PDA

View Full Version : East Stand and East Mains.



blackpoolhibs
05-08-2014, 07:48 AM
Nobody was more in favour of the new East Stand than me, and building it apparently saved us 2 or 3 million quid. Yet now i'm questioning myself over if it was the right decision.

Our team has been neglected while we built it, the team has declined. Crowds have dropped, and the stadium looks terrible less than half empty every home game too.

Now we find ourself relegated and as a result will cost us millions to get us back to where we were before we built it, so what i'm basically saying is, has building it been the right decision?

I have certainly questioned myself over it, and with the increased cost to maintain it and of course East Mains, have we overstretched ourselves to the detriment of our core product IE the team on the park each week?

Are the same points still valid as they were before? :confused:

Nando™
05-08-2014, 07:57 AM
Building the new East was the correct decision, it was the building of East Mains that was the wrong choice.

random sub
05-08-2014, 07:57 AM
Nobody was more in favour of the new East Stand than me, and building it apparently saved us 2 or 3 million quid. Yet now i'm questioning myself over if it was the right decision.

Our team has been neglected while we built it, the team has declined. Crowds have dropped, and the stadium looks terrible less than half empty every home game too.

Now we find ourself relegated and as a result will cost us millions to get us back to where we were before we built it, so what i'm basically saying is, has building it been the right decision?

I have certainly questioned myself over it, and with the increased cost to maintain it and of course East Mains, have we overstretched ourselves to the detriment of our core product IE the team on the park each week?

Are the same points still valid as they were before? :confused:

I think the decision on the east stand was the wrong one, for atmosphere and footballing reasons (backing of the team) if nothing else.

East Mains is a mixed bag- we definitely needed a good training facility but it is quite far out of town for the youngsters and it does seem a bit overstated or large (costly?) for our needs.

Just my thoughts. Cue lots of comments along the lines of....we have them, time to move on etc

CB_NO3
05-08-2014, 07:59 AM
Nobody was more in favour of the new East Stand than me, and building it apparently saved us 2 or 3 million quid. Yet now i'm questioning myself over if it was the right decision.

Our team has been neglected while we built it, the team has declined. Crowds have dropped, and the stadium looks terrible less than half empty every home game too.

Now we find ourself relegated and as a result will cost us millions to get us back to where we were before we built it, so what i'm basically saying is, has building it been the right decision?

I have certainly questioned myself over it, and with the increased cost to maintain it and of course East Mains, have we overstretched ourselves to the detriment of our core product IE the team on the park each week?

Are the same points still valid as they were before? :confused:

I think they have had nothing to do with the downfall of the team. Having Rod making football decisions was our downfall. In the last 2 to 3 years only Celtic, Hearts and Aberdeen have had bigger wage bills than us, so you cant really criticise the funds IMO, just the way we utilised them. Hibs have huge potential as a football club. A good supported club in a capital city. Look at the New Year derby this year, the place was bouncing and there was 20k people there. If and thats a big 'if' we can get a decent team on the park then the crowds will come back in their numbers and we can fulfil the potential Hibs and Easter Road have.

danhibees1875
05-08-2014, 08:03 AM
East stand was a now or never situation (at least very unlikely). Training facilities were also required.

It should never have been a case that it was these things Or premiership status. We went down due to other factors despite of these things, Not because of.

Green Cabbage 7
05-08-2014, 08:04 AM
Nobody was more in favour of the new East Stand than me, and building it apparently saved us 2 or 3 million quid. Yet now i'm questioning myself over if it was the right decision.

Our team has been neglected while we built it, the team has declined. Crowds have dropped, and the stadium looks terrible less than half empty every home game too.

Now we find ourself relegated and as a result will cost us millions to get us back to where we were before we built it, so what i'm basically saying is, has building it been the right decision?

I have certainly questioned myself over it, and with the increased cost to maintain it and of course East Mains, have we overstretched ourselves to the detriment of our core product IE the team on the park each week?

Are the same points still valid as they were before? :confused:



Yes we did the right thing, it was the football side were we went wrong, but these things were needed, I'm hoping with this change we are going through that we are only going to get stronger in the long term, if we get it right, out with the of other teams will have to catch us, things will come to fruition for us, yes we have had it a while but we were getting it wrong, now I hope all attention is in the right areas strong academy producing players for years to come and the football a delight to see!

Lucius Apuleius
05-08-2014, 08:05 AM
Still of the opinion that the infrastructure was needed. Bad management of funds took us to where we are. The stadium needed bringing into the 21st century and we needed a training centre. Whether it needed to be so lavish is another discussion altogether. Our income after these were built was sufficient for us to challenge in the top four, or top three when Rangers left. Bad managers screwed that up. I still say we are ahead of the game as regards other teams. The time has to come when the Aberdeens, Hertz, Arabs etc must upgrade their stadia. Hopefully by then we have a management team that can capitalize on it. Maybe the Arabs should not be there as they are now benefitting from their "golden generation".

Hibbyradge
05-08-2014, 08:07 AM
Building East Mains and the East Stand was necessary and timely.

Hibs continued to spend millions on the team despite the capital investment, hence our debt.

I doubt we would have invested any more in the team had we not built them.

Although the football has been poor, the fact that we are in the Championship is down to one man, Terry Butcher.

Arch Stanton
05-08-2014, 08:09 AM
I can't think of any of our illustrious ex-managers who would have made good use of the money saved by cutting down on infrastructure - probably still have ended up in the championship.

These projects at least should help us recruit ambitious players and management - here's hoping anyway.

The Gorf
05-08-2014, 08:15 AM
If it's a money thing ie none going to the team because of East Mains, then why not rent it out to five a siders or for training facilities for smaller clubs? Or is this already the case?

TowerHibs
05-08-2014, 08:22 AM
Right decision for both.

Mixu, Yogi, Calderwood, Fenlon and Butcher were the wrong decisions.

