The future of Hampden

With a decision whether or not to renew our commitment to the national stadium looming ever closer for the SFA what are folks thoughts on it?

It does seem logical to bin the whole thing and stick two fingers up to Queens Park, who own it but never put a penny into it, and take the internationals around the country, that is until you look at exactly what that will mean. Every game with any meaning will still be played in Glasgow, with the rest of the country getting meaningless friendlies or the busted flush qualifiers nobody wants to see and the ugly sisters dividing up the spoils from the games where there's real money to be made, including the league and Scottish cup finals, putting even more money into their pockets.

I can honestly also see a scenario where the venue for old firm semi finals or cup finals will be either decided on the toss of a coin or played on a two legged basis. I simply cant see police Scotland allowing them to play each other at the only other stadium capable of holding the game which is in Edinburgh, even if the police were ok with it the council would never sanction it IMO.

Taking all this into account I would say we simply have to do two things:

The first is to find a way to wrest control of Hampden from Queens Park .. rental for the stadium from the SFA, SPFL, concerts and other events goes into their company ... but any renovations to the stadium over the years has been paid for from grants and sponsorships only attained because of the involvement of football with the stadium ... when the pitch gets re laid for example I'm pretty sure the SFA pay for it, not Queens Park ..... its a farcical situation.

The second ... dependent on the first happening ... is for Scottish football to find a way to rebuild the stadium and take its capacity up to at least 60,000 ... Look at what they did to the Maracanã Stadium ... nothing fancy, they just built another basic one tier stadium but with the stands much closer to the pitch. That's all they need to do with Hampden, knock down the east, north and west stands and rebuild them much steeper and much closer to the pitch at both ends ... steepness means more height, but if they want the stands to be level all the way round all they need to do is lower the pitch and put another section in front of the south stand to bring it level with the others.

They could probably do the whole lot for 70 million quid and when you look at the money SKY and BT pump into the EPL and Champion's league I bet you could get them to put up at least 40 million of it for the naming rights .... the SKY Hampden park stadium would perhaps even appeal to them.

As you can see its a slow Sunday and I'm bored waiting for the Scotland game to start :greengrin ...... But in all seriousness, IMO allowing Hampden to pass into history would be a huge mistake.

I think the national stadium should be around the Motherwell / Airdrie area - more accessible for those coming from the north and east, even those from the south.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

With a decision whether or not to renew our commitment to the national stadium looming ever closer for the SFA what are folks thoughts on it?

It does seem logical to bin the whole thing and stick two fingers up to Queens Park, who own it but never put a penny into it, and take the internationals around the country, that is until you look at exactly what that will mean. Every game with any meaning will still be played in Glasgow, with the rest of the country getting meaningless friendlies or the busted flush qualifiers nobody wants to see and the ugly sisters dividing up the spoils from the games where there's real money to be made, including the league and Scottish cup finals, putting even more money into their pockets.

I can honestly also see a scenario where the venue for old firm semi finals or cup finals will be either decided on the toss of a coin or played on a two legged basis. I simply cant see police Scotland allowing them to play each other at the only other stadium capable of holding the game which is in Edinburgh, even if the police were ok with it the council would never sanction it IMO.

Taking all this into account I would say we simply have to do two things:

The first is to find a way to wrest control of Hampden from Queens Park .. rental for the stadium from the SFA, SPFL, concerts and other events goes into their company ... but any renovations to the stadium over the years has been paid for from grants and sponsorships only attained because of the involvement of football with the stadium ... when the pitch gets re laid for example I'm pretty sure the SFA pay for it, not Queens Park ..... its a farcical situation.

The second ... dependent on the first happening ... is for Scottish football to find a way to rebuild the stadium and take its capacity up to at least 60,000 ... Look at what they did to the Maracanã Stadium ... nothing fancy, they just built another basic one tier stadium but with the stands much closer to the pitch. That's all they need to do with Hampden, knock down the east, north and west stands and rebuild them much steeper and much closer to the pitch at both ends ... steepness means more height, but if they want the stands to be level all the way round all they need to do is lower the pitch and put another section in front of the south stand to bring it level with the others.

