PDA

View Full Version : Sports Scene v MotD



Lago
25-05-2015, 01:25 PM
Watch both last night and what a contrast. As the Hamilton game played away I looked at a empty ground which looked as if contractors had downed tools mid way through the build. Switch to MotD great crowds fabulous stadiums and end of season drama, tears at Hull, smiles at Newcastle.
You would wonder why the BBC want to screen any Scottish football never mind pay for it.

leggeto
25-05-2015, 01:31 PM
Not bothered about comparing them as its obvious,what does bother me however is the BBC's constant coverage of the fa cup and screening it up here,why not show the Scottish cup in Scotland and fa cup in England,is that how it used to be a while back but I'm can't remember

Andy Bee
25-05-2015, 01:43 PM
Watch both last night and what a contrast. As the Hamilton game played away I looked at a empty ground which looked as if contractors had downed tools mid way through the build. Switch to MotD great crowds fabulous stadiums and end of season drama, tears at Hull, smiles at Newcastle.
You would wonder why the BBC want to screen any Scottish football never mind pay for it.

You're comparing what would be one of the lowest attended matches in the Spl, with either team having nothing to play for against two of the highest attended matches in England with everything to play for, why miss a chance to knock Scottish football though :rolleyes:

liamh2202
25-05-2015, 01:59 PM
Not bothered about comparing them as its obvious,what does bother me however is the BBC's constant coverage of the fa cup and screening it up here,why not show the Scottish cup in Scotland and fa cup in England,is that how it used to be a while back but I'm can't remember

They still do

Dr What If?
25-05-2015, 02:04 PM
You're comparing what would be one of the lowest attended matches in the Spl, with either team having nothing to play for against two of the highest attended matches in England with everything to play for, why miss a chance to knock Scottish football though :rolleyes:
The poster is just pointing out that there is something not right with our product up here. It's an end of season game right enough but there should still be fans wanting to go along and see it, you could pretty much guarantee if Hull had already bee relegated before last weekends match the stadium would still be pretty much full.

liamh2202
25-05-2015, 02:16 PM
Maybe Hamilton just don't have the fan Base?

green&left
25-05-2015, 02:17 PM
The poster is just pointing out that there is something not right with our product up here. It's an end of season game right enough but there should still be fans wanting to go along and see it, you could pretty much guarantee if Hull had already bee relegated before last weekends match the stadium would still be pretty much full.

Hull were averaging 5000 15 years ago.

Comparing the EPL to SPFL is like comparing a Ferrari to a Citreon - quite silly really.

(Not suggesting there isn't a problem with Scottish fitba BTW, just struggling to see why anyone would attempt to compare our game up here to the multi-billion pound inustry that is the Barclay's Premier League)

Pete
25-05-2015, 02:21 PM
Hamilton have just as rich a history as Hull.

We need a total change in the way our game is promoted and ultimately portrayed. Very few countries in the world have the game we have yet unlike the English game, it's been allowed to be forgotten about.

Lago
25-05-2015, 02:42 PM
Hamilton have just as rich a history as Hull.

We need a total change in the way our game is promoted and ultimately portrayed. Very few countries in the world have the game we have yet unlike the English game, it's been allowed to be forgotten about.
Unfortunately Peter showing football in a half empty stadium which looks incomplete will not promote the game. And I am not knocking the game as some are suggesting, but pointing out that the BBC will just point at a game and stadium like that and say we pay the rate for the job,.

Lago
25-05-2015, 02:45 PM
The poster is just pointing out that there is something not right with our product up here. It's an end of season game right enough but there should still be fans wanting to go along and see it, you could pretty much guarantee if Hull had already bee relegated before last weekends match the stadium would still be pretty much full.
Correct, you will never convince the BBC that more money should go to Scottish football based on what I watched on Sunday, maybe time for much less tv.

