The Big Queen's Park FC Thread

[1320Lichtie]

1 hour ago, Shibuya said:

Some defending at the goal there, what a huddy. About as smash and grab a win as you'll see all season going by those highlights. 

There best chances come from a Ricky Little slip, other than that the 2 great tackles/clearances aside Gaston didn’t have much to do. We had 2 good chances other than the goal too. QP took the game to us but we held up and dealt with them well for the full 90

[Bring Your Own Socks]

13 minutes ago, ExiledLichtie said:

You don't need gold standard to get into the Premier League though.

https://spfl.co.uk/admin/filemanager/images/shares/pdfs/Membership Criteria Letter 2021-22 issued 1 December 2020.pdf

So by that then, no grounds in Scottish football need seats? 

[ExiledLichtie]

4 minutes ago, Bring Your Own Socks said:

So by that then, no grounds in Scottish football need seats? 

Entry level for the levels below just require covering and all the other criteria (which you listed yourself!) to be fulfilled as far as I can see, and then championship level up require bronze, which is 500 covered seats.  Silver and gold are not required.  We had the discussions last season when it looked like Arbroath might be heading up, and our chairman confirmed that Gayfield met all the bronze criteria except floodlight levels, which got upgraded in the summer, so there were no issues with using Gayfield in the premier league.  

[Stuntiethumper]

It is all happening in the Herald today. This article musing about the Scotland training connection being a quid pro quo for us getting access to Hampden should lightning strike and we get promoted. Personally I think that is the most likely option. https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/23411755.scotland-move-pave-way-queens-parks-return-hampden/

[PB1994]

If Lesser Hampden is ready there they should be playing there. They shouldn’t be able to cash is on ticket sales playing at Hampden just because they didn’t make their own stadium big enough.

[Bring Your Own Socks]

4 minutes ago, Stuntiethumper said:

It is all happening in the Herald today. This article musing about the Scotland training connection being a quid pro quo for us getting access to Hampden should lightning strike and we get promoted. Personally I think that is the most likely option. https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/23411755.scotland-move-pave-way-queens-parks-return-hampden/

All I’d say on this subject is that it’s an extraordinary coincidence that the Lesser pitch is a top-tier Hybrid surface, just like Hampden, with exactly the same pitch dimensions, just like Hampden. 

Interesting that in the Coyle interview he stated the stadium and all its going-ons are in the remit of Dempster. Yet whenever there’s a fans progress update it’s the committee who represent the club. Plausible deniability all round. 

[Bring Your Own Socks]

1 minute ago, PB1994 said:

If Lesser Hampden is ready there they should be playing there. They shouldn’t be able to cash is on ticket sales playing at Hampden just because they didn’t make their own stadium big enough.

Why?

[LeodhasXD]

12 minutes ago, Stuntiethumper said:

It is all happening in the Herald today. This article musing about the Scotland training connection being a quid pro quo for us getting access to Hampden should lightning strike and we get promoted. Personally I think that is the most likely option. https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/23411755.scotland-move-pave-way-queens-parks-return-hampden/

I like the quote about  looking at Hampden being inspirational. I mean I get tetanus just by looking at Hampden but each to their own.

[mcjameos]

10 minutes ago, PB1994 said:

If Lesser Hampden is ready there they should be playing there. They shouldn’t be able to cash is on ticket sales playing at Hampden just because they didn’t make their own stadium big enough.

A number of clubs have previously sold their stadium to third parties and continue(d) to play at them so the precedent is there. How would us playing a full season at big Hampden be any different?

[PB1994]

12 minutes ago, Bring Your Own Socks said:

Why?

Because your home ground is Lesser Hampden. If that is ready and available you play your home games at that ground. You can’t chop and change to make a bit of cash out of the OF.

What would be stopping St Mirren, Partick, Hearts of Hibs deciding to do the same thing at Hampden/Murrayfield? Not that they would as they’ve actually built themselves a proper football ground.

Personally, I’d be fucking raging if my club had spent £8 million, or whatever the figure is, building a brand new home ground and then as soon as it was ready deciding to go back to Hampden just to sell 45k+ tickets to the OF a couple of games a year. Essentially giving yourself a few extra away games and accepting the fact your probably not going to get any points from them.

[PB1994]

3 minutes ago, mcjameos said:

A number of clubs have previously sold their stadium to third parties and continue(d) to play at them so the precedent is there. How would us playing a full season at big Hampden be any different?

What clubs are these? I presume they didn’t have any other place to play? Queens Park literally have their own ground so that would be a big difference.

[Zanetti]

4 minutes ago, PB1994 said:

What would be stopping St Mirren, Partick, Hearts of Hibs deciding to do the same thing at Hampden/Murrayfield? Not that they would as they’ve actually built themselves a proper football ground.

 

Nothing, they're very welcome to try.

[PB1994]

Just now, Zanetti said:

Nothing, they're very welcome to try.

And they shouldn’t be allowed to either, If the sole reason is to try and make extra ticket money when they have a perfectly good home ground already available.

[mcjameos]

9 minutes ago, PB1994 said:

What clubs are these? I presume they didn’t have any other place to play? Queens Park literally have their own ground so that would be a big difference.

Pretty certain Dundee didn't own Dens for a while as there was talk of them buying it back. Raith don't own Starks, Haughey owned Celtic Park at one time, Clyde didn't own Shawfield or Broadwood, Rangers debacle.... do I need to go on? 

Historically we owned both. What we choose to do with our property portfolio diesnt enter into it. 

