Hampden Park has it had its Day ?

[gannonball]

4 hours ago, The Spider said:

So let me get this right. You think that if the SFA decide to move all International and domestic showpiece games away from Hampden that Queen's Park will be able to continue to run the stadium solely on revenue from occasional concerts, and therefore will be able to keep it open so that the SFA can still retain their office space?

By any chance are you the same guy who was lambasting the SFA for their incompetence, and suggesting they were unfit to handle construction contracts? Hampden without it's football income could not continue to exist. Queen's Park would either sell the 33 acres in a prime development area for housing, and build a new small fit for purpose stadium for themselves elsewhere (Cathkin?), or keep Lesser Hampden with the car park opposite, and sell the southernmost 20 acres. Maintaining a 50,000 capacity stadium for 2 or 3 concerts a year (unless you see a future for it as a year round venue given our climate) would be the quickest way possible to ensure that the club itself quickly followed Hampden into dereliction, so if it's a choice of keeping it open to let the SFA have office space or selling it to maintain our survival, which in your considered opinion is the more likely outcome?

I suggested that may be able to rent the office space yes. Given how long it would take to get planning permission for houses etc (should QP sell the land) I dont think it would be out of the question whilst they try to source other offices. I accept In the long term Queens Park would most likely be unable to survive with the white elephant and would have to sell the ground. I also accept Queens Park has a long history but trying to keep them at Hampden shouldnt be a the behest of the progression of the national game. 

I was the guy lambasting the SFA and wouldn't trust them to be in charge of rebuilding Hampden therefor a move away from it would make more sense for me. We have other stadiums in Scotland that are better for atmosphere and transport so why play at an inferior ground?  

[The Spider]

I don't expect anyone to be able to precisely answer the following two questions, as I doubt a survey has been taken on the first, whilst the other is a "how long is a piece of string" one, but here goes anyway:

1.  At your average Scotland game, what is the geographical representation of attendees, and in particular the % of fans from Glasgow or the West of Scotland? I hear a lot being spouted about how Murrayfield would suit the majority of Scotland fans but IF 60% (for the sake of argument) are from that area, is there either an assumption that they'll all be prepared to go to Murrayfield for an evening game, or that their spaces will be filled by others from the North and East.  To me at any rate, unless the answer to that is already known by the SFA, that's quite a gamble when money appears to be the main consideration for the SFA at present.
2. Neither Rangers nor Celtic fans have historically shown to be mindful of public decency on Old Firm match days, what makes anyone think that either the Scottish Government or Lothian Police will happily endorse the prospect of inflicting such behaviour on Edinburgh's patrons, let alone the potential carnage at all points in-between?

Strangely perhaps, as a QP fan I'm entirely ambivolent about the outcome of all this as there are huge advantages and disadvantages for my club with or without Hampden. I therefore ask these questions entirely from a neutral perspective, and if it makes overall sense to re-locate to Murrayfield (ignoring the fact that Scottish Football will no longer have a home) then I'm all for it, but at present I am far from convinced that the potential benefits outweigh the obstacles.

I also have a little chuckle to myself every now and again when articles like this one crop up http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15799432.Revealed__How_the_Thatcher_Government_pulled_the_plug_on_the__new_Hampden_/, and we are reminded of what could have been had Old Firm one-upmanship not prevailed all those years ago.

[gannonball]

I don't expect anyone to be able to precisely answer the following two questions, as I doubt a survey has been taken on the first, whilst the other is a "how long is a piece of string" one, but here goes anyway:

1.  At your average Scotland game, what is the geographical representation of attendees, and in particular the % of fans from Glasgow or the West of Scotland? I hear a lot being spouted about how Murrayfield would suit the majority of Scotland fans but IF 60% (for the sake of argument) are from that area, is there either an assumption that they'll all be prepared to go to Murrayfield for an evening game, or that their spaces will be filled by others from the North and East.  To me at any rate, unless the answer to that is already known by the SFA, that's quite a gamble when money appears to be the main consideration for the SFA at present.
2. Neither Rangers nor Celtic fans have historically shown to be mindful of public decency on Old Firm match days, what makes anyone think that either the Scottish Government or Lothian Police will happily endorse the prospect of inflicting such behaviour on Edinburgh's patrons, let alone the potential carnage at all points in-between?