Ozyhibby
25-05-2015, 02:46 PM
Hamilton has a population of about 50,000 people compared to Hull which has 250,000 people.

liamh2202
25-05-2015, 03:18 PM
I don't see why the majority want more coverage. I'd rather there was less maybe then attendances would improve

Vini1875
25-05-2015, 07:34 PM
We have 42 clubs in a country of 5 million, while England has 92 in a country 55 million. Comparing to a country ten times our size is daft. Comparisons could be made with countries our size to see what they do and where we might learn lessons would make more sense.

Biggie
25-05-2015, 09:26 PM
Disappointing all the same to see stadiums half empty week in week out across the country.....will we ever see an upturn in Scottish football ?

Tricla
25-05-2015, 09:39 PM
English fitba. Meh.

SunshineOnLeith
25-05-2015, 09:41 PM
It's almost as if England is a bigger country than Scotland, with a far wealthier professional football league.

Bizarre.

Danderhall Hibs
25-05-2015, 09:43 PM
It's almost as if England is a bigger country than Scotland, with a far wealthier professional football league.

Bizarre.

The same broadcaster manages to push out a professional programme and an amateur production. That's nothing to do with size of country.

Holmesdale Hibs
25-05-2015, 09:56 PM
We have 42 clubs in a country of 5 million, while England has 92 in a country 55 million. Comparing to a country ten times our size is daft. Comparisons could be made with countries our size to see what they do and where we might learn lessons would make more sense.

Agree. I read in a book called Soccernomics that Scottish football has better attendance per capita than most other countries in Europe, including England. We're doing ok for the size of Scotland but our product simply can't compete with the EPL. The difference in standard has been growing for the last 20 years and will probably continue to do so.

What does bother me is the quality of the weejie bias in the media. Some folk down south moan about the scouser bias but it's nothing compared with what we put up with. This is something we can and should improve on.

Baader
25-05-2015, 10:04 PM
Agree. I read in a book called Soccernomics that Scottish football has better attendance per capita than most other countries in Europe, including England. We're doing ok for the size of Scotland but our product simply can't compete with the EPL. The difference in standard has been growing for the last 20 years and will probably continue to do so.

What does bother me is the quality of the weejie bias in the media. Some folk down south moan about the scouser bias but it's nothing compared with what we put up with. This is something we can and should improve on.

Very true. We need to stop comparing Scottish football to the English version. It makes no sense. Like comparing a Savile Row suit to one from Primark.

Scotland does have a very high football attendance per head of population although two clubs are mostly responsible for this.

What we do need to ensure is that grass roots is strong and kids are coached in the right manner - to appreciate, understand and enjoy the game. We need to utilise our resources which is not something we have done. Scotland is a fitba daft country - it would help if more people supported their local club rather than some ridiculous affinity to a team that plays in Glasgow (and who most never actually see.) It would also help massively if we had people who are actually competent running our Association and leagues. Actually clamping down on the bigotry and hostility that unfortunately tarnishes our nation's footballing reputation (through not much fault of most clubs) would be a good start but won't be holding my breath..

timewilltell
25-05-2015, 10:10 PM
Hamilton have just as rich a history as Hull.

We need a total change in the way our game is promoted and ultimately portrayed. Very few countries in the world have the game we have yet unlike the English game, it's been allowed to be forgotten about.

You serious?

Pete
25-05-2015, 10:13 PM
You serious?

What bit are you referring to?

NAE NOOKIE
25-05-2015, 10:46 PM
Disappointing all the same to see stadiums half empty week in week out across the country.....will we ever see an upturn in Scottish football ?

The very comparison at the start of the thread is part of the problem. Our kids, and far too many adults, have spent the last 10 years watching the EPL on the telly and judging our football against theirs, but its not just that. Our best young talent is being siphoned off down south at a rate never imagined in the past. In the 80s Aberdeen held on to the likes of McLeish and Miller and Dundee Utd kept the likes of Malpas and Sturrock. Perhaps the top English clubs didn't rate them and the teams below that couldn't afford them ..... but now they would be away to bloody Wigan or Bristol City. Scottish fans aren't even getting a chance to see our best youngsters develop ..... Allan ? Fyvie ? ....... we even had Swansea offering £200,000 for Cummings who had barely kicked a ball for us.