They could probably do the whole lot for 70 million quid and when you look at the money SKY and BT pump into the EPL and Champion's league I bet you could get them to put up at least 40 million of it for the naming rights .... the SKY Hampden park stadium would perhaps even appeal to them.

As you can see its a slow Sunday and I'm bored waiting for the Scotland game to start :greengrin ...... But in all seriousness, IMO allowing Hampden to pass into history would be a huge mistake.

---

Doesn't the SFA own Hampden now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theonlywayisup

I think the national stadium should be around the Motherwell / Airdrie area - more accessible for those coming from the north and east, even those from the south.

---

Ideally yes it should ... but in this scenario we are rebuilding Hampden. In any scenario where you build a new stadium on a different site its going to be difficult to get a planning application past the locals ... The sweetie paper rustlers of Aberdeen are struggling to get the good folk of Westhill to agree to their stadium .... imagine the resistance to the prospect of 60,000 knuckle draggers pissing in gardens and puking up in the street a few times a season from the good folk of Motherwell etc.

It's not the greatest stadium in the world, but not half as bad as some make out. One of footballs most famous venues and every Scottish football fan will have memories never to be forgotten, be that international or club. I hope we continue on at Hampden Park.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theonlywayisup

I think the national stadium should be around the Motherwell / Airdrie area - more accessible for those coming from the north and east, even those from the south.

---

Personally I would like to see an enlarged Hampden for for purpose. But if they decide to move I believe Stirling is where it should be. Accessible to all parts of the country and the historic heart of Scotland.

If they don’t want to do that then let’s put it in Inverness. Neutral ground and very little goes to the highlands. Every bit as relevant as any other part of the country

It's the SFA, they'll choose the easiest option (no brain required), so they'll just renew the lease on Hampden.

Hampden will be hosting games at the euros in 2020, should have been done up for that imo

Make Hampden bigger and better would be the best way to go imo. Sharing Murrayfield would be the most cost effective way to go, but it would never happen, and if I’m being honest I’m glad it won’t happen.

If they wanted to do a botch job semi rebuild,(....this is Scotland we are talking about so seems plausible)

I would leave the main stand and rebuild the north,east,west and make them multi tiered with a proper rake to the seating, east and west stands are especially poor for spectator viewing.
There is not a huge amount of space behind the north west corner, they might have to shift the odd weegie out their house and claim a bit of land. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carheenlea

It's not the greatest stadium in the world, but not half as bad as some make out. One of footballs most famous venues and every Scottish football fan will have memories never to be forgotten, be that international or club. I hope we continue on at Hampden Park.

---

Absolutely this. I personally love Hampden.

We could try and increase capacity to 60k... although only 1 qualifier in this campaign has sold out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carheenlea

It's not the greatest stadium in the world, but not half as bad as some make out. One of footballs most famous venues and every Scottish football fan will have memories never to be forgotten, be that international or club. I hope we continue on at Hampden Park.

---

:agree:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liberal Hibby

Doesn't the SFA own Hampden now?

---

No, its always been in the hands of Queens Park ... the current owner is 'Hampden Park Ltd' which is in effect Queens Park FC.

Their continued ownership of the stadium has been a disaster for it over the years IMO. Example .... Glasgow was desperate to hold the Commonwealth games and the Scottish government was very very keen to help them do it. Short of building a white Elephant that would be utterly useless within a fortnight the only possible venue was Hampden .... Even though they had Glasgow council and the government over a barrel Queens Park Ltd allowed them to spend 14 million quid on the stadium with incredibly no lasting legacy or benefit to it whatsoever ... any company worth its salt would have insisted that the stadium had to benefit in the long term from such an arrangement. Which proves to me that Queens Park Ltd see the stadium as nothing more than a cash cow and have little or no interest in its upkeep, its maintenance, or sadly its future .... they are little better than a slum landlord.

But then why should they bother when all the money they have ever needed to improve it and keep it running has come through its connections to the SFA and Scottish football in general .... Its like renting out a house and expecting the tenants to pay to have the roof replaced and bizarrely the tenants agreeing to it .... hell its like renting out a house you have expected your tenants to buy for you.