In that time St J have had Owen Coyle, McInnes, Lomas and Wright. Motherwell had MCCall and even Craig Brown. All would have seen the training ground and stadium used better. I have faith that Stubbs will get 100% out East Mains and Dempster and George Craig are part of that. Years of mismanagement of the football side have caused this

Crowds turned up at Easter Road for Dunfermline, Malmo and Hearts then the potential for support is there.

greenpaper55
05-08-2014, 08:26 AM
I think the east stand had to be built or it was a case of having to re apply for planning permission, we also needed a training centre but why did we have to spend over 5 million on one ?. This must have been around half of the clubs turnover at the time which in hindsight was utter stupidity by that financial genius Rod Petrie !. We could have surely got a piece of land for a fraction of the price on the outskirts of town instead of something in an other county that just happens to be near Petries house and i kid you not. Don't forget this was all paid for by the fans not RP or TF, money that could have built us a good squad of players when Broonie etc was sold.

IWasThere2016
05-08-2014, 08:32 AM
They were both poor business decisions - regardless of however they are dressed up. We have:

- neglected the team
- lost fans
- dropped a league
- have a cost base that is too high

Wasn't too difficult to see that the Board wanted to strengthen the Balance Sheet over, what really matters, the football.

lord bunberry
05-08-2014, 08:35 AM
If we hadn't built the east stand or the training centre the money wouldn't have been spent on the team, we would then still be in the first division with no new stand and no training facilities. Until crowds rise we should be looking at closing a stand or parts of one of the stands to improve atmosphere.

Hibbyradge
05-08-2014, 08:35 AM
I think the east stand had to be built or it was a case of having to re apply for planning permission, we also needed a training centre but why did we have to spend over 5 million on one ?. This must have been around half of the clubs turnover at the time which in hindsight was utter stupidity by that financial genius Rod Petrie !. We could have surely got a piece of land for a fraction of the price on the outskirts of town instead of something in an other county that just happens to be near Petries house and i kid you not. Don't forget this was all paid for by the fans not RP or TF, money that could have built us a good squad of players when Broonie etc was sold.

Wasn't that money used to reduce our level of debt?

we are hibs
05-08-2014, 08:38 AM
Building East Mains and the East Stand was necessary and timely.

Hibs continued to spend millions on the team despite the capital investment, hence our debt.

I doubt we would have invested any more in the team had we not built them.

Although the football has been poor, the fact that we are in the Championship is down to one man, Terry Butcher.

It's down to more than Butcher why we went down although he was a main part of it. Bad decision after bad decision whether it comes to hiring poor managers or those poor managers signing poor players left us in this situation. Relegation has been coming for a good 2/3 years now so let's not kid ourselves and put the entire blame on Butcher.

Golden Bear
05-08-2014, 08:43 AM
It would be interesting to compare our "Home" records for the pre and post new East stand era.

There's no doubt that building the new stand when we did was both cost effective and aesthetically pleasing but we've never managed to re-create the atmosphere of the old "East." At times there is more life in the nearby cemetery than what we witness on matchday but maybe that's as much to do with what is happening (or not happening) on the park.

DarrenSQH
05-08-2014, 08:46 AM
Building both of them was the correct choice.

Its hardly a stands fault that Butcher took us down.

Hibbyradge
05-08-2014, 08:48 AM
It's down to more than Butcher why we went down although he was a main part of it. Bad decision after bad decision whether it comes to hiring poor managers or those poor managers signing poor players left us in this situation. Relegation has been coming for a good 2/3 years now so let's not kid ourselves and put the entire blame on Butcher.

You blame who you want, young fella, that's your prerogative. :aok:

I blame Butcher.

He inherited a side in a more than reasonable league position, but instead of improving it and driving it up the table, he succeeded in draining the life out of it.

Hibbyradge
05-08-2014, 08:55 AM
It would be interesting to compare our "Home" records for the pre and post new East stand era.



It might be of limited interest, but it would prove nothing.

We could compare my weight pre and post East Stand. Or rainfall. Or seagull population in Leith. :greengrin

The East Stand is not to blame for our poor results.

Having said that, I can't help noticing the contradictions when people discuss the effect of the East Stand atmosphere on the team.

On the one hand, some argue the old atmosphere helped the team, yet when fans are criticised for booing and giving players abuse, they argue that it has no effect or that the players should rise above it.

IWasThere2016
05-08-2014, 09:06 AM
The East Stand is not to blame for our poor results.

No but it and EM have limited the scope to invest in the team - January past being the case in point.

I agree with the earlier comment that relegation was coming and again we have been unable to spend to improve the football/league standing.

We also now clearly have insufficient funds to invest in the team and challenge for the league IMHO - because the cost base is too high in financing and running these investments.

Turkish Green
05-08-2014, 09:09 AM
Nobody was more in favour of the new East Stand than me, and building it apparently saved us 2 or 3 million quid.

A bit like my wife when she comes home with bags of designer clothes and says "They were on sale, I saved £££". They fact that we would have saved even more if she'd not bought anything in the first place is lost to her logic.

At the time it was a good decision as Hibs were in a position of "use it or lose it" in respect to the Planning Permission. Unlike Arsenal who managed to pay-off the cost of The Emirates while still maintaining a winning team, Hibs have deteriorated since 2009 when the last of the big money transfers (Fletcher) left the club. After 2009 Hibs started bringing in cheaper loan signings and started to finish in the Bottom 6 behind clubs they should have been well above.

I hope that LD bringing a plan to develop players from the grass roots will benefit the future of the club but it will not benefit the short term. 2014-2015 starts tonight. We shall see how AS has changed things around.

JimBHibees
05-08-2014, 09:21 AM
They were both poor business decisions - regardless of however they are dressed up. We have:

- neglected the team
- lost fans
- dropped a league
- have a cost base that is too high

Wasn't too difficult to see that the Board wanted to strengthen the Balance Sheet over, what really matters, the football.

Disagree think they were the right decisions and think it is only the football side that is failed. Having a modern stadium and modern training complex should mean with the right coaches in charge that we are able to perform much better than we have. Solely down to poor footballing decisions IMO.

Michael
05-08-2014, 09:23 AM
It's really important that the club owns valuable assets such as the training centre and the completed stadium. Definitely the correct decision.