Strangely perhaps, as a QP fan I'm entirely ambivolent about the outcome of all this as there are huge advantages and disadvantages for my club with or without Hampden. I therefore ask these questions entirely from a neutral perspective, and if it makes overall sense to re-locate to Murrayfield (ignoring the fact that Scottish Football will no longer have a home) then I'm all for it, but at present I am far from convinced that the potential benefits outweigh the obstacles.

I also have a little chuckle to myself every now and again when articles like this one crop up http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15799432.Revealed__How_the_Thatcher_Government_pulled_the_plug_on_the__new_Hampden_/, and we are reminded of what could have been had Old Firm one-upmanship not prevailed all those years ago.

Murrayfield is an option, other smaller stadiums are available depending on demand sp the evening argument doesnt really matter. Regarding the glasgow derby issue, for a start Scottish police is now under one body so 'Lothian Police' will be unable to shirk it really. For Edinburgh derbys one set of fans get on at one line whilst the other get the other line through to Glasgow so never cross paths,same would happen for this. Pubs would be segragated outside the ground I imagine as well. Any issues you have pointed out are very much avoidable.

 

ETA what the f*ck has the article on Tories pulling funding got to do with Celtic or Rangers?

 

[Goalie Hamish]

33 minutes ago, gannonball said:

Murrayfield is an option, other smaller stadiums are available depending on demand sp the evening argument doesnt really matter. Regarding the glasgow derby issue, for a start Scottish police is now under one body so 'Lothian Police' will be unable to shirk it really. For Edinburgh derbys one set of fans get on at one line whilst the other get the other line through to Glasgow so never cross paths,same would happen for this. Pubs would be segragated outside the ground I imagine as well. Any issues you have pointed out are very much avoidable.

 

ETA what the f*ck has the article on Tories pulling funding got to do with Celtic or Rangers?

 

Let's face it, this suggestion that we can use Tynecastle, Aberdeen, Easter Road, Rugby Park for smaller matches is an utter myth.  Fair enough for low-key friendlies but we do that already, almost all competitive Scotland games draw crowds of more than 30,000.  There was a stat saying something like only 3 or 4 qualifiers on the last 20 years had under 30k, but the other 3 or 4 were all still above 20k.   So your choice if you move away from Hampden is Celtic Park, Ibrox or Murrayfield, the latter of which would be an utter nightmare to police for OF Semis or Finals, with poorer transport links.  No thanks.

The SFSA pish survey was twisted - deliberately - to say only 15% want to remain at Murrayfield.  If you look at a couple of Tartan Army FB pages, one poll has it at 75% remain from 500 responses, the other is something like 52% remain from 1000 responses.  These people, apart from QP fans, visit Hampden more than anyone else. Who is fooling who here?

[The Spider]

14 minutes ago, gannonball said:

ETA what the f*ck has the article on Tories pulling funding got to do with Celtic or Rangers?

Sorry, I  was under the misapprehension that the answer to your question was either well known, and/or you had read the article in full, so allow me to save you the bother and paraphrase accordingly. In 1980 the UK government pledged to meet 50% of the rebuilding (not upgrading) costs for a new Hampden, and on the back of that GDC and SRC councils pledged a 120% contribution each meaning that the entire venture was already 70% funded before other sources were investigated.

However, Rae Simpson saw an opportunity to promote Ibrox as a new national stadium and the very same night that the above deal was agreed, he used the occasion of a Jim Watt fight at Ibrox to cajoule the Scottish Minister for Sport Alex Fletcher into scuppering the deal on the basis that money could be saved by using other stadiums instead, and purely coincidentally the refurbished Ibrox would be completed the following year. Given that Desmond White, the then Celtic Chairman, had been outspoken in his support of Hampden's re-development (whether for genuine reasons or simply because he loathed the idea of the potential alternative given that Parkhead was lagging well behind at that point), I'm left wondering whether Rae Simpson was in any way motivated by the prospect of getting one over on good ol' Des.