The biggest question which remains for Queens Park Ltd is what exactly do they do if the SFA and SPFL refuse to use the stadium in the future? You can only hold so many Take That and Robbie Williams concerts in a year, so far for the summer of 2018 all they have booked is 3 nights of Ed Sheerin. With footballs lack of input there is no way they would be able to attract a penny of public money, nothing like the sponsorship they do and nowhere near the annual rental income. The SFA / SPFL have Queens Park Ltd over the same barrel they had Glasgow Council and the government over with the Commonwealth games.

The SFA and SPFL if you ask me can near enough 100% expect Queens Park Ltd not to call their bluff when it comes to a threat to withdraw from their use of Hampden and at that point the whole situation is up for negotiation with all the cards firmly stacked in favour of Scottish football .... The only fly in the ointment is will the absolute dullards who run our game have the brains to see it and the balls to take full advantage?

Get that place into the hands of Scottish football, or even better a charitable trust in the control of Scottish football and Hampden could have a future .... IMO its as iconic a Scottish landmark as Edinburgh castle or the Forth bridge and getting it into the hands of a charitable trust isn't as fanciful as it might seem if you ask me .... manage to do that and the prospect of access to public funding and major sponsorship for a rebuild would be far higher than they are at the moment.

If Scottish football was united in its purpose instead of being at loggerheads all the time the clubs could get together and get Celtic Park and Ibrox who both have far better facilities and certainly in the case of Ibrox are far easier to get to, to compete with Hampden for big concerts. If the buggers wont play ball run them into the ground until the place is a rusting hulk.

It was an opportunity missed when it was redeveloped. They should have forced Queens Park out and built a 60K stadium with stands nearer the pitch. Ideally this would happen this time round but I suspect the SFA will cut their losses and ditch Hampden.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bishop Hibee

It was an opportunity missed when it was redeveloped. They should have forced Queens Park out and built a 60K stadium with stands nearer the pitch. Ideally this would happen this time round but I suspect the SFA will cut their losses and ditch Hampden.

---

I cant see the SFA leaving Hampden. In fact id be shocked if they did.

If Hampden didnt exist id think there was no need to build a national stadium, especially such a rubbish one.

But it does exist, so i think the history etc makes it worth keeping. I just wish they had shown slightly more vision when they refurbished it to make it decent. If Lansdown Road and Cardiff Arms Park could be turned into the brilliant stadiums they have been, i dont understand why Hampden couldnt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bishop Hibee

It was an opportunity missed when it was redeveloped. They should have forced Queens Park out and built a 60K stadium with stands nearer the pitch. Ideally this would happen this time round but I suspect the SFA will cut their losses and ditch Hampden.

---

Sadly you are probably right. But IMO Scotland needs to have a national stadium. Its true that countries like Germany and Spain share games around, but both countries have huge populations compared to Scotland and huge stadiums scattered all around the country, a luxury we certainly don't enjoy.

With Celtic and Sevco owning the only two stadiums capable of matching Hampden and the presence of at least one of them in every set of cup semi finals played, not to mention finals, the effect of having no national stadium would be as I said before to pump even more money into the coffers of the two clubs who are already miles in front of everybody else in spending power. If they have any regard for the general good of Scottish football its something the SFA and SPFL have to be worried about.

I've said it before ...... If the Scottish government were prepared to spend hundreds of millions on a glorified school sports day that subsequent studies have shown actually had no overall beneficial affects on the good health or prestige of the nation ... something they could have learned before the event by looking at the stats for previous commonwealth games and Olympics ... then there is no reason why they shouldn't get on board with helping to build this country a national football stadium we can be proud of and which is fit for purpose. They are quick enough to stick their nose in when it comes to using football for their own ends .... its time they did something to help it.