Smartie
05-08-2014, 09:24 AM
This is a total red herring for me.

The mismanagement of the football side of the club is why we are where we are now. Poor managerial appointments, poor support for managers, poor signings and timings of signings.

Had we not built them we'd have had more to spend on players but I have zero confidence that the club wouldn't have just squandered this too. We shouldn't have needed more cash to compete with Motherwell, St.Johnstone, ICT and Ross County and our showings last season against Hearts under 20s were shameful.

Of course they shouldn't have been built had we planning on being in the First Division as the cost of upkeep on East Mains is hard to justify where we are. There's no way that as a club we should ever have contemplated being here though.

I also think that against a backdrop of selling quality and replacing with drivel, the high ticket prices have led to our support being very demanding and have contributed to Easter Road being a difficult place for our own team to play.

We absolutely should have built them. Hopefully we now have a management structure in place to get the best out of them.

Ozyhibby
05-08-2014, 09:26 AM
It wasn't the East stand or East Mains that made us a worse team than Ross County (player budget £0.4m).
That was Rod Petrie and Terry Butcher.

lord bunberry
05-08-2014, 09:31 AM
It wasn't the East stand or East Mains that made us a worse team than Ross County (player budget £0.4m).
That was Rod Petrie and Terry Butcher.

Correct

JimBHibees
05-08-2014, 09:34 AM
It wasn't the East stand or East Mains that made us a worse team than Ross County (player budget £0.4m).
That was Rod Petrie and Terry Butcher.

Are you sure their budget would be that low given the 5 or 6 loan players that arrived in January. Think Roy McGregor isnt shy in opening the wallet when needed.

Hibeesmad
05-08-2014, 09:39 AM
The positive thing about this is that once we do become a successful team we don't need to worry about looking into new training facilities or new stand etc, and they could make us even more successful in the long run

Bill Milne
05-08-2014, 09:44 AM
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Because we were relegated, developing the facilities is a "bad thing" and, of course, all the fault of the demon Petrie. IMO, it was correct to build both East Stand and East Mains. It was almost entirely the fault of the team management/ players that we went down.

Waxy
05-08-2014, 09:45 AM
Atmosphere wise the east stand was a mistake. This could be balanced by having a safe standing area in the ground.

Hibbyradge
05-08-2014, 09:49 AM
A bit like my wife when she comes home with bags of designer clothes and says "They were on sale, I saved £££". They fact that we would have saved even more if she'd not bought anything in the first place is lost to her logic.



Unlike your wife's clothes which weren't essential, the East stand needed re-built at some point, so getting it when we did, at a knock down price, was excellent business.

East Mains too, was necessary, if successive managers are to be believed. These were football people, not accountants, so I guess building it was a football decision, rather than a business one.

If we hadn't spent the money when we did, we'd have all this to do so at some point, so if the team really did suffer as a result of diverted funding, we'd still have it to look forward to.




At the time it was a good decision as Hibs were in a position of "use it or lose it" in respect to the Planning Permission.

Agreed. :aok:

The_Todd
05-08-2014, 09:50 AM
It would be interesting to compare our "Home" records for the pre and post new East stand era.


Correlation does not imply causation.

marinello59
05-08-2014, 09:51 AM
It would be interesting to compare our "Home" records for the pre and post new East stand era.

There's no doubt that building the new stand when we did was both cost effective and aesthetically pleasing but we've never managed to re-create the atmosphere of the old "East." At times there is more life in the nearby cemetery than what we witness on matchday but maybe that's as much to do with what is happening (or not happening) on the park.

It's ALL to do with what is happening on the park. The old east was also morgue like when we played poor fitba. I think building the new stand was a no brainer and East mains was also required. My take on it is we failed despite having these facilities rather than because of them.

HappyAsHellas
05-08-2014, 10:04 AM
These were the right decisions for a forward thinking football club. Training centres, schools of excellence, call them what you will, are an integral part of modern day football. Now we have a state of the art centre, coupled with people who seem to have an idea of how to use it, then the future looks bright. Anyone doubting this should have a look here:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1704418-ranking-the-best-training-ground-facilities-in-world-football

greenpaper55
05-08-2014, 10:13 AM
These were the right decisions for a forward thinking football club. Training centres, schools of excellence, call them what you will, are an integral part of modern day football. Now we have a state of the art centre, coupled with people who seem to have an idea of how to use it, then the future looks bright. Anyone doubting this should have a look here:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1704418-ranking-the-best-training-ground-facilities-in-world-football


I agree but did we have to spend 5 million on it ?, a lot of money for a club the size of hibs. You could also argue that if we spent that 5 million on players we wouldn't be in the position we are in now !.

RIP
05-08-2014, 10:14 AM
East Stand has been a success.

East Mains is the right facility but in the wrong location. We had the opportunity to build a community hub here in Edinburgh by building partnerships with Edinburgh University, Edinburgh College or local teams.

By effectively moving all our squads twenty miles out of town to the East we lost the connection to Leith, North and East Edinburgh. Every home game is an away game.

It's hard to persuade players with homes in the West to sign faced with a 2 hour or more round trip to work every day. Many parents of promising youngsters find the journey time untenable to fit on to the working day.

I predict a gradual withdrawal from East Mains over the next 3 years. Time for the club to re-connect with it's roots.

Liberal Hibby
05-08-2014, 10:31 AM
Correlation does not imply causation.

Quite.

This proves the point: http://www.tylervigen.com/

southern hibby
05-08-2014, 10:33 AM
My understanding was that the East had to be built soon as we had planning permission that was due to run out. I believe it was the right division as was East Mains.

If you look back to the early 90's and Hands of Hibs campaign no one would have guessed what infa structure we have now. What we needed was coaches /manager who can get East Mains used to it's full potential. If we get more kids coming through who can make the grade then it will all be worth it because outside of the ugly sisters no one is close to us I'n stadium never mind owning their own training facilities.

