Hampden Park has it had its Day ?

[1320Lichtie]

I have no idea. Tax payers? Lottery? The Magic Money Tree?
If there is a spare £100M or whatever knocking around I'd rather it was spent on player development rather than building a white elephant in Glasgow

Why would it be a white elephant?

Hampden could just be redeveloped like Windsor or Croke.

[EdTheDuck]

1 minute ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

Why would it be a white elephant?

Hampden could just be redeveloped like Windsor or Croke.

Do we really need a new stadium that would be used 10 times a season at most?  That's fairly white elephanty

[1320Lichtie]

Do we really need a new stadium that would be used 10 times a season at most?  That's fairly white elephanty

For how many years though...?

And it’ll get used more than that. Cup finals. Semi finals. Queens Park games. Concerts. SFA offices.

I don’t think it should be new. I don’t see how the West and East stands couldn’t be redeveloped.

[Goalie Hamish]

53 minutes ago, EdTheDuck said:

Seems like fans don't want Scotland to continue at Hampden, at least according to a survey by Scottish Football Supporters Association...although I don't know who they are so have no idea if they have an agenda.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42316749?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_sportsound&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=scotland

34% fancy playing at Murrayfield with just 15% wanting to stay at Hampden

24% apparently want a new Hampden built. Anyone have a spare £100M laying around?

 

They seem to think they have a membership of 71,000 Scottish fitba fans. Really?

[itzdrk]

1 hour ago, EdTheDuck said:

Seems like fans don't want Scotland to continue at Hampden, at least according to a survey by Scottish Football Supporters Association...although I don't know who they are so have no idea if they have an agenda.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42316749?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_sportsound&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=scotland

34% fancy playing at Murrayfield with just 15% wanting to stay at Hampden

24% apparently want a new Hampden built. Anyone have a spare £100M laying around?

 

Fucking braindead c***s

[SpoonTon]

1 hour ago, EdTheDuck said:

Seems like fans don't want Scotland to continue at Hampden, at least according to a survey by Scottish Football Supporters Association...although I don't know who they are so have no idea if they have an agenda.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42316749?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_sportsound&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=scotland

34% fancy playing at Murrayfield with just 15% wanting to stay at Hampden

24% apparently want a new Hampden built. Anyone have a spare £100M laying around?

 

So, 39% want to stay at Hampden? 

I'm a bit confused about this poll. 24% picked an option which doesn't exist right now, what would they have chosen otherwise? 

[EdTheDuck]

9 hours ago, SpoonTon said:

So, 39% want to stay at Hampden? 

I'm a bit confused about this poll. 24% picked an option which doesn't exist right now, what would they have chosen otherwise? 

Fair point that.

Bet they want a hover-pitch and mega-casino too though

[gannonball]

Fucking braindead c***s

How is wanting a superior stadium with better transport links and more pubs a braindead idea exactly? I admit its far from perfect from a football point of view but hardly brain dead

 

[gannonball]

So, 39% want to stay at Hampden? 
I'm a bit confused about this poll. 24% picked an option which doesn't exist right now, what would they have chosen otherwise? 

Thats a fair point, a refurbished stadium is out of the question for me though. It will be largely the same types that built the last piece of sh*te.

[1320Lichtie]

It will be largely the same types that built the last piece of sh*te.

How?

[gannonball]

8 minutes ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

How?

 

As in the ones in charge of developing it (SFA). They cant run their own organisation correctly so I dont want them dishing out contracts for constuction.

[banana]

OK, alternative solution considering Ibrox and Parkhead are falling apart and in shithole areas...

Old Firm new super-modern stadium share, doubling as the new national stadium. Funded 1/3 each club and the SFA/govt. SFA keep proceeds of Scotland affairs and takes a 1/3 cut of other non-footballing events.

Located in Glencoe glen for added atmosphere.

[gannonball]

10 minutes ago, banana said:

OK, alternative solution considering Ibrox and Parkhead are falling apart and in shithole areas...

 

Im guessing you havent been to Parkhead for a while. As for Ibrox yes its in bad nick but I would rather have a shitpit has some decent atmosphere than the ‘new’ soulless hampden, I also find it easier to get in and out from.

[dirvy]

too much is vague.

how much would tic/gers/sru want to hire their stadium

relocation of sfa admin and other costs.

loss of Ed Sheerin, etc concert income

policing of trains to Edinburgh for 2-3 old firm, semis /finals.

We need to know these things , and not vague statements like Hampden is expensive

 

[gannonball]

59 minutes ago, dirvy said:

too much is vague.

1.how much would tic/gers/sru want to hire their stadium

2.relocation of sfa admin and other costs.

3.loss of Ed Sheerin, etc concert income

4.policing of trains to Edinburgh for 2-3 old firm, semis /finals.