Hampden should be left to Queens Park or torn down. We are a small country and already have a top class national stadium in Murrayfield. I'd be happy enough going to Murrayfield/Ibrox/Parkhead for semis and finals

Keep it, make it better sell name right and extend it. I couldn't count the amount of times at the Malta match I looked up to where I was sitting in the final and day dream. We just won the cup there. Keep it now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KingDomofFife84

Hampden should be left to Queens Park or torn down. We are a small country and already have a top class national stadium in Murrayfield. I'd be happy enough going to Murrayfield/Ibrox/Parkhead for semis and finals

---

Aye Celtic at Parkhead for a final would be brilliant. Or do the stadiums get a month or so to prepare depending on what sides are competing? There's nothing wrong with Hampden. Even as a wee laddie going to Glasgow no on a weds night for an international was brilliant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firestarter

Aye Celtic at Parkhead for a final would be brilliant. Or do the stadiums get a month or so to prepare depending on what sides are competing? There's nothing wrong with Hampden.

---

A game involving Celtc would be played at Ibrox and one involving Sevco at Parkhead. If they're playing each other, then they take it in turns to host with the stadium split 50:50.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eyrie

A game involving Celtc would be played at Ibrox and one involving Sevco at Parkhead. If they're playing each other, then they take it in turns to host with the stadium split 50:50.

---

Yup

The view is absolute ***** but there is something special about going there. Always feel goosebumps when I walk in.

I've said for years we will buy a new stadium cut price from Qatar after the 2022 WC. That stupid friendly at ER wasn't for nothing and they'll have 7 or 8 stadiums to spare after their farcical tournament.

Whether that stadium is then reconstructed at the current site or moved elsewhere is the question.

If Hampden was torn down would Celtic and Rangers get to keep their ends?

If I win the Euromiilions I'll make a contribution to a new National Stadium... but only if they promise to build it outside Glasgow and accessible by motorway and rail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KingDomofFife84

If Hampden was torn down would Celtic and Rangers get to keep their ends?

---

tbf Hibernian would need to be consulted to see if we wanted any part of the hibs end, we could maybe get some use of concrete for filling in the corners at ER, you just need to look at hertz to see the cost of tin is obviously much higher than good solid concrete

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pretty Boy

I've said for years we will buy a new stadium cut price from Qatar after the 2022 WC. That stupid friendly at ER wasn't for nothing and they'll have 7 or 8 stadiums to spare after their farcical tournament.

Whether that stadium is then reconstructed at the current site or moved elsewhere is the question.

---

That's not a bad shout

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eyrie

A game involving Celtc would be played at Ibrox and one involving Sevco at Parkhead. If they're playing each other, then they take it in turns to host with the stadium split 50:50.

---

So if they are both in the Semi final you think it's realistic each season to set out ticket plans and hosting etc in about a month depending if any get knocked out? If it was to happened it would have to be pre-determined at the start of each season and both they clubs would just get the money that wouldn't go to Hampden which wouldn't help either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pretty Boy

I've said for years we will buy a new stadium cut price from Qatar after the 2022 WC. That stupid friendly at ER wasn't for nothing and they'll have 7 or 8 stadiums to spare after their farcical tournament.

Whether that stadium is then reconstructed at the current site or moved elsewhere is the question.

---

How do they move the stadium from there to Glasgow? Interesting theory mind reminds me of taking my subbuteo stadium to my mates shan pitch only but on a better surface.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firestarter

So if they are both in the Semi final you think it's realistic each season to set out ticket plans and hosting etc in about a month depending if any get knocked out? If it was to happened it would have to be pre-determined at the start of each season and both they clubs would just get the money that wouldn't go to Hampden which wouldn't help either.

---

Why would it need to be done in one month when it's known what the arrangement would be? The only decision would be which plan to use to split the stadium and that would depend on their opponent (we'd be 50:50 but it could be one stand for a club with a smaller fan base).

Other grounds would be used when neither Celtc nor Sevco are involved - Easter Road would be a front runner for many of the central belt clubs. Murrayfield could be rented for a Hibs-Hearts game.

Do we really need a rarely used stadium just to provide a neutral venue for two groups of bigots to exchange vile taunts? The money saved on that white elephant could be invested in grass roots facilities to bring through better young players to improve the standard of our game.

National games can then be taken round the country and played at Pittodrie, Easter Road etc rather than forcing everyone to travel to Glasgow every time. After all, it's our national team and not our Glasgow team.