As I have said before .... Scottish football needs to be made a fun experience and that means standing areas and everything possible being done to make the fans of every club feel valued. Summer football ? .... why not try it?

The OP is right about New Douglas park, not to mention some of our other so called 'top flight' grounds. If the Scottish government can spend over £14,000,000 of public money on a glorified school sports day, then surely they can be persuaded to help redevelope some of the 2 and 3 sided grounds of what is after all by far and away our major spectator sport, perhaps with a view to staging the under 21 world cup or Euro championships.

That's what we need, not comparisons with match of the day or English football.

Nutmegged
26-05-2015, 08:53 AM
Lago are you serious? Younare comparing a game at the worst home ground in the League compared to the only two games that mattered in the English Premier League, why not conpare Hull/Newcastle games to the Dundee Utd/St Johnstone games? The only two games that anything was at stake in the Scottish Premiership.

The Premiership only had 3 games on Sunday, all at half 12 kick off times yet 84,000 people still attended those three fixtures, thats an incredible figure - Celtic Park was almost full and it offers a fantastic spectacle - big Dundee Derby, 16k+ at Pittodrie with the Saints biggest traveling support of the Season.

Very very unfair!

English teams are guaranteed £120m for getting to the Premier League, Scottish Clubs are gauranteed £900,000 for getting to the Premiership, its a no brainer why those clubs can build nice shiney stadiums/stands, buy players that can fill those stands and make allowances that can get fans in cheaper.

Scottish Football is what it is, there is plenty wrong with out game but there is a helluva lot thats right with it too, comparing Hamilton Accies and New Douglas Park with Newcastle Utd and St James is just looking for things to be annoyed about in my opinion.

Nutmegged
26-05-2015, 08:59 AM
The same broadcaster manages to push out a professional programme and an amateur production. That's nothing to do with size of country.

Erm yes it is, thats exactly what its down too, Match of the Day is sold Nation-wide to every region of the United Kingdom, that and all thats associated with it (Pundit/Presenter wages & production costs etc) comes out of the BBC National pot while Sportscene and all thats associated with it comes out of BBC Scotland's regional pot

liamh2202
26-05-2015, 09:03 AM
Erm yes it is, thats exactly what its down too, Match of the Day is sold Nation-wide to every region of the United Kingdom, that and all thats associated with it (Pundit/Presenter wages & production costs etc) comes out of the BBC National pot while Sportscene and all thats associated with it comes out of BBC Scotland's regional pot

Also I reckon a professional sportscene would be like polishing a turd,,, rolling it in glitter will not benefit the game imo

Geo_1875
26-05-2015, 09:12 AM
If the BBC gave as much money to the Scottish game as they do the self-proclaimed "Best League in The World" we'd be in a better position than we are now. However, they have a vested interest in running down the Scottish game and would rather we all gave in and watched Stoke City V Bournemouth, or even Derby County V Rotherham in the Championship. They are as guilty as SKY in ruing our domestic leagues.

GreenCastle
26-05-2015, 09:17 AM
Sky and BT sport seem to have much better coverage of the game.

Sadly I can't see SportScene improving - though having it at a decent time and done in a better studio would give it a more professional look.

Bottom line is this the product needs improved on the park as while we will always play 2nd fiddle to England due to the size and money - we need to find a way to relaunch the product.

Scotland has a 2020 vision - we are in 2015 - maybe the next 5 years will see this..?

liamh2202
26-05-2015, 09:22 AM
If the BBC gave as much money to the Scottish game as they do the self-proclaimed "Best League in The World" we'd be in a better position than we are now. However, they have a vested interest in running down the Scottish game and would rather we all gave in and watched Stoke City V Bournemouth, or even Derby County V Rotherham in the Championship. They are as guilty as SKY in ruing our domestic leagues.