Our time will come of that I have no doubt especially when Aberdeen / hearts / Motherwell and even utd start upgrading their stadiums. GGTTH

stubbs-hibs
05-08-2014, 10:33 AM
We had to build it planning premission was running out and we may not have got it again to build

gegs70
05-08-2014, 10:36 AM
Nobody was more in favour of the new East Stand than me, and building it apparently saved us 2 or 3 million quid. Yet now i'm questioning myself over if it was the right decision.

Our team has been neglected while we built it, the team has declined. Crowds have dropped, and the stadium looks terrible less than half empty every home game too.

Now we find ourself relegated and as a result will cost us millions to get us back to where we were before we built it, so what i'm basically saying is, has building it been the right decision?

I have certainly questioned myself over it, and with the increased cost to maintain it and of course East Mains, have we overstretched ourselves to the detriment of our core product IE the team on the park each week?

Are the same points still valid as they were before? :confused:

Without doubt it was the correct decision. Although by doing so we kind of lost a lot of the old atmosphere!

The problem with hibs is we were recruiting journey men and too many loan deals. Everyone remembers the quality players such as sauzee and they are the players that the youth players need to learn the game from a role model.

Liberal Hibby
05-08-2014, 10:36 AM
East Stand has been a success.

East Mains is the right facility but in the wrong location. We had the opportunity to build a community hub here in Edinburgh by building partnerships with Edinburgh University, Edinburgh College or local teams.

By effectively moving all our squads twenty miles out of town to the East we lost the connection to Leith, North and East Edinburgh. Every home game is an away game.

It's hard to persuade players with homes in the West to sign faced with a 2 hour or more round trip to work every day. Many parents of promising youngsters find the journey time untenable to fit on to the working day.

I predict a gradual withdrawal from East Mains over the next 3 years. Time for the club to re-connect with it's roots.

According to the AA route planner East Mains is 13.3 miles from Easter Road and a twenty minute drive.

Smartie
05-08-2014, 10:39 AM
East Stand has been a success.

East Mains is the right facility but in the wrong location. We had the opportunity to build a community hub here in Edinburgh by building partnerships with Edinburgh University, Edinburgh College or local teams.

By effectively moving all our squads twenty miles out of town to the East we lost the connection to Leith, North and East Edinburgh. Every home game is an away game.

It's hard to persuade players with homes in the West to sign faced with a 2 hour or more round trip to work every day. Many parents of promising youngsters find the journey time untenable to fit on to the working day.

I predict a gradual withdrawal from East Mains over the next 3 years. Time for the club to re-connect with it's roots.


Interesting point and one I agree with. A tie-in with Edinburgh Uni, Peffermill or something would have made sense.

The stubbornness of Petrie will keep us where we are for a bit though.

I would rule out us actually doing something up a Heriot-Watt long-term too at the new academy they're putting there. As you said, a much better place to commute to for much of Scotland. We'd a have to get over the fact that "they" are up there too but sharing a world-class facility might make sense.

matty_f
05-08-2014, 10:44 AM
They were the right decisions. We kept a budget that should have made us competitive at the top end of the table despite building East Mains and the East so I think it's tenuous to link the under-performance on the pitch with the two developments.

There is nothing to suggest that we would have been better on the park without them.

The_Todd
05-08-2014, 10:44 AM
I agree but did we have to spend 5 million on it ?, a lot of money for a club the size of hibs. You could also argue that if we spent that 5 million on players we wouldn't be in the position we are in now !.

We shouldn't have needed to spend an extra £5m to compete in the SPL. Who's to say if we had it in the playing budget we wouldn't have blown it like the rest of it? We weren't relegated because we spent less, we were relegated because we spent poorly and played dreadful hoofball.

lucky
05-08-2014, 10:46 AM
East Stand has been a success.

East Mains is the right facility but in the wrong location. We had the opportunity to build a community hub here in Edinburgh by building partnerships with Edinburgh University, Edinburgh College or local teams.

By effectively moving all our squads twenty miles out of town to the East we lost the connection to Leith, North and East Edinburgh. Every home game is an away game.

It's hard to persuade players with homes in the West to sign faced with a 2 hour or more round trip to work every day. Many parents of promising youngsters find the journey time untenable to fit on to the working day.

I predict a gradual withdrawal from East Mains over the next 3 years. Time for the club to re-connect with it's roots.


The East Stand was a must, if we hadn't built it we would never had got planning permission. You make a good point on the location of East Mains. I know parents of youngsters from Glasgow who have pulled their kids from Hibs as soon as they got a chance at clubs in West Central Scotland. Going round the by-pass at rush hour is hellish. I can't see Hibs leaving EMs as it is a facility that most teams would love. Rangers training centre is not in Glasgow but in East Dunbartonshire, in fact most teams don't train at their ground so the point of home games being away doesn't stand up.

NAE NOOKIE
05-08-2014, 11:02 AM
East Stand has been a success.

East Mains is the right facility but in the wrong location. We had the opportunity to build a community hub here in Edinburgh by building partnerships with Edinburgh University, Edinburgh College or local teams.

By effectively moving all our squads twenty miles out of town to the East we lost the connection to Leith, North and East Edinburgh. Every home game is an away game.

It's hard to persuade players with homes in the West to sign faced with a 2 hour or more round trip to work every day. Many parents of promising youngsters find the journey time untenable to fit on to the working day.

I predict a gradual withdrawal from East Mains over the next 3 years. Time for the club to re-connect with it's roots.

Clubs like Roma and Lazio ( odious club ) have little or no connection with the stadium they play in, but don't appear to have any issue relating to their support. Where Hibs train is not a factor in the slightest to my connection with the club. The club need to strike a balance between pushing the Leith thing and making a connection with the thousands of people who support them and have never lived in Edinburgh, never mind Leith.

Hibs have plenty of support in East and West Lothian and the Borders. I said on another thread that the club don't do enough to acknowledge the fans who travel from outlying areas to support them, for me an 80 mile round trip, further for others. The club want to connect more with schools ...... how many of them will be in the Borders I wonder .... an area of 100,000 people and a natural breeding ground for potential Hibbies? Instead the majority of kids are Old Firm fans or turn to the EPL .... Both Hibs and Hearts miss a trick neglecting this market.