Knock down both ends, and bring them into behind the goals. Let the Hearys building people do it for us

A national sports arena for all sports with a good venue for concerts in the same complex just north of Falkirk where all the motorway networks converge is the answer. Build a rail extension and **** loads of parking. Easily accessible fior the majority of the population. Even the punters from up north don’t need to venture as far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenlex

A national sports arena for all sports with a good venue for concerts in the same complex just north of Falkirk where all the motorway networks converge is the answer. Build a rail extension and **** loads of parking. Easily accessible fior the majority of the population. Even the punters from up north don’t need to venture as far.

---

Almost agree. I would sell off both and murrayfield and build a national stadium as close to Bannockburn as possible. How much more "Scotland" could it be! Road and rail links could be upgraded for access from the whole of Scotland. Stirling uni has good sports facilities for training. Sadly doubt the political will exists at government level nor, I suspect, the governing bodies of the SFA and SRU have the guts to make such a huge change from the accepted format of Glasgow for football and Edinburgh for rugby. Love to be wrong though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pretty Boy

I've said for years we will buy a new stadium cut price from Qatar after the 2022 WC. That stupid friendly at ER wasn't for nothing and they'll have 7 or 8 stadiums to spare after their farcical tournament.

Whether that stadium is then reconstructed at the current site or moved elsewhere is the question.

---

This idea would have never crossed my mind, but it's definitely an interesting concept. If people are talking on this thread about £60-70m Hampdem revamps, how much do you think the idea of moving then reconstructing a Qatar stadium would cost? Genuinely curious as it's never crossed my mind!

No matter what they do, they’ll still have to have an end each for the bigot brothers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roc1

Almost agree. I would sell off both and murrayfield and build a national stadium as close to Bannockburn as possible. How much more "Scotland" could it be! Road and rail links could be upgraded for access from the whole of Scotland. Stirling uni has good sports facilities for training. Sadly doubt the political will exists at government level nor, I suspect, the governing bodies of the SFA and SRU have the guts to make such a huge change from the accepted format of Glasgow for football and Edinburgh for rugby. Love to be wrong though.

---

To be fair north of Falkirk isnt a boot in the arse of Bannockburn.

The owner of Queens Park must make a fortune renting it out to the SFA, SPFL and for concerts etc!

Ibrox, Celtic Park, Easter Road, Tynecastle and Murrayfield are all better equipped to host finals, semi finals and International games. Hampden is redundant and not fit for football in this day and age.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StevieCowan

Ibrox, Celtic Park, Easter Road, Tynecastle and Murrayfield are all better equipped to host finals, semi finals and International games. Hampden is redundant and not fit for football in this day and age.

---

You're going to have to run by me how ER and especially the pink ***** hole is better equipped to host football matches than Hampden? Even Ibrox is falling apart. Why give more money to Celtic and huns?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by .Sean.

The owner of Queens Park must make a fortune renting it out to the SFA, SPFL and for concerts etc!

---

Think it's Hampden Park Ltd who actually rent the stadium out, Queen's Park technically own it though as the original landlords (I think)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

Sadly you are probably right. But IMO Scotland needs to have a national stadium. Its true that countries like Germany and Spain share games around, but both countries have huge populations compared to Scotland and huge stadiums scattered all around the country, a luxury we certainly don't enjoy.

With Celtic and Sevco owning the only two stadiums capable of matching Hampden and the presence of at least one of them in every set of cup semi finals played, not to mention finals, the effect of having no national stadium would be as I said before to pump even more money into the coffers of the two clubs who are already miles in front of everybody else in spending power. If they have any regard for the general good of Scottish football its something the SFA and SPFL have to be worried about.

I've said it before ...... If the Scottish government were prepared to spend hundreds of millions on a glorified school sports day that subsequent studies have shown actually had no overall beneficial affects on the good health or prestige of the nation ... something they could have learned before the event by looking at the stats for previous commonwealth games and Olympics ... then there is no reason why they shouldn't get on board with helping to build this country a national football stadium we can be proud of and which is fit for purpose. They are quick enough to stick their nose in when it comes to using football for their own ends .... its time they did something to help it.