Why would they give us as much money though? Although 10 percent to reflect population size would be nice but even that has its downsides as Scottish people also watch motd where as sportscene is only shown in Scotland

Juice-Terry
26-05-2015, 09:22 AM
The Old Firm dominance is responsible for the decline of football in Scotland. No question.

liamh2202
26-05-2015, 09:35 AM
The Old Firm dominance is responsible for the decline of football in Scotland. No question.

Correct

HUTCHYHIBBY
26-05-2015, 10:44 AM
Maybe Hamilton just don't have the fan Base?

Or the SKY TV money.

Geo_1875
26-05-2015, 10:50 AM
Why would they give us as much money though? Although 10 percent to reflect population size would be nice but even that has its downsides as Scottish people also watch motd where as sportscene is only shown in Scotland

They show Strictly Come Dancing throughout the British Isles but I wish they didn't. Scottish football attendances are higher per capita than any other league in Europe so I assume their are a lot of interested fee payers. Just a fair share would benefit our game.

liamh2202
26-05-2015, 10:51 AM
Or the SKY TV money.

Yeh hence why comparison is silly. We need to accept we are not going to get a massive TV deal. And if we do would it really help our attendances? Time to move on and modernise imo

Lago
26-05-2015, 11:07 AM
Look folks I am not knocking Scottish football just for the sake of it, we can not just keep bleating about not getting enough money while ignoring the product on offer.
Maybe my use of New Douglas park was unfair I don't think so, it looked empty and unfinished, why at the very least was the part behind the goal not terraced then a case could have been made for a standing area at certain games.
As to unfair comparisons, sorry but that is happening through out football, people watch and travel from Scotland to EPL games and talk about the game here on .net, how many watch La Liga? So my basic point was maybe just maybe at the moment what the BBC pays the SPFL is all its worth based on the product on offer.

liamh2202
26-05-2015, 11:09 AM
Look folks I am not knocking Scottish football just for the sake of it, we can not just keep bleating about not getting enough money while ignoring the product on offer.
Maybe my use of New Douglas park was unfair I don't think so, it looked empty and unfinished, why at the very least was the part behind the goal not terraced then a case could have been made for a standing area at certain games.
As to unfair comparisons, sorry but that is happening through out football, people watch and travel from Scotland to EPL games and talk about the game here on .net, how many watch La Liga? So my basic point was maybe just maybe at the moment what the BBC pays the SPFL is all its worth based on the product on offer.

Why should they build it just for the sake of it though if they don't need it? Just so it looks good on telly??

Lago
26-05-2015, 11:18 AM
Why should they build it just for the sake of it though if they don't need it? Just so it looks good on telly??
I didnt say build it for the sake of it, build it to exploit it potential, but maybe just continue with a short sighted view of why do or try anything.

CallumLaidlaw
26-05-2015, 01:17 PM
In the early nineties, Sky took a risk and pumped money into the EPL. They were struggling and if their live football coverage didnt land correctly, there probably wouldnt be a Sky TV any more.

They put money in, made it glamorous, using the glitzy American Football approach. It worked, and the money allowed EPL clubs to invest in Stadia and players. So every time the contract came for renewal, the EPL were able to demand higher and higher fees, to the point where it is now worth umpteen billion.

Scottish football has never had that kind of money invested in it. Gary Lineker gets paid more than BBC pay for their yearly coverage. Maybe if the likes of Sky realised that a bit of PROPER investement rather than their current token efforts, would actually improve the product they are showing, then we too could see a big upturn in the quality and interest in our game. We also have the problem that the top men in our game talk our game down. Doncaster spoke of Armageddon - that isnt going to help sell a product. We cringe at the English media for talking up their game, while our media talk ours down. Unfortunately, the worse we make our game sound, the less attractive it will be to investors, fans, tv companies. We also have the fact that our governing body continue to make huge cock ups - the split, the fixture scheduling, etc.

We really need someone (like Barry Hearn) to come in and talk our game up and fight our corner. Look at how successful flippin' darts has become!!

So to compare our game to the EPL is crazy - not least forgetting that the likes of Hull & Newcastle are much more populated than the likes of Hamilton.