Your question suggests that you believe that the Tories pulling funding had nothing whatsover with Celtic or Rangers, and if that's your "reading" of events then you're entitled to your opinion, but I happen to think otherwise.

[Salvo Montalbano]

Let's face it, this suggestion that we can use Tynecastle, Aberdeen, Easter Road, Rugby Park for smaller matches is an utter myth.  Fair enough for low-key friendlies but we do that already, almost all competitive Scotland games draw crowds of more than 30,000.  There was a stat saying something like only 3 or 4 qualifiers on the last 20 years had under 30k, but the other 3 or 4 were all still above 20k.   So your choice if you move away from Hampden is Celtic Park, Ibrox or Murrayfield, the latter of which would be an utter nightmare to police for OF Semis or Finals, with poorer transport links.  No thanks.
The SFSA pish survey was twisted - deliberately - to say only 15% want to remain at Murrayfield.  If you look at a couple of Tartan Army FB pages, one poll has it at 75% remain from 500 responses, the other is something like 52% remain from 1000 responses.  These people, apart from QP fans, visit Hampden more than anyone else. Who is fooling who here?

In what way does Murrayfield have poorer transport links? There's an actual mainline station served by trains from all the major cities in Scotland, a fair number in England and local trains from Fife, The Lothians and the Forth Valley a 15 minute walk away. There are multiple bus routes from the city centre, airport, park and ride sites and local outskirts. There is a tram link to the city centre, park and ride site and airport. The surrounding area has several nice pubs and restaurants and you can be on the M8, M9 and M90 fairly quickly depending on where you park.

[flyingscot]

On 1/2/2018 at 13:26, Lurkst said:

The Georgia game at Ibrox?  Not exactly a rocking atmosphere at that from what I remember. 

Correct, and pricing meant each goal end was full (£25 tickets?),  but the main and Govan were much quieter particularly in the middle where tickets were more pricey. 

8 minutes ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

In what way does Murrayfield have poorer transport links? There's an actual mainline station served by trains from all the major cities in Scotland, a fair number in England and local trains from Fife, The Lothians and the Forth Valley a 15 minute walk away. There are multiple bus routes from the city centre, airport, park and ride sites and local outskirts. There is a tram link to the city centre, park and ride site and airport. The surrounding area has several nice pubs and restaurants and you can be on the M8, M9 and M90 fairly quickly depending on where you park.

 

I don't think the links from Murrayfield are poorer than Hampden, pros and cons to both. The main issue is they have to queue people to get into Haymarket and trains unlike Mount Florida are often rammed by the time they get there. The New Zealand rugby game was 5.15pm and I think some people struggled to even get back on last trains north. 

I never get the folk who say Hampden is 'hard to get to' either!

[gannonball]

15 hours ago, The Spider said:

Sorry, I  was under the misapprehension that the answer to your question was either well known, and/or you had read the article in full, so allow me to save you the bother and paraphrase accordingly. In 1980 the UK government pledged to meet 50% of the rebuilding (not upgrading) costs for a new Hampden, and on the back of that GDC and SRC councils pledged a 120% contribution each meaning that the entire venture was already 70% funded before other sources were investigated.

However, Rae Simpson saw an opportunity to promote Ibrox as a new national stadium and the very same night that the above deal was agreed, he used the occasion of a Jim Watt fight at Ibrox to cajoule the Scottish Minister for Sport Alex Fletcher into scuppering the deal on the basis that money could be saved by using other stadiums instead, and purely coincidentally the refurbished Ibrox would be completed the following year. Given that Desmond White, the then Celtic Chairman, had been outspoken in his support of Hampden's re-development (whether for genuine reasons or simply because he loathed the idea of the potential alternative given that Parkhead was lagging well behind at that point), I'm left wondering whether Rae Simpson was in any way motivated by the prospect of getting one over on good ol' Des.