We need to know these things , and not vague statements like Hampden is expensive

 

1. I would imagine you could all play them off against each other to get the best deal for the SFA so their may be value to be had.

2. Relocation of offices is hardly going to be a major cost. They may be even able to negotiate the office space at Hampden on its own.

3.loss of Ed Sheerin, an obituary I would like to see.

4. One lot get on at Central, the other queen st. Then get off at Waverly or Haymarket. I think this is standard practice for Ediburgh derbys at Hampden?

 

[Nanook of the North]

This article was to be in the Albion Rovers match day programme v Arbroath, 9 December, programmes printed, and then match postponed.  Match will be played in the New Year at some stage.

Hampden

Some of my best Scotland memories are in the old Hampden stadium pre-redevelopment; different times, open air and all the mud or dust, depending on the weather conditions, that you could ask for.  I was in at least a few 100,000+ crowds, no health and safety in those days, always made a point  of standing in front of the barriers, if a sway started, you did not want to be pushed onto the barrier by the weight of the crowd, did that once and once was quite enough, thank you.

Hampden was just brilliant, and it helped that we had a reasonable team who, in those days, went forward, and if we went out, at least, you knew Scotland had had a go.

Different times!

But do we need to be in a different stadium for our national team and later stages of national Cup competitions?

First up Murrayfield.  A great rugby stadium, and that is the point, it is a rugby stadium.  Watching Scotland play the Autumn internationals, whenever an aerial view was shown, it was amazing how far away the crowd were at one end (this is also a minus redeveloped Hampden point) and remarkably far away down the side where the teams come out.  Hearts have been playing there and it’s great, apparently, for atmosphere, although the match highlights don’t quite seem to agree,

So, suitability is one issue, but the main question for me is why do we want to take money out of Scottish football, to give it to Scottish rugby?  They are doing fine; let them get on with it without football cash.

So, where do we go for the big matches?  The only stadiums big enough are Parkhead and Ibrox but how neutral is either venue?

The last time I was at Ibrox, the ground looked tired, weary; it just looked like it needed some TLC.  And don’t forget that Celtic Park has seats with restricted view, usually where the away support is seated, and some say that the dressing rooms are too small.

Step forward Hampden.

Absolutely, the best thing about Hampden is that it is a long established neutral venue.  (It is a sad indictment on the needs of Scottish football that a neutral venue is a must because our two biggest supported teams are at each other’s throat, so much of the time.)

Traditionally, cup semi-finals and finals are played at a neutral venue.  What happens if the Old Firm play in a semi-final or final?  No matter what the SFA do in this situation, allocate the game to either Ibrox or Parkhead, they will be wrong according to one or other side.

And the Old Firm would not be helping out by supplying their grounds for the greater good of Scottish football, simply put, they want the ground rent.

According to press reports, Celtic made more from the 2014 Scottish Cup Final than either of the finalists!  Hampden was not available as it was being set up for the Commonwealth Games that year.

Do the big two not already have every advantage?  So, we want to give them even more of the cash?  Really?  When is enough advantage enough?  From time to time Old Firm supporters tell the rest of us that they want a better challenge, more competition in Scotland, aye right!  The next time Rangers and/or Celtic start to talk about evening out the resource flow within Scottish football, it will be the first time or it will be April 1st.

Spread out football cash across Scotland.  Smaller international matches and cup semi-finals should be played round the country, that makes sense.  Going back to the 2014 Scottish cup, the St Johnstone v Aberdeen semi-final was played in Ibrox.  So, Aberdeen drove past two serviceable grounds in Dundee, and then drove on with St Johnstone to Glasgow.  The match should have been played in Dundee to give supporters less of a trip.  19,057 supporters attended Ibrox, how many more would have shown up in Dundee?  (To add to the inconvenience, kick off time was 12.45 on a Sunday, you would think making things easier for the supporters (customers) might be a plan.)

Stewart Regan, the Chief Executive of the Scottish Football Association, might like to defend those 2014 Cup decisions.

You have to ask if this move by the SFA to investigate alternatives to Hampden is just a cynical attempt by the SFA to get the costs down for a future Hampden lease, after an unseemly public auction.

Mr Regan has many questions to answer, including those, quite rightly, put by Queens Park, the owners of Hampden.  It seems the club has been kept in the dark.  They want evidence to justify the statement that Hampden will cost many, many millions of pounds if the lease were to be renewed.  Under the lease, it is the responsibility of the SFA to maintain the stadium.  The SFA should not be complaining about the stadium, after all, it is their job to keep it up to scratch.

Moving elsewhere will not be cost free.  Hampden Park Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of the SFA, which has access to revenue sponsorship opportunities through the use of Hampden.  Are Celtic, Rangers and Murrayfield going to hand that over, doubt it!

Queens Park also dispute reports of the stadium rental, they do not recognise the £800,000 quoted, and they say some of the rental is retained by the SFA to maintain the stadium.