On subject ..... The East had to be done, but for me with a 5,000 capacity and 5 yards closer to the pitch. The size of East Mains is impressive, but perhaps a bit OTT for a club of our size to upkeep considering it was a step up from public parks.

Onion
05-08-2014, 11:09 AM
Nobody was more in favour of the new East Stand than me, and building it apparently saved us 2 or 3 million quid. Yet now i'm questioning myself over if it was the right decision.

Our team has been neglected while we built it, the team has declined. Crowds have dropped, and the stadium looks terrible less than half empty every home game too.

Now we find ourself relegated and as a result will cost us millions to get us back to where we were before we built it, so what i'm basically saying is, has building it been the right decision?

I have certainly questioned myself over it, and with the increased cost to maintain it and of course East Mains, have we overstretched ourselves to the detriment of our core product IE the team on the park each week?

Are the same points still valid as they were before? :confused:

IMO it was the right thing to do. We had the money from the sale of our golden generation and building management is/was the only thing in which Petrie had any competency. Had he tried to invest in decent managers and players, it would have been completely wasted. We would be sitting here in the exact same position, just without a nice new stand to show for it.

scoopyboy
05-08-2014, 11:14 AM
It would be interesting to compare our "Home" records for the pre and post new East stand era.

There's no doubt that building the new stand when we did was both cost effective and aesthetically pleasing but we've never managed to re-create the atmosphere of the old "East." At times there is more life in the nearby cemetery than what we witness on matchday but maybe that's as much to do with what is happening (or not happening) on the park.

And yet when we beat Hearts at the New Year everybody agreed the atmosphere was brilliant, howzat?

Its a hibs.net myth that the old east produced a great atmosphere week in, week out. It didn't because on a bad day the atmosphere was just as dead as your nearby cemetery, only difference being the boo merchants were probably closer to the players.

IanM
05-08-2014, 11:20 AM
It's hard to persuade players with homes in the West to sign faced with a 2 hour or more round trip to work every day. Many parents of promising youngsters find the journey time untenable to fit on to the working day.



If any player can't be bothered travelling from West to East to play football then maybe they shouldn't be signing for us. Imagine if they got a contract for a team in Russia, then they'd know what a commute was!

good point about the youngsters though.. East Mains should have been made into a training academy with midweek accomodation for the youngsters.. means plenty of time to clean the first team boots :greengrin

greenpaper55
05-08-2014, 11:23 AM
A training facility that is used by the club during the day and can be used by the community by night would have been the perfect option, anyone want to take a bunch of kids down to East mains on a winters night even if it was available ?.

HFC 0-7
05-08-2014, 11:43 AM
Building both have taken money away from the playing staff. East mains must cost a fair bit to run annually. We, I believe are still paying off some of the east and the size of it hasn't caused more problems. Having a stadium, where even for cat a games there is enough seats available to pick and choose has impacted season tickets. Fans can now pay at the gate, get sat beside their mates, get tickets for cat a games easily. Between the price of a st and the capacity of the stadium it makes more sense financially for fans to pay at the gate, if you are expecting to miss 1 or 2 games.

East mains hasn't produced anything that our previous training facilities did. It was also supposed to be a incentive to attract players to the club, again, no sign of that really. East mains, because it is of a high standard has possibly effected playing staff by making them feel like they have made it and effort has been lacking. We should have tried to grow at the same rate as the demand, instead the growth of the infrastructure expanded rapidly without a plan to use it. In any other business there would be plans on downsizing, running a premises that is far too big for the companies needs will lose money. Of course this is a football stadium and club with emotional ties so it won't work like that.

A couple of seasons in the championship and I could quite easily see east mains getting scaled right back or renting it out and part of the stadium shutting.

RIP
05-08-2014, 11:45 AM
According to the AA route planner East Mains is 13.3 miles from Easter Road and a twenty minute drive.

For those who are handy for Easter Road the club runs a bus. For a car it can add up to an additional 30 mins in traffic. If you live in Central Scotland or Fife the round trip is over an hour. Tayside or Glasgow add another 20-30.

Living in Perth the St Johnstone players are out and about in the town. I saw Stevie May at the pictures with Lee Croft. A few days later in the High St chatting to fans. They interact with supporters, businesses and the community. Most Hibs players are only in Edinburgh on a match day.

Kato
05-08-2014, 11:47 AM
The East Stand had to be built otherwise planning permission would have been difficult to re-gain further down the line.

The then Edinburgh Council made it plain they weren't willing to help or work with Hibs in any way when the illegally thwarted Hibs' plans for the Lochend Butterfly and the surrounds then refused to contemplate Hibs taking over Hunter's Hall, hence we chose to work with another Council.

Both done at the right time imho and it's the cack-handed management of the playing/managerial budget that has caused the ensueing problems.

proud_and_green
05-08-2014, 11:53 AM
I understand the point that the Op is trying to make but what i don't think is understood is that it is not a questions of this or that. In order to be successful and that is at the level we all believe we should be successful at, we must have the whole infrastructure of the club right. This means the right training facilities, the right playing arena and the rights staff playing and management. But whilst haveing a good physical infrastructure we have a had a succession of badly planned staff appointments none of which have been properly considered or synchronised across the whole business

I think both EM and new east were absolutely the right choices, but, unfortunately because we did not have the right management structure and people in we were unable to maximise the opportunity. I think the changes over the recent months since Leeanne has come in look like the right ones and that we are beginning to get the right blend of staff and people in and that, i hope, will allow the whole club to operate as a single entity with a single vision and plan. That has not happened in a long, long time, too long the club has been a loose collection of related but not aligned departments operating to their own plans and not to that common goal.

Hibs7
05-08-2014, 11:58 AM
I think they have had nothing to do with the downfall of the team. Having Rod making football decisions was our downfall. In the last 2 to 3 years only Celtic, Hearts and Aberdeen have had bigger wage bills than us, so you cant really criticise the funds IMO, just the way we utilised them. Hibs have huge potential as a football club. A good supported club in a capital city. Look at the New Year derby this year, the place was bouncing and there was 20k people there. If and thats a big 'if' we can get a decent team on the park then the crowds will come back in their numbers and we can fulfil the potential Hibs and Easter Road have.