Sudds_1
26-05-2015, 01:47 PM
Speaking of comparisons, I'm reminded of the late, great Arthur Montford apologising to the viewers on techncial difficulties that prevented them screening the Old Firm match that week...............

"........but we have an equally exciting game from Brechin". :greengrin:greengrin:greengrin

NAE NOOKIE
26-05-2015, 02:00 PM
Why should they build it just for the sake of it though if they don't need it? Just so it looks good on telly??

Exactly.

In every aspect of the entertainment industry presentation and image is a huge part of the package. If something looks small time that's how it will be perceived by its potential customers, including sponsors and TV companies.

Having 3 clubs in our top flight who have incomplete stadiums does the image of our game no favours whatsoever. ICT's ground is a joke, even the main stand isn't fully covered. New Douglas park if it had another 2 stands modelled on the 2 it has would IMO be a decent template for how to build a really nice small ground .... St Mirren take note.

As I have said before, there is no need to go mental and spend squillions ..... here's my take on what is required:

ICT ....... 2,000 capacity stand on open side and fully cover main stand
Partick .... 1,000 capacity stand behind the goals
Falkirk .... 2,000 capacity stand on open side
Hamilton ... 1,000 capacity stand on open side and 500 capacity stand behind the goals

I doubt the whole lot would cost more than 10 million ..... when you consider that 14 million was spent on Hampden for the commonwealth games, with not a stitch of infrastructure improvement to show at the stadium when it was all over, is that too much to ask?

Lago
26-05-2015, 02:58 PM
Exactly.

In every aspect of the entertainment industry presentation and image is a huge part of the package. If something looks small time that's how it will be perceived by its potential customers, including sponsors and TV companies.

Having 3 clubs in our top flight who have incomplete stadiums does the image of our game no favours whatsoever. ICT's ground is a joke, even the main stand isn't fully covered. New Douglas park if it had another 2 stands modelled on the 2 it has would IMO be a decent template for how to build a really nice small ground .... St Mirren take note.

As I have said before, there is no need to go mental and spend squillions ..... here's my take on what is required:

ICT ....... 2,000 capacity stand on open side and fully cover main stand
Partick .... 1,000 capacity stand behind the goals
Falkirk .... 2,000 capacity stand on open side
Hamilton ... 1,000 capacity stand on open side and 500 capacity stand behind the goals

I doubt the whole lot would cost more than 10 million ..... when you consider that 14 million was spent on Hampden for the commonwealth games, with not a stitch of infrastructure improvement to show at the stadium when it was all over, is that too much to ask?

Your absolutely spot on. I wasnt trying to put down Scottish football as some have accused me of doing, but trying to make the point that the product on display at Hamilton was poor, unfinished stadium, low crowd just lookedamateurish. So why would anyone pay more money for a product like that, SPFL needs to do as you suggest with the grounds plus start looking at standing areas.

Eyrie
26-05-2015, 06:55 PM
Why should clubs that haven't completed their grounds be subsidised to do so when other clubs (like ourselves) have invested their own funds for their stadia?

And imagine the outcry on here if a Famous pub team got public money to replace an asbestos death trap!

Andy Bee
27-05-2015, 02:57 AM
I'd like to see all TV money distributed more evenly between all of the UK leagues according to population so we'd get roughly 10% of the total pot. I don't see that hurting the EPL when Sky can afford to offer £5.5bn. All UK football should be in one pot when it comes to renewal time for the TV deals, for one league to take that amount of money when even their own lower leagues are struggling is simply plain greed. I'll give it two years at most before the £.5m per week threshold has been broken for a players wage, that's just mental when we're discussing the pros and cons of an unfinished stadium being shown on TV or how fancy the studio looks. Newly promoted Norwich will receive £10m a game as will every other EPL club, it's pathetic especially when the majority of us contribute to it by either subscribing to Sky and/or pay the TV license. There's enough money now from TV in the UK for every top league to flourish and compete with the best of them, not to mention break the OF strangle hold on Scottish football.

