Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
RangersFirst

Murrayfield v Hampden

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, Cheech said:

Get the running track to feck and get the fans closer to the pitch.  I hate the place and Murrayfield is the same.  Both shite stadiums.

As a rugby fan, I love Murrayfield. I just want football to stay in Glasgow and at Hampden.

Murrayfield is not shite. Its a terrific venue.

Hampden has its problems, but isn't the dump its claimed. Believe me, those of us who stood or sat there pre-90s don't mind the new version.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ayrshireranger said:

As a rugby fan, I love Murrayfield. I just want football to stay in Glasgow and at Hampden.

Murrayfield is not shite. Its a terrific venue.

Hampden has its problems, but isn't the dump its claimed. Believe me, those of us who stood or sat there pre-90s don't mind the new version.

 Not really true many who stood in it pre 90s have problems with it. My main gripe is of you are in the front few rows the view is pathetic to the opposite of the park. But you are right I would much rather see football money go into some sort of redevelopment of Hampden than give it to Rugby. And I say that asa rugby fan 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Broxi_Bear_Eire said:

 Not really true many who stood in it pre 90s have problems with it. My main gripe is of you are in the front few rows the view is pathetic to the opposite of the park. But you are right I would much rather see football money go into some sort of redevelopment of Hampden than give it to Rugby. And I say that asa rugby fan 

Not saying Hampden is at all perfect, just I prefer the newer one with all its undoubted issues than the crappy bowl I grew up with. Maybe I am getting old, but I don't miss getting crushed, pissed on and soaked to the skin.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ayrshireranger said:

As a rugby fan, I love Murrayfield. I just want football to stay in Glasgow and at Hampden.

 Murrayfield is not shite. Its a terrific venue.

Hampden has its problems, but isn't the dump its claimed. Believe me, those of us who stood or sat there pre-90s don't mind the new version.

TBF I was only in the old Hampden about 3 or 4 times but I preferred the terracing for atmosphere.  The redevelopment is better with services/facilities (and a roof all round) and the old wooden main stand (Sco 1-0 Arg in 1990) was horrific, probably on a par with the likes of Firhill or Brockville main stands at the time although bigger.  It's smart outside mostly and the vehicle tunnels are a definite plus. 

If I had to pick one it would be the redevelopment but they fucked up in design by not making it larger and not making it closer into the pitch - too much of the old was retained IMO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ayrshireranger said:

Not saying Hampden is at all perfect, just I prefer the newer one with all its undoubted issues than the crappy bowl I grew up with. Maybe I am getting old, but I don't miss getting crushed, pissed on and soaked to the skin.

Oh I agree with you on these points 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was Hampden ever really a great stadium?

What made it great were the attendances and the atmosphere generated by passionate STANDING fans

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decision to be made at 3pm today, given the press conference is being held at Hampden, you would assume they are announcing Hampden will be staying as the national stadium. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DonegalBear said:

Decision to be made at 3pm today, given the press conference is being held at Hampden, you would assume they are announcing Hampden will be staying as the national stadium. 

Probably say smaller games/friendlies will tour the country, with Zero investment into Hampden...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, greyhareuk said:

Probably say smaller games/friendlies will tour the country, with Zero investment into Hampden...

I can't see anything other than them making the wrong decisions on this, zero confidence in anyone at the SFA.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

Hampden v Murrayfield: Scottish FA opt to keep games in Glasgow

The Scottish FA will be staying at Hampden after agreeing to buy the national stadium from Queen's Park.

A deal has been struck to pay the League Two club £5m for the Glasgow ground.

The SFA were contemplating moving to Murrayfield, the home of Scottish Rugby, once their Hampden lease expires in 2020.

But instead they will now take ownership of the ground in two years' time.

Half of the money to complete the cash takeover was pledged by Scottish businessman Lord Willie Haughey, with Queen's Park set to move their matches to Lesser Hampden.

While the Glasgow side will receive £5m for the deal, it is believed the total cost to the SFA will be in the region of £19m due to liabilities going back to when the stadium was redeveloped in 1998.

SFA chief executive Ian Maxwell has promised that the body will now look at improving the stadium, which has been criticised by supporters during the process.

"Our mission is to inspire a nation to love the game and having a home that we can call our own is an important part of that," he said.

"While we are now committed to Hampden Park we also recognise that it needs to change. We have heard the fans' views throughout the process and agree with them that we need to improve access, transport links and the overall experience. We are committed to doing that.

"With that in mind, we need all of Scotland to pull together to make it Scotland's national stadium. We have heard many voice their support for the stadium. We need collective action, driven by the Scottish FA, to ensure it remains the beating heart of Scottish football."

Not a foregone conclusion

The SFA had commissioned a feasibility study to assess all the options and rejected a proposal in January from Celtc and Rangers to share hosting of internationals and domestic cup matches.

But various hurdles - including the cost of such a deal - ensured it was not a foregone conclusion.

The board met for several hours on 29 August but were unable to come to a conclusion and asked both bidders to provide more information before making a final decision.

"Today's announcement has been the conclusion of a four-year process to review our national stadium beyond 2020," said SFA president Alan McRae.

"It was a hugely difficult decision and I would like to place on record our thanks to Scottish Rugby for their professionalism throughout the process.

"They made a truly compelling case to move to Edinburgh and gave us a very difficult decision to make. I would like to pay tribute to the inspiration, energy and hard work of Scottish Rugby Chief Executive, Mark Dodson, and his Chief Operating Officer, Dominic McKay - both are true leaders in Scottish sport.

"This decision is about what was best for Scottish football and our members. It is about the future of football in Scotland.

"I would also like to thank everyone who has been part of this process and to recognise the enormous generosity of Lord Haughey."

 

So is the money from Haughey (a Celtc season ticket holder), a loan or a donation? And are there any strings attached, I wonder?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone seen what Stuttgart done with their stadium?

That's almost identical to what the SFA need to do to Hampden. I'm sure it cost them about €60m and was done over 2 years. They basically took the running track area away and then done something cool with the top tier, adding 'blinds' that cover that stand when the crowds are lower.

To me, its a perfect blueprint to follow.

 

stuttgart2.jpg

merdesbenz_top.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue with the removal of the running track is that it would preclude Hampden hosting athletics events as it did superbly at the Commonwealth games. Hampden would still want to be used for other sports and non sports events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ayrshireranger said:

The issue with the removal of the running track is that it would preclude Hampden hosting athletics events as it did superbly at the Commonwealth games. Hampden would still want to be used for other sports and non sports events.

The SFA own it now, why wouldn't they want to make it a footballing arena.

They could also combat that with the stands that fold underneath each other to allow for that area to still be used when need be.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Iggybumtastic said:

The SFA own it now, why wouldn't they want to make it a footballing arena.

They could also combat that with the stands that fold underneath each other to allow for that area to still be used when need be.

The SFA can't even afford full time referees or goalline technology, it's difficult to see how they would be able to revamp the national stadium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, PaulWill said:

The SFA can't even afford full time referees or goalline technology, it's difficult to see how they would be able to revamp the national stadium.

They have already came out and said that they hope for a home nations bid for the 2030 World Cup, the funding they would get for this would make any upgrades happen.

Scotland would likely be looking to have 3 stadiums in the tournament, Hampden, Ibrox and Parkhead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

Guidelines