---

:top marks

Whatever happens with Hampden it gave both me and my brother who traveled through on 21st May 2016 the best footballing day of our lives as it did most of us Hi bees. Just wish those like my Dad who couldn't be there had been able to enjoy the day we won the Cup against the huns like we did. It was just magic. It may not be fit for the future but it will hold special memories like the day we won the Cup watching the Heroes.

GGTTH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenlex

A national sports arena for all sports with a good venue for concerts in the same complex just north of Falkirk where all the motorway networks converge is the answer. Build a rail extension and **** loads of parking. Easily accessible fior the majority of the population. Even the punters from up north don’t need to venture as far.

---

Nice idea but you wouldn't get support for **** loads of parking in the current political climate (pun intended).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pretty Boy

I've said for years we will buy a new stadium cut price from Qatar after the 2022 WC. That stupid friendly at ER wasn't for nothing and they'll have 7 or 8 stadiums to spare after their farcical tournament.

Whether that stadium is then reconstructed at the current site or moved elsewhere is the question.

---

I said the same thing on a previous thread relating to this subject ..... Qatar's bid was actually partly based on giving away the stadiums to other countries once the tournament was over. I presume that meant poor African countries and the like, but seeing as how most 'poor African countries' already have better national stadiums than Scotland whose to say we couldn't be in the running.

Hell, there's a good chance it could happen ... Imagine the mirth in the middle east if Scotland, part of the supposed 5th richest economy on the planet could make a better case for the charitable gift of a stadium than Ethiopia or Kenya.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eyrie

Nice idea but you wouldn't get support for **** loads of parking in the current political climate (pun intended).

---

It'd certainly be very very interesting indeed to find out which scottish politicians who are against cars in principle have homes with parking spaces/garages attached. If it was Brucie's deal or no deal I'd say above 50%?

GGTTH

Aside from the botched rebuild, the biggest missed opportunity was for the Commonwealth Games. The chance could have been taken to completely replicate how it worked for Manchester 2002 which resulted in a true world class football stadium on the back of an athletics stadium. Instead I suspect Glasgow's bid was only successful because it could be done on the cheap, just as Birmingham are finding out now.

The SFA are only threatening to leave Hampden to pressure the owners over the costs of upgrading and an anticipated rates hike. They certainly won't be pushing for a new stadium or a major rebuild.

Paul Lambert was on the radio saying the atmosphere at Celtic, Rangers and Aberdeen was much better in the campaign to get to France 98 but I guess a winning team also helps in that regard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LancashireHibby

Aside from the botched rebuild, the biggest missed opportunity was for the Commonwealth Games. The chance could have been taken to completely replicate how it worked for Manchester 2002 which resulted in a true world class football stadium on the back of an athletics stadium. Instead I suspect Glasgow's bid was only successful because it could be done on the cheap, just as Birmingham are finding out now.

---

Are Birmingham not the only bidder? I thought I heard the were and had still been knocked back as the bid was unacceptable. The deadline was extended till they upped their game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenlex

Are Birmingham not the only bidder? I thought I heard the were and had still been knocked back as the bid was unacceptable. The deadline was extended till they upped their game.

---

Liverpool were also going to bid but that would have involved building a new stadium so the government put forward Birmingham as the 'preferred bidder' as theirs involved just an upgrading of the existing athletics stadium rather than building a new one.

Hampden was a great place to be in 2016 and indeed 2007 but those in the media trying to link it with wonderful international games at the old Hampden are way off the mark.Other than the place there’s no connection between the grounds and therefore no great history to affect decisions on its future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ancient hibee

Hampden was a great place to be in 2016 and indeed 2007 but those in the media trying to link it with wonderful international games at the old Hampden are way off the mark.Other than the place there’s no connection between the grounds and therefore no great history to affect decisions on its future.

---

Oh I don't know, the legroom does suggest that it was designed using the average height of a man in the 1930's.