Totally agree ... Well said.

Keith_M
05-08-2014, 11:59 AM
And yet when we beat Hearts at the New Year everybody agreed the atmosphere was brilliant, howzat?

Its a hibs.net myth that the old east produced a great atmosphere week in, week out. It didn't because on a bad day the atmosphere was just as dead as your nearby cemetery, only difference being the boo merchants were probably closer to the players.

:agree:

The atmosphere wasn't better because of a different Stand. People tend to remember the big matches but forget the ocassions when the place was dead and we were still outsung by a small away support.

Think of the first season after the new East Stand was completed. People raved about the atmosphere from the new Singing Section. The reason that dissapeared was that the fans were gradually worn down by what was on the park.

Also, I see no reason why a club can't spend some money on infrastructure improvements (especially with the amount we made from transfers) and not still be able to put a decent team on the park. Clubs with a much smaller budget than we had are now in the 'Premiership'. It was more to do with poor signings (both managers and players).

yekimevol
05-08-2014, 12:09 PM
Both where the right choice at the time; no one in their wildest dreams would think that after Collins left that hibs would be relegated in seven years time to the championship and we would go from 13,000 against gretna to an Edinburgh derby with the attendance of 12877.

When times get good against like the mowbray era both will show their worth, fingers crossed stubb and dempster are that solution.

HUTCHYHIBBY
05-08-2014, 12:11 PM
These were the right decisions for a forward thinking football club. Training centres, schools of excellence, call them what you will, are an integral part of modern day football. Now we have a state of the art centre, coupled with people who seem to have an idea of how to use it, then the future looks bright. Anyone doubting this should have a look here:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1704418-ranking-the-best-training-ground-facilities-in-world-football

Scottish domestic football is increasingly becoming a back water in footballing terms, I very much doubt anyone else outside the OF will be in any hurry to invest so much dough in the infrastructure of their clubs without considerable outside assistance. I've no evidence to support this theory but, I'm quite sure that the powers that be at ER must've got wind of an Atlantic League of some sort and invested in infrastructure to guarantee our involvement, either that or I've ran out of patience! :)

sahib
05-08-2014, 12:22 PM
[/B]

Interesting point and one I agree with. A tie-in with Edinburgh Uni, Peffermill or something would have made sense.

The stubbornness of Petrie will keep us where we are for a bit though.

I would rule out us actually doing something up a Heriot-Watt long-term too at the new academy they're putting there. As you said, a much better place to commute to for much of Scotland. We'd a have to get over the fact that "they" are up there too but sharing a world-class facility might make sense.

A tie in with the Mafia would be a safer proposition than that lot. imho

Bad Martini
05-08-2014, 12:32 PM
We didn't need a new East Stand or East Mains when we last won a cup. We didn't need it the time before that either. We also didn't have such "infrastructure" when our greatest two teams graced the Leith San Siro.

We are a football club. The PRIMARY objective is to win football matches. Big stupid half-empty stands and big stupid training complexes in downtownfekknowswhere wont put the ball in the net nor win us cups or matches.

Players on the pitch will.

We could have done these things in due course (even if all we done in due course was replaced the single tier East with a new, more modern east). We could've eventually bought a training complex.

NEITHER have done us any any good? Yes, you can say we have had the biggest wage bill outwith Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen and Hearts...we got rid of our best players, invested in bricks and mortar when we should've invested in achieving the primary objective.

If we had a good team on the pitch, the seats would be filled (the new East has rarely been close) and that would pay for the "infrastructure".

Infrastructure never scored a peach or kept us entertained. Successive managers may have liked a training complex but we didn't NEED one for our last two successful trophies...nor any before that.

:agree:

grammyb111
05-08-2014, 12:33 PM
East Stand has been a success.

East Mains is the right facility but in the wrong location. We had the opportunity to build a community hub here in Edinburgh by building partnerships with Edinburgh University, Edinburgh College or local teams.

By effectively moving all our squads twenty miles out of town to the East we lost the connection to Leith, North and East Edinburgh. Every home game is an away game.

It's hard to persuade players with homes in the West to sign faced with a 2 hour or more round trip to work every day. Many parents of promising youngsters find the journey time untenable to fit on to the working day.

I predict a gradual withdrawal from East Mains over the next 3 years. Time for the club to re-connect with it's roots.

Population of East Lothian is ~100,000. With us being the only 'reachable' professional club for that population if we use the same travelling logic, is it not better being where we are, rather than West Edinburgh with all the central belt clubs to compete with?

grammyb111
05-08-2014, 12:35 PM
Clubs like Roma and Lazio ( odious club ) have little or no connection with the stadium they play in, but don't appear to have any issue relating to their support. Where Hibs train is not a factor in the slightest to my connection with the club. The club need to strike a balance between pushing the Leith thing and making a connection with the thousands of people who support them and have never lived in Edinburgh, never mind Leith.

Hibs have plenty of support in East and West Lothian and the Borders. I said on another thread that the club don't do enough to acknowledge the fans who travel from outlying areas to support them, for me an 80 mile round trip, further for others. The club want to connect more with schools ...... how many of them will be in the Borders I wonder .... an area of 100,000 people and a natural breeding ground for potential Hibbies? Instead the majority of kids are Old Firm fans or turn to the EPL .... Both Hibs and Hearts miss a trick neglecting this market.

On subject ..... The East had to be done, but for me with a 5,000 capacity and 5 yards closer to the pitch. The size of East Mains is impressive, but perhaps a bit OTT for a club of our size to upkeep considering it was a step up from public parks.

Didn't read this post before posting, agree 100%

Thecat23
05-08-2014, 12:36 PM
Nobody was more in favour of the new East Stand than me, and building it apparently saved us 2 or 3 million quid. Yet now i'm questioning myself over if it was the right decision.

Our team has been neglected while we built it, the team has declined. Crowds have dropped, and the stadium looks terrible less than half empty every home game too.