Your question suggests that you believe that the Tories pulling funding had nothing whatsover with Celtic or Rangers, and if that's your "reading" of events then you're entitled to your opinion, but I happen to think otherwise.

I did read the article. All I got from it was one chairman was for it and the other against it. Your claim about Alex Fletcher makes no sense as they still continued to use Hampden, and no Government money was used for the refurbishment of Ibrox as far as I am aware. Your rambles and claims are getting rather speculative. I know Celtic and Rangers like to get blamed for a lot in Scottish football but in this case it was Tory cuts. They even wanted to shut the place down in the early 90s as well.

[The Spider]

Anything that happened post-1980 is irrelevant to the point I was trying to make, and directly consequential to the failure to re-build Hampden when the chance was there. We can debate back and forth our interpretation of events, but the bottom line is that a huge opportunity was wasted.

[Goalie Hamish]

9 hours ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

In what way does Murrayfield have poorer transport links? There's an actual mainline station served by trains from all the major cities in Scotland, a fair number in England and local trains from Fife, The Lothians and the Forth Valley a 15 minute walk away. There are multiple bus routes from the city centre, airport, park and ride sites and local outskirts. There is a tram link to the city centre, park and ride site and airport. The surrounding area has several nice pubs and restaurants and you can be on the M8, M9 and M90 fairly quickly depending on where you park.

One station, Haymarket, and a 30 minute walk (or 10 min tram ride) back up the line to Waverley.   Everyone on the train funneled down the one line, and if the train is busy at Waverley, you have no chance getting on at Haymarket.

There are 4 different train stations within a 10/15 min walk of Hampden, and you can be on the M74 at Polmadie and away within 15 minutes of the final whistle if you park right.

Better pubs around Murrayfield though.

[effeffsee_the2nd]

i'm not saying murrayfield is or isnt the answer here but the "how will you get the old firm fans to edinburgh and back safely for semi's and finals" line is mostly a non issue.  Both sides of the old firm use supporters buses for transporting  fans to  games more than any other team,  dont under estimate just how much of their support comes from outside the city of glasgow, those buses from motherwell larkhall harthill  livingstone bathgate Falkirk grangemouth dunfermiline perth dundee..... need i go on? can just as easily take fans to murrayfield as they can hampden 

[Thefootballblether]

Discussed this issue in an article - pros and cons of moving. Tradition versus finance. 

https://thefootballblether.com/2018/01/03/tradition-versus-finance-hampden-versus-moving/

 

[lubo_blaha]

On 05/01/2018 at 19:10, Goalie Hamish said:

One station, Haymarket, and a 30 minute walk (or 10 min tram ride) back up the line to Waverley.   Everyone on the train funneled down the one line, and if the train is busy at Waverley, you have no chance getting on at Haymarket.

There are 4 different train stations within a 10/15 min walk of Hampden, and you can be on the M74 at Polmadie and away within 15 minutes of the final whistle if you park right.

Better pubs around Murrayfield though.

Aye, 4 stations that will only take you around the southside of Glasgow or into Central. Haymarket will take you to either Glasgow station (or anywhere inbetween), Fife, Dundee, Angus, Aberdeen, Stirling, Perth and Inverness and regularly handles 67,000 rugby crowds. There's also the option of getting the tram from one of two nearby stations back into Edinburgh or to get trains from Edinburgh Park or Gateway. 

[NorthernLights]

SRU have released their "bid video"

 

[San Starko Rover]

Hampden for me ideally rebuilt, I know people will say where is the money but there must be a way if Republic of Ireland can build Croke Park and the Aviva and the Welsh can find money to build the Millennium stadium then there must be ways to raise the money. None of the alternatives work for me.