liamh2202
27-05-2015, 08:00 AM
I'd like to see all TV money distributed more evenly between all of the UK leagues according to population so we'd get roughly 10% of the total pot. I don't see that hurting the EPL when Sky can afford to offer £5.5bn. All UK football should be in one pot when it comes to renewal time for the TV deals, for one league to take that amount of money when even their own lower leagues are struggling is simply plain greed. I'll give it two years at most before the £.5m per week threshold has been broken for a players wage, that's just mental when we're discussing the pros and cons of an unfinished stadium being shown on TV or how fancy the studio looks. Newly promoted Norwich will receive £10m a game as will every other EPL club, it's pathetic especially when the majority of us contribute to it by either subscribing to Sky and/or pay the TV license. There's enough money now from TV in the UK for every top league to flourish and compete with the best of them, not to mention break the OF strangle hold on Scottish football.

Like I have said over and over.. Why would they do this when the Scottish 10% watch motd as well where as sportscene is only available to the 10%?

Colr
27-05-2015, 08:13 AM
Hamilton have just as rich a history as Hull.

We need a total change in the way our game is promoted and ultimately portrayed. Very few countries in the world have the game we have yet unlike the English game, it's been allowed to be forgotten about.

There are lots of towns called Hamilton across the world. They should reach out to the diaspora!!

Colr
27-05-2015, 08:14 AM
I'd like to see all TV money distributed more evenly between all of the UK leagues according to population so we'd get roughly 10% of the total pot. I don't see that hurting the EPL when Sky can afford to offer £5.5bn. All UK football should be in one pot when it comes to renewal time for the TV deals, for one league to take that amount of money when even their own lower leagues are struggling is simply plain greed. I'll give it two years at most before the £.5m per week threshold has been broken for a players wage, that's just mental when we're discussing the pros and cons of an unfinished stadium being shown on TV or how fancy the studio looks. Newly promoted Norwich will receive £10m a game as will every other EPL club, it's pathetic especially when the majority of us contribute to it by either subscribing to Sky and/or pay the TV license. There's enough money now from TV in the UK for every top league to flourish and compete with the best of them, not to mention break the OF strangle hold on Scottish football.

So fiscal autonomy doesn't apply to football?

NAE NOOKIE
27-05-2015, 09:00 AM
Why should clubs that haven't completed their grounds be subsidised to do so when other clubs (like ourselves) have invested their own funds for their stadia?

And imagine the outcry on here if a Famous pub team got public money to replace an asbestos death trap!

I don't think its a question of that. Nobody can accuse Falkirk or Hamilton at this stage of not doing their best on the stadium front. Partick couldn't use their open terrace and probably don't have the cash to do more ... they have built 2 new stands in the time it took us to re develop ER. ICT came out of the highland league .. I doubt they could have raised any sort of professional team and built any better than they have at the same time on the crowds they get. As for Hibs spending our own money .... that's true, but how many of the clubs mentioned have sold £8,000,000 worth of players in the last 10 years?

As for the Yams ........ Nobody is suggesting that they be given the funds to build the 8 - 10 thousand seater with corporate suits etc they will want. This is about stadium completion, not re development. That's why I never mentioned the likes of Dundee or Aberdeen, both of whom are in the same boat as them.

Having said that .... If there was a general pot with enough money left to help the Yams, Dundee, Aberdeen I would be OK with that. Its time to put petty differences to one side for the good of the game. The Yams, even though I hate the holier than thou way they go about it, are not the club they were. Though sharing an Athletics, Rugby, Football stadium the other side of the bypass is my preferred option for them :greengrin

liamh2202
27-05-2015, 09:06 AM
I don't think its a question of that. Nobody can accuse Falkirk or Hamilton at this stage of not doing their best on the stadium front. Partick couldn't use their open terrace and probably don't have the cash to do more ... they have built 2 new stands in the time it took us to re develop ER. ICT came out of the highland league .. I doubt they could have raised any sort of professional team and built any better than they have at the same time on the crowds they get. As for Hibs spending our own money .... that's true, but how many of the clubs mentioned have sold £8,000,000 worth of players in the last 10 years?