Hampden has an international name, an iconic name and reputation across the World as the home of Scottish Football, everyone has heard of the Hampden roar, and the ground has all the history that you would want.  From a marketing point of view, you do not throw away this major asset, it is established and known.

A few personal memories.

In 1973, I was bus convenor for the Rovers supporters club on the night of the Czech match, Scotland needed to beat the Czechs which they did 2-1, Holton and Jordan, to qualify for the 1974 World Cup.  At one point, the driver shouted on me, I was not a car driver at that time, and he said the gear stick had come away in his hand, and I said “is that important?”  Hmnn, if looks could kill, we coasted into a parking space at Shawfield and then had to walk hurriedly to Hampden, agreeing that the replacement bus would meet us on Aitkenhead Road afterwards.  I am sure I counted 3 short on the way back but no one has ever got back to me about it.

I was privileged to watch 18 year old Diego Maradona, in one of his early Argentina international matches, in 1979, at Hampden and he scored his first international goal in a 1-3 away win.  I watched him and thought too small, he will never make it, but he scored 34 goals in 91 appearances, so might be wrong on that one.  Argentina were a joy to watch, it is the only time I ever heard a Scottish crowd chanting for the visitors!

Hampden is not perfect.  No 1 difficult to get to. No 2 redevelopment disaster.

Yes, Hampden is difficult to get to, volume of traffic!

If you have ever travelled from the north, on Scotland match day, I have once on a Saturday morning, once for a mid-week match, there is a crazy amount of traffic going south but the real issue is with the A9 and the Aberdeen road converging at the Broxden roundabout on the south side of Perth.  But it does highlight how many Scotland supporters travel huge distances from the north to watch the team.  Give them an Aberdeen, Dundee or Perth game now and again.

Travelling to any stadium in Glasgow is going to be a problem, especially for an evening match but while that applies to Hampden, it applies equally well to Parkhead and Ibrox as Hampden.

Getting through Glasgow to Hampden is also an issue.  Can only say, with Coatbridge as the starting point, that going to Hampden, my preferred route is via East Kilbride, not the most direct but certainly quieter than other routes.

Time to throw in a few celebrities.  Kenny Dalglish, Joe Jordan and Malky MacKay all say Hampden is the home of Scottish Football.  Craig Levein, of 4 6 fame, says Murrayfield is the place; well that clinches it for me.  Hampden, it is.

We all know what is wrong with the redeveloped stadium.  Pitch too far away from the nearest supporters.  Low, flat stands sweeping away from the action.  Low level seats, you will be lucky to see the players’ ankles.  At the back of the stands, you feel as if you are a mile away.  At times the atmosphere can be quite tame, no wonder.

My understanding of modern football stadium design is to ‘crowd’ the pitch; the first supporters are tight to the pitch, slightly above the level of the pitch, so that supporters are looking down rather than up or along.  Stands should be steeper and there should tiers, levels a la San Siro or to a lesser extent Celtic Park.

But not too steep, in 1990, I was in the Studio delle Alpi in Turin, home then to both Juventus and Torino, the name means the "Stadium of the Alps”, a reference to the nearby Alps mountain range, but equally could have been named after how steep the top tier was.  I have a real fear of heights (acrophobia), I crawled up to my seat on the second last top row and at the finish, I bummed my way down to the exit.  Fortunately, Brazil and Scotland played out a dire, unexciting game, just as well from my point of view, Scotland gave us no reason to get up and cheer or jump about, Scotland lost 1-0.

So, move over Murrayfield, Parkhead, Ibrox, stand aside for Hampden the neutral national football stadium, just a wee bit of work required.

So, SFA get on, and get Hampden fixed!  Hampden forever!

[Lurkst]

13 minutes ago, Nanook of the North said:

Going back to the 2014 Scottish cup, the St Johnstone v Aberdeen semi-final was played in Ibrox.  So, Aberdeen drove past two serviceable grounds in Dundee, and then drove on with St Johnstone to Glasgow.  The match should have been played in Dundee to give supporters less of a trip.  19,057 supporters attended Ibrox, how many more would have shown up in Dundee? 

Errr none? Unless they wanted to watch it in the pub!

Not a bad article apart from that.  Michael Gannon wrote a similar piece defending Hampden in the Sunday Mail, can't find it online though...

Edited December 18, 2017 by Lurkst

[gannonball]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/gordon-strachan-urges-sfa-ditch-11781934

Bit of a hate figure right now but he makes a decent point from a players point of view.

[Lurkst]

26 minutes ago, gannonball said:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/gordon-strachan-urges-sfa-ditch-11781934

Bit of a hate figure right now but he makes a decent point from a players point of view.

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

 

[The Spider]

On 12/12/2017 at 22:56, gannonball said:

Relocation of offices is hardly going to be a major cost. They may be even able to negotiate the office space at Hampden on its own.

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?