Now we find ourself relegated and as a result will cost us millions to get us back to where we were before we built it, so what i'm basically saying is, has building it been the right decision?

I have certainly questioned myself over it, and with the increased cost to maintain it and of course East Mains, have we overstretched ourselves to the detriment of our core product IE the team on the park each week?

Are the same points still valid as they were before? :confused:

Building both EM and the ES was absolutely the right thing to do for us to prosper in the future. What went wrong was the utter disaster of managerial appointments and the shocking signings we made.

What was needed was built. We had a crumbling East Stand and if we didn't build it then when costs were cheap when could we have built it? Same with the training ground. Public parks is not a place for professionals to play. For me the board got this right while getting everything else spectacularly wrong. With the right folk in charge EM will be used to the purpose it's built for, to train and get the best out the players not to just sit around. This will improve the team and no doubt when Hibs are doing well the crowds will come back. So that will fill the east. Not fill it but look at the derby game when Spoony knocked them out. The place was packed!!

ahibby
05-08-2014, 12:40 PM
The upkeep of the new stadium and East Mains has definitely eaten in to our funds and as a result we have seen lower quality players at our club.

With three new stands we needed to do something about the East Stand and now the stadium looks brand new, right choice in my opinion. How we go about paying for it is another matter and I wonder if Hibs could have got a sponsor to build it with their name on it. I guess Hibs would have looked in to that so give them the benefit of the doubt. East Mains hasn't paid dividend, yet, it might never but it has scope for the future; we, or someone has spare land there which sometime in the future can be built on, like the car park was. Granted that is not foreseeable but could happen in the future.

It's done now and the solution is to look for ways to bring cash in to the club which can be spent on the team.

KeithTheHibby
05-08-2014, 12:44 PM
You blame who you want, young fella, that's your prerogative. :aok:

I blame Butcher.

He inherited a side in a more than reasonable league position, but instead of improving it and driving it up the table, he succeeded in draining the life out of it.


This. I didn't think it was possible to have a worse manager than Jim Duffy however Butcher succeeded by a country mile.

ahibby
05-08-2014, 01:08 PM
This. I didn't think it was possible to have a worse manager than Jim Duffy however Butcher succeeded by a country mile.

Agreed but even with a poor manager the players have a chance to get results, and they didn't. No surprise that around fourteen of them were let go during the summer. We will wait a long time to see players of the stature of Sauzee, Latapy, and even Zemmama. With money being spent of infrastructure we have seen too many flops pass through ER in the past six or seven years. Was it really as long ago as 2007 when we had a team capable of winning even the lesser cup, it seems like just yesterday but that's how long ago it's been since we had a team to be proud of. Of that team Steven Whittaker, Scott Brown and Kevin Thompson were all sold for fees totalling around £8 million, they must have been some players back then and now for the matter. We wouldn't get £8 million for the entire squad from last season. Last season imo we resembled a team like Rott Weis Essen who we played in 2005 when they were attempting to get in to the German senior league system. It's a long road back to get close to what we were in 2005 and we weren't great then, just reasonable with a couple of goal scorers in the team who could have played at English Premiership level and did afterwards, come to think of it.

IWasThere2016
05-08-2014, 01:22 PM
We didn't need a new East Stand or East Mains when we last won a cup. We didn't need it the time before that either. We also didn't have such "infrastructure" when our greatest two teams graced the Leith San Siro.

We are a football club. The PRIMARY objective is to win football matches. Big stupid half-empty stands and big stupid training complexes in downtownfekknowswhere wont put the ball in the net nor win us cups or matches.

Players on the pitch will.

We could have done these things in due course (even if all we done in due course was replaced the single tier East with a new, more modern east). We could've eventually bought a training complex.

NEITHER have done us any any good? Yes, you can say we have had the biggest wage bill outwith Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen and Hearts...we got rid of our best players, invested in bricks and mortar when we should've invested in achieving the primary objective.

If we had a good team on the pitch, the seats would be filled (the new East has rarely been close) and that would pay for the "infrastructure".

Infrastructure never scored a peach or kept us entertained. Successive managers may have liked a training complex but we didn't NEED one for our last two successful trophies...nor any before that.

:agree:

:top marks

Thecat23
05-08-2014, 02:02 PM
We didn't need a new East Stand or East Mains when we last won a cup. We didn't need it the time before that either. We also didn't have such "infrastructure" when our greatest two teams graced the Leith San Siro.

We are a football club. The PRIMARY objective is to win football matches. Big stupid half-empty stands and big stupid training complexes in downtownfekknowswhere wont put the ball in the net nor win us cups or matches.

Players on the pitch will.

We could have done these things in due course (even if all we done in due course was replaced the single tier East with a new, more modern east). We could've eventually bought a training complex.

NEITHER have done us any any good? Yes, you can say we have had the biggest wage bill outwith Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen and Hearts...we got rid of our best players, invested in bricks and mortar when we should've invested in achieving the primary objective.

If we had a good team on the pitch, the seats would be filled (the new East has rarely been close) and that would pay for the "infrastructure".

Infrastructure never scored a peach or kept us entertained. Successive managers may have liked a training complex but we didn't NEED one for our last two successful trophies...nor any before that.

:agree:

Football has changed dramatically I modern years. I'm not sure we would have built something as we wouldn't have had the money. Everyone knows how I feel about the board but I think they got the training centre and stand spot on. We can hold internationals and also have the seay to get players that teams who train on public parks won't.

Yeah it's all great thinking of the past but Hibernian had to move into the future.

Keith_M
05-08-2014, 02:10 PM
We didn't need a new East Stand or East Mains when we last won a cup. We didn't need it the time before that either. We also didn't have such "infrastructure" when our greatest two teams graced the Leith San Siro.

We are a football club. The PRIMARY objective is to win football matches. Big stupid half-empty stands and big stupid training complexes in downtownfekknowswhere wont put the ball in the net nor win us cups or matches.

Players on the pitch will.

We could have done these things in due course (even if all we done in due course was replaced the single tier East with a new, more modern east). We could've eventually bought a training complex.