 

Edited March 26, 2023 by mcjameos

[PB1994]

3 minutes ago, mcjameos said:

Pretty certain Dundee didn't own Dens for a while as there was talk of them buying it back. Raith don't own Starks, Haughey owned Celtic Park at one time, Clyde didn't own Shawfield or Broadwood, Rangers debacle.... do I need to go on? 

Please do. None of those are remotely comparable to this situation.

I never said every football team needs to own their own stadiums but the ones that do need to play their home games at that ground.

[Zanetti]

6 minutes ago, PB1994 said:

And they shouldn’t be allowed to either, If the sole reason is to try and make extra ticket money when they have a perfectly good home ground already available.

You're attributing far too much meaning to the term "home ground". It basically has no real definition other than where a team is registered to play during any given season.

I can't say I'd particularly care if Hearts, for example, decided to play at Murrayfield instead of Tynecastle, but I'm sure you realise it's not a remotely comparable scenario to us moving back into a stadium we called home for well over a century.

For what it's worth I'd personally prefer Lesser were actually fit for purpose, but that's looking increasingly unrealistic any time soon. 

[mcjameos]

2 minutes ago, PB1994 said:

 

I never said every football team needs to own their own stadiums but the ones that do need to play their home games at that ground.

Is that in the rules? 

[PB1994]

6 minutes ago, Zanetti said:

You're attributing far too much meaning to the term "home ground". It basically has no real definition other than where a team is registered to play during any given season.

I can't say I'd particularly care if Hearts, for example, decided to play at Murrayfield instead of Tynecastle, but I'm sure you realise it's not a remotely comparable scenario to us moving back into a stadium we called home for well over a century.

For what it's worth I'd personally prefer Lesser were actually fit for purpose, but that's looking increasingly unrealistic any time soon. 

Aye, I’m sure I probably am.

I totally get the history of QP and Hampden but if then why haven’t the been playing there ever since it was sold to the SFA?

I just don’t think it is right to use Hampden as a cash cow to make millions in extra ticket revenue. That’s the only reason it is being discussed as an option, nothing to do with the History etc.

Lesser is actually fit for purpose under the SPFL criteria, in reality is it? Absolutely not but then that is QPs own fault.

Its obviously a very unique situation as no other club has a 50k stadium lying empty for 45 weeks of the year 50 yards away from their current home ground.

It’s not in any rules but I don’t think any club should be able to chop and change grounds like that just to make a massive amount of extra money.

[Stuntiethumper]

11 minutes ago, PB1994 said:

Aye, I’m sure I probably am.

I totally get the history of QP and Hampden but if then why haven’t the been playing there ever since it was sold to the SFA?

I just don’t think it is right to use Hampden as a cash cow to make millions in extra ticket revenue. That’s the only reason it is being discussed as an option, nothing to do with the History etc.

Lesser is actually fit for purpose under the SPFL criteria, in reality is it? Absolutely not but then that is QPs own fault.

Its obviously a very unique situation as no other club has a 50k stadium lying empty for 45 weeks of the year 50 yards away from their current home ground.

It’s not in any rules but I don’t think any club should be able to chop and change grounds like that just to make a massive amount of extra money.

Worth bearing in mind that whilst QP fans are keen to get back to the southside I don't think many of us would relish moving back to "big" Hampden on a permanent basis. It is way too big for us, even with a massive OF attendance.  The trek up to Stenny can be a pain at times (if I miss that slip from for the M898 one more time on dark and wet night I swear I'll do one!) but we all enjoy the much improved atmosphere of being in a smaller ground that "fits" our current fanbase. 

On swapping grounds I take your point on fairness to other clubs although shifting venues does happen in other sports and in football in other countries (e.g. Australia).  If we did get access to Hampden I suspect it would probably need to be on a temporary basis whilst we put up North & South stands at Lesser  Although it would be great cash cow if we could host the OF at Hampden...

Edited March 26, 2023 by Stuntiethumper

[Bring Your Own Socks]

27 minutes ago, PB1994 said:

Aye, I’m sure I probably am.

I totally get the history of QP and Hampden but if then why haven’t the been playing there ever since it was sold to the SFA?

I just don’t think it is right to use Hampden as a cash cow to make millions in extra ticket revenue. That’s the only reason it is being discussed as an option, nothing to do with the History etc.

Lesser is actually fit for purpose under the SPFL criteria, in reality is it? Absolutely not but then that is QPs own fault.

Its obviously a very unique situation as no other club has a 50k stadium lying empty for 45 weeks of the year 50 yards away from their current home ground.

It’s not in any rules but I don’t think any club should be able to chop and change grounds like that just to make a massive amount of extra money.

On the grounds of fairness and money, it should be the duty of every boardroom at every club to take all opportunities, within the law, to maximise the clubs profit and thereby wellbeing.  

As a match day experience, assuming we get some temporary stands next season it would be a better atmosphere at Lesser for some teams and a better atmosphere at Hampden for others.

Aside of that, Police Scotland have a say on stadium security and impact on the local area. If we were to be promoted, the potential for trouble outside the stadium will be a risk. There is a large grass embankment to the south of Lesser that might attract a large crowd. With the south stand not yet built, much of the pitch will be visible. That’s the jurisdiction of the police, not QP nor the SFA. 

There’s nothing malicious or manipulative from the club. When we started this journey 3 years ago the aspiration was upper half of League 1. It’s working out different. We have to make the best of it.

Besides, all your fears are based on the SFA letting us use Hampden. That’s a very high bar. We’ve not been pals for a while.