scotstoun and the RDS in Dublin, and they've been up for years. But it won't be as long-lasting as a concrete stadium, obviously, that stuff will age much quicker.

Very good point about the 90s grounds, I remember seats being bolted onto existing terracing at Hampden, Parkhead, Tynecastle and elsewhere (and Hampden is pretty much the same today). Didn't they give out foam cushions for the uncovered seats at the Gorgie Road end? 

At least you winding the Embra fans up on twitter has them making some noise, which they never did at any of their previous home grounds.

[Steve McQueen]

14 hours ago, GordonS said:

I don't think it will be temporary at all really, I think it will be pretty permanent. There are similar stands at Scotstoun and the RDS in Dublin, and they've been up for years. But it won't be as long-lasting as a concrete stadium, obviously, that stuff will age much quicker.

Very good point about the 90s grounds, I remember seats being bolted onto existing terracing at Hampden, Parkhead, Tynecastle and elsewhere (and Hampden is pretty much the same today). Didn't they give out foam cushions for the uncovered seats at the Gorgie Road end? 

I read it cost £5.7m, is that what you get for that much money?

[topcat(The most tip top)]

I don't think it will be temporary at all really, I think it will be pretty permanent. There are similar stands at Scotstoun and the RDS in Dublin, and they've been up for years. But it won't be as long-lasting as a concrete stadium, obviously, that stuff will age much quicker.
Very good point about the 90s grounds, I remember seats being bolted onto existing terracing at Hampden, Parkhead, Tynecastle and elsewhere (and Hampden is pretty much the same today). Didn't they give out foam cushions for the uncovered seats at the Gorgie Road end? 

I was looking for pictures of the Away end at that time and stumbled across this

“Being considerate of the fact that they could get a bit wet, Hearts provided bright yellow seat covers to protect the seats for a Celtic visit to Tynecastle in February 1995.

Quickly realising these wouldn’t be much use if it rained again, the traveling supporters soon started repurposing the bright yellow freebies by turning them in to crosses. Would likely be frowned upon now, but in the grand scheme of things, harmless and quite funny.

They even brought about a miracle, as Willie Jamieson produced the strike of his life to equalise for Hearts with a late, 25-yard screamer.

The considerable number of Hearts fans filing out behind the goal where the Roseburn stand would soon be built, got quite the view of the ball plying past Pat Bonner.”

https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/sport/football/tynecastle-park-1990s-hearts-remember-16024150

[Crawford Bridge]

On 16/02/2021 at 13:50, super_carson said:

if the attendances grow in years to come.  

They won't.

[super_carson]

19 minutes ago, Crawford Bridge said:

They won't.

Well, no.  Not while crowds are banned they won't.  

There is the potential, quarter finals against Toulouse and Munster and the games against Glasgow around Hogmanay each year show there is a base to grow Edinburgh as a 'brand'.  Part of the problem was the rather nomadic existence and generally poor match "experience" at Murrayfield with crowds of five or six thousand.  A smaller and permanent 'stadium' might help improve this and drive some more interest, time will tell.

Leinster were in a similar situation a few years ago, but with clever marketing and investment in the right places and they are now one of the most dominant teams in Europe in the last few years.  Whether or not the SRU has the wherewithal to execute a similar improvement remains to be seen.

[Crawford Bridge]

27 minutes ago, super_carson said:

A smaller and permanent 'stadium' might help improve this and drive some more interest.

It won't.

It's a fallacy that Edinburgh is a rugby town. Virtually nobody cares, well at least not enough to back it.

[super_carson]

1 minute ago, Crawford Bridge said:

It won't.

It's a fallacy that Edinburgh is a rugby town. Virtually nobody cares, well at least not enough to back it.

I think there is the potential, they've just made an absolute hash of things in the past. It's about maximising that potential - look at the number of rugby clubs in Edinburgh.  3 Super Six, plus 3 Premiership clubs and a handful of smaller ones dotted around, all with fairly sizeable youth sections.  There is obviously an interest in rugby in the city, but the SRU have been utterly woeful at trying to get people to sign up to it on a regular basis rather than just the big events.  It doesn't help competing against Hearts and Hibs doesn't help, and nor does charging £25 for an adult ticket...

[Crawford Bridge]

1 minute ago, super_carson said:

I think there is the potential.

They've been saying that forever.

As you say, there's always been plenty of interest in playing rugby but it's never translated to spectators.

Have you ever considered that it's £25 per ticket for a reason? Perhaps the same reasons rugby union was kept amateur for so long? 

[GordonS]

It's not £25 to watch Edinburgh, it's £15 (£20 if you buy on match day) and £5 for kids. I think it's excellent value. 

The main factor holding back crowds at Murrayfield has been team performance. The market is much bigger for a team that's competitive. They have about the same average attendance (big games excluded) that Glasgow had until about 8 years ago. Glasgow's crowd rose to a consistent 7-8 thousand off the back of years of challenging for the league. I think if Edinburgh were in that position they could definitely grow to 10,000 before long. I remember being in crowds of 1,200-ish watching Glasgow and there's no reason to think they're close to tapping out the market yet.

But Edinburgh would need to improve the next biggest factor too - they need to make it more of a social occasion, because that's the key to rugby crowds in Scotland. I know a few groups of regular attenders and in most there are at least 2-3 people with no interest in the game, who are only along for the company.

Longer term, once a whole generation has come through that grew up as fans of either team in the traditional sense, and not just because it's your nearest pro team, I think both clubs have the potential to kick on to the 15-20 thousand range. But utterly critical to that is keeping matches - especially the Six Nations - on cooncil telly. The Premier Sports deal was very short sighted.

As for Scotstoun... I preferred Firhill. But do those folk come to Maryhill?

 

ETA just checked what I paid last time I was at Scotstoun - £32 for an adult and £15 for a kid, to sit in an uncovered stand behind the goals for the semi-final v Ulster. And that's why I stopped watching Glasgow and stuck with Edinburgh instead. 

Also, that reminds me, Ulster fans are d!cks.

Edited February 18, 2021 by GordonS

[super_carson]

1 hour ago, Crawford Bridge said:

Have you ever considered that it's £25 per ticket for a reason? Perhaps the same reasons rugby union was kept amateur for so long? 

I don't think the idea that rugby is being kept from the masses is accurate at all to be honest.  Rugby Union has been professional since 1995, and as such requires finance from paying customers to survive; they'd be cutting their nose to spite their face in that regard.  

To back my point up, Glasgow Warriors actually charge £27 for their cheapest ticket and have an average attendance of nearly 7000. 

Edited February 18, 2021 by super_carson