NEITHER have done us any any good? Yes, you can say we have had the biggest wage bill outwith Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen and Hearts...we got rid of our best players, invested in bricks and mortar when we should've invested in achieving the primary objective.

If we had a good team on the pitch, the seats would be filled (the new East has rarely been close) and that would pay for the "infrastructure".

Infrastructure never scored a peach or kept us entertained. Successive managers may have liked a training complex but we didn't NEED one for our last two successful trophies...nor any before that.

:agree:


Makes me wonder why we don't just have an uncovered terracing on three sides of the stadium and a Main Stand that smells of p*ss, like we did in bygone days.


Like it or not, the world has moved on.

Bishop Hibee
05-08-2014, 02:10 PM
It wasn't the East stand or East Mains that made us a worse team than Ross County (player budget £0.4m).
That was Rod Petrie and Terry Butcher.

Correct. As for East Mains being too far away, what a load of tosh. I can get there quicker from Leith than I can get to The Gyle by car.

Sooner or later we'll have a decent team and be close to or filling the stadium for big games.

Turkish Green
05-08-2014, 02:11 PM
I agree a tie-in at Peffermill would have made more sense and less cost. Edinburgh Uni have decent facilities, they are used by the SFA/SYFA.

EM is not the most accessible for me. Driving there from west of Edinburgh was always horrendous using the by-pass after 6 pm. I suppose if I lived in Leith/Musselburgh there would have been no problem. Que sera sera...

HFC 0-7
05-08-2014, 02:22 PM
Don't think anyone is disputing that we needed training facilities and a new stand, what's in dispute are the sizes. The new stand has meant you can walk up and get into any game, season tickets don't reflect good value, they guarantee you a seat for all matches but because of the capacity now a walk up can get every match. Season starts off badly and the walk ups choose not to go.

east mains is big, we could have made do with something smaller and cheaper to run.

the training facilities and stand looks great but we are simply not big enough to utilise them fully.

Dashing Bob S
05-08-2014, 02:29 PM
Well, it's not like we're going to tear it down and painstakingly reconstruct a Victorian death trap to replace it, which we'll need to pull down anyway, as soon as some non-corrupt structural engineer or councilman gains influence, or it falls down of its accord. Nor are we going back to Wardie playing fields.

We have a great stadium and training centre, so poor us, let's just deal with it. Moaning about building that infrastructure isn't going to retrospectively put great players in jerseys or trophies on the shelf or European trips in the old diaries.

We took a bad hit on the field for this, yes, but not to my mind because we wasted resources, (we still had playing budgets way in advance of our performances over the last 7 years), but because our mentality and focus as a club shifted from on-the-pitch to off-the-pitch success. With a less myopic leader (yes, we're back to Petrie) we wouldn't have gotten into this mess.

Just suppose that LD had been in charge of footballing matters years ago, given what she's achieved at Motherwell? I seriously doubt that Calderwood, Fenlon or Butcher would ever have been at Hibs, or that we'd be in the championship. Petrie's 'crime' wasn't building state-of-the-art facilities, it was a failure to realise that he wasn't a football man, and that the construction of a successful on-field club is far too complex to be left to an accountant with barely one eye on the ball. He learned that too little, too late, and I although I genuinely believe he has now, he shouldn't be associated with the club anymore.

Bad Martini
05-08-2014, 02:36 PM
Football has changed dramatically I modern years. I'm not sure we would have built something as we wouldn't have had the money. Everyone knows how I feel about the board but I think they got the training centre and stand spot on. We can hold internationals and also have the seay to get players that teams who train on public parks won't.

Yeah it's all great thinking of the past but Hibernian had to move into the future.
Yep, I'm well aware that the game has changed. The point that I was making is, we didn't need either for our last success on the pitch. I know it feels longer but the last league cup wasnt that long ago.

What's not changed is eleven versus eleven, most goals wins. In my opinion, our priority should've been players.

Makes me wonder why we don't just have an uncovered terracing on three sides of the stadium and a Main Stand that smells of p*ss, like we did in bygone days.


Like it or not, the world has moved on.
Nope. I don't think we need to go backwards. What I said was this stand or East mains wasnt needed, certainly not as we got it (smaller for both and only after the team on the pitch was sorted). There's nobody ever said we should go backwards but we haven't gone forward following the path we have..... Indeed, it's culminated in the lowest ebb since we were last relegated and lots of us pissed off.

Thecat23
05-08-2014, 02:41 PM
Yep, I'm well aware that the game has changed. The point that I was making is, we didn't need either for our last success on the pitch. I know it feels longer but the last league cup wasnt that long ago.

What's not changed is eleven versus eleven, most goals wins. In my opinion, our priority should've been players.

Nope. I don't think we need to go backwards. What I said was this stand or East mains wasnt needed, certainly not as we got it (smaller for both and only after the team on the pitch was sorted). There's nobody ever said we should go backwards but we haven't gone forward following the path we have..... Indeed, it's culminated in the lowest ebb since we were last relegated and lots of us pissed off.

I agree the playing side was neglected when we should have had a balance. The training centers are now more needed so hopefully they pays off and wins us more cups.

We only won 3 league cups in 50 odd years or something which is very poor. Having a training centre with top of the range stuff will only help if we sign better players than we have been. Also I think it will help the youth which will be a good thing.

Moon unit
05-08-2014, 09:32 PM
Nobody was more in favour of the new East Stand than me, and building it apparently saved us 2 or 3 million quid. Yet now i'm questioning myself over if it was the right decision.

Our team has been neglected while we built it, the team has declined. Crowds have dropped, and the stadium looks terrible less than half empty every home game too.

Now we find ourself relegated and as a result will cost us millions to get us back to where we were before we built it, so what i'm basically saying is, has building it been the right decision?

I have certainly questioned myself over it, and with the increased cost to maintain it and of course East Mains, have we overstretched ourselves to the detriment of our core product IE the team on the park each week?

Are the same points still valid as they were before? :confused:
time to move on!.....we have both, Yams have a crumbling cesspit, and loaning a training facility!
time for us all to back the manager and the team!