As for the Yams ........ Nobody is suggesting that they be given the funds to build the 8 - 10 thousand seater with corporate suits etc they will want. This is about stadium completion, not re development. That's why I never mentioned the likes of Dundee or Aberdeen, both of whom are in the same boat as them.

Having said that .... If there was a general pot with enough money left to help the Yams, Dundee, Aberdeen I would be OK with that. Its time to put petty differences to one side for the good of the game. The Yams, even though I hate the holier than thou way they go about it, are not the club they were. Though them sharing an Athletics, Rugby, Football stadium the other side of the bypass is my preferred option for them :greengrin

You need to remember that teams like Hamilton and St mirren got massive amounts of money for their old grounds from supermarkets. income that hibs never had.

Carheenlea
27-05-2015, 09:08 AM
Those three sided stadiums are probably one side too many as the clubs can't fill what stands they have as it is.
Replacing a TV view of a gap site with an empty stand won't really improve things.

NAE NOOKIE
27-05-2015, 09:20 AM
You need to remember that teams like Hamilton and St mirren got massive amounts of money for their old grounds from supermarkets. income that hibs never had.

I know .... but every penny of that money was spent on new grounds, not beefing up their playing squads at the expense of their infrastructure, which is the argument used against some clubs when comparing them to us.

I could write a book on what little regard I have for what St Mirren ended up building ..... its a byword for lack of imagination, I don't care what the budget was.

NAE NOOKIE
27-05-2015, 09:54 AM
Those three sided stadiums are probably one side too many as the clubs can't fill what stands they have as it is.
Replacing a TV view of a gap site with an empty stand won't really improve things.

I couldn't disagree more. Ask the players what they would prefer, our own Derek Riordan was the one who said it was depressing looking down the pitch at Hamilton and seeing a supermarket and not a stand .... empty or not.

Building these stands would also show that we have some optimism about our game. I'm not talking about mega grounds here.

Falkirk ........ 8,750 to 10,750
Partick ....... 10,887 to 11,287
Hamilton .... 6,078 to 7,578
ICT ............ 7,711 to 9,711

There would be the odd times the extra capacity will be used and I'm sure the clubs would welcome that income. Easter Road has only been filled to capacity once since the east stand was built, but that's not a case that we shouldn't have built it.

Carheenlea
27-05-2015, 11:14 AM
I couldn't disagree more. Ask the players what they would prefer, our own Derek Riordan was the one who said it was depressing looking down the pitch at Hamilton and seeing a supermarket and not a stand .... empty or not.

Building these stands would also show that we have some optimism about our game. I'm not talking about mega grounds here.

Falkirk ........ 8,750 to 10,750
Partick ....... 10,887 to 11,287
Hamilton .... 6,078 to 7,578
ICT ............ 7,711 to 9,711

There would be the odd times the extra capacity will be used and I'm sure the clubs would welcome that income. Easter Road has only been filled to capacity once since the east stand was built, but that's not a case that we shouldn't have built it.

Fair points, can`t really argue.
What I would like to see is clubs with gaps to fill to be permitted to build terracings, or at least have that option to consider if wishing to complete their grounds. A cheaper option, and one that would find favour with many supporters. Covering them can be done with a basic roof and pillars as opposed to cantilevered grandstands. Grounds might just start to get their own identity again rather than every new one looking pretty much the same.

Lago
27-05-2015, 11:42 AM
Fair points, can`t really argue.
What I would like to see is clubs with gaps to fill to be permitted to build terracings, or at least have that option to consider if wishing to complete their grounds. A cheaper option, and one that would find favour with many supporters. Covering them can be done with a basic roof and pillars as opposed to cantilevered grandstands. Grounds might just start to get their own identity again rather than every new one looking pretty much the same.
I got shot down in flames for suggesting terracing at Hamilton bur I still think its a better idea than wide open space and, at certain gamescould be used as a standing area.