1. Move games round the country, yes it works in Spain, Germany and Italy but our stadiums are too small only Hampden, Ibrox, Celtic Park and Murrayfield have the capacity for a final or competitive international match.

2. Use Ibrox and Celtic Park, both stadiums are decent enough although Ibrox needs some TLC and the away section at CP has restricted views but my main problem with this is giving Celtic and Rangers more money is not going to help our domestic game and what’s the solution to Cup finals hardly fair if they get home advantage against the smaller teams and what about when they play each other.

3. Use Murrayfield, yes it seems a good stadium and hosts Rugby internationals and cup finals although as has been mentioned the stands at either end aren’t close to the pitch and there’s a running track at one side. Transport links are better than Hampden but do we really want to pour football money into Rugby coffers? And I can’t see Edinburgh Council being thrilled about the prospects of an Old Firm cup final offending the tourists.

4. Build a shiny new stadium away from Glasgow / Edinburgh, seen this one mentioned lots on various forums. Great idea as long as you’re driving there but it lacks infrastructure there’s no hotels for fans from further away or the away fans, there would be no bars or restaurants except in the stadium and forget a train link, if Glasgow and Edinburgh airport don’t have them then no way a stadium will get one.

Hampden has its flaws as The Spider mentions a lot of this was caused by Rangers screwing us over in the 80s (not sure Celtic were involved) when they tried to push Ibrox as an alternative causing the Tory government at the time to remove the funding. We then had to re do Hampden on the cheap. For me Hampden is Scotland’s home I’ve been to Ibrox and Celtic Park and the atmosphere at Hampden for big games is every bit as good when it’s France, Italy, England etc. I’ve been in the back row of the West stand and yes there are better views but it’s nowhere near as bad as some make out as I could see everything that happened. I’d like to see it rebuilt even if it’s a future plan as it’s hardly a crumbling wreck of a stadium. Find a way to raise the money and rebuild it. As mentioned the transport to the Centre isn’t inadequate the problem is getting back to Inverness, Aberdeen, Dundee after an evening game surely this could be resolved by a deal with Scotrail, Scotland fans are hardly renowned for hooliganism a few late trains shouldn’t be beyond reason.

[Goalie Hamish]

On 1/27/2018 at 00:18, lubo_blaha said:

Aye, 4 stations that will only take you around the southside of Glasgow or into Central. Haymarket will take you to either Glasgow station (or anywhere inbetween), Fife, Dundee, Angus, Aberdeen, Stirling, Perth and Inverness and regularly handles 67,000 rugby crowds. There's also the option of getting the tram from one of two nearby stations back into Edinburgh or to get trains from Edinburgh Park or Gateway. 

One line.  Have you ever been stood at Haymarket whilst a train pulls in from Waverley you cant get on and are told to wait on the next, same thing happens.   It's a total myth that transpost links to/from Hampden are poor and Murrayfield is better.  Ever tried to park near Murrayfield on a big matchday?

[jamamafegan]

SRU have released their "bid video"
 

It’s an absolute no brainer. I’m all for it.

[lubo_blaha]

One line.  Have you ever been stood at Haymarket whilst a train pulls in from Waverley you cant get on and are told to wait on the next, same thing happens.   It's a total myth that transpost links to/from Hampden are poor and Murrayfield is better.  Ever tried to park near Murrayfield on a big matchday?

It’s never happened to me at Haymarket but I have had to wait for several trains to go by before I could get on at Mount Florida.

I’ve also never driven to Murrayfield but I’ve been on a buses that were still in view of Hampden an hour after full time on more than one occasion.

[BallochSonsFan]

Hampden's design is absolutely terrible. Fans are simply too far away from the pitch . Murrayfield isnt a huge improvement, but the stands at Hampden aren't steep enough. If you're down the front then you have a shite view with all the advertising boards and other gear at pitch level. Too near the back and you're miles away.

The redevelopment was botched. It should have been a complete rebuilt to bring it up to modern standards.

[Guest JTS98]

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.

Edited January 29, 2018 by JTS98