SFA should not be held to ransom, I would like to see a new stadium, failing that it should be moved between Parkhead, Ibrox and if the two uglies are in a final then Murrayfield.
On saying that, would we be held to ransom by the uglies. Mibbe a joint stadium venture between SRU and SFA would be a starter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phil MaGlass

SFA should not be held to ransom, I would like to see a new stadium, failing that it should be moved between Parkhead, Ibrox and if the two uglies are in a final then Murrayfield.
On saying that, would we be held to ransom by the uglies. Mibbe a joint stadium venture between SRU and SFA would be a starter.

---

SRU will quite rightly be looking after their own interests and undoubtedly take it in i such a situation. Credit to them for getting their house in order rather than the mess the SFA made with Hampden.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

With a decision whether or not to renew our commitment to the national stadium looming ever closer for the SFA what are folks thoughts on it?

It does seem logical to bin the whole thing and stick two fingers up to Queens Park, who own it but never put a penny into it, and take the internationals around the country, that is until you look at exactly what that will mean. Every game with any meaning will still be played in Glasgow, with the rest of the country getting meaningless friendlies or the busted flush qualifiers nobody wants to see and the ugly sisters dividing up the spoils from the games where there's real money to be made, including the league and Scottish cup finals, putting even more money into their pockets.

I can honestly also see a scenario where the venue for old firm semi finals or cup finals will be either decided on the toss of a coin or played on a two legged basis. I simply cant see police Scotland allowing them to play each other at the only other stadium capable of holding the game which is in Edinburgh, even if the police were ok with it the council would never sanction it IMO.

Taking all this into account I would say we simply have to do two things:

The first is to find a way to wrest control of Hampden from Queens Park .. rental for the stadium from the SFA, SPFL, concerts and other events goes into their company ... but any renovations to the stadium over the years has been paid for from grants and sponsorships only attained because of the involvement of football with the stadium ... when the pitch gets re laid for example I'm pretty sure the SFA pay for it, not Queens Park ..... its a farcical situation.

The second ... dependent on the first happening ... is for Scottish football to find a way to rebuild the stadium and take its capacity up to at least 60,000 ... Look at what they did to the Maracanã Stadium ... nothing fancy, they just built another basic one tier stadium but with the stands much closer to the pitch. That's all they need to do with Hampden, knock down the east, north and west stands and rebuild them much steeper and much closer to the pitch at both ends ... steepness means more height, but if they want the stands to be level all the way round all they need to do is lower the pitch and put another section in front of the south stand to bring it level with the others.

They could probably do the whole lot for 70 million quid and when you look at the money SKY and BT pump into the EPL and Champion's league I bet you could get them to put up at least 40 million of it for the naming rights .... the SKY Hampden park stadium would perhaps even appeal to them.

As you can see its a slow Sunday and I'm bored waiting for the Scotland game to start :greengrin ...... But in all seriousness, IMO allowing Hampden to pass into history would be a huge mistake.

---

It's had it's day. Time to move on

I really like the Swedish national stadium - Friends Arena I think it's called.

Smart design - with a roof and atmosphere is good.

It would be a massive boost to Scottish football if we have a national stadium to be proud of but instead nearly everyone in the country moans about Hampden.

Just imagine cup finals and semi finals with a better venue than Hampden. The only reason I like Ibrox for neutral venues is that it retains the noise when the stadium is split and looks good on TV etc when fans score.

Scotland has bigger issues than the national stadium but a revamp of the structure and a new bold plan to sort the national stadium would give fans and players something to look forward to if done properly to last for the future with good transport links etc. The only main issue is of course funding...

My opinion as a neutral is that it's a terrible stadium. That's all I have to say!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LancashireHibby

SRU will quite rightly be looking after their own interests and undoubtedly take it in i such a situation. Credit to them for getting their house in order rather than the mess the SFA made with Hampden.

---

I think, someone mentioned earlier on another thread, the SRU also have financial woes and Murrayfield is becoming a bit expensive to maintain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carheenlea

It's not the greatest stadium in the world, but not half as bad as some make out. One of footballs most famous venues and every Scottish football fan will have memories never to be forgotten, be that international or club. I hope we continue on at Hampden Park.

---

2 games - Scottish League Cup Final 1972-73 Hibernian 2 Septic 1 ! As a 11-12 year-old laddie, that game was just magical for me - even having my jeans splattered with the contents of a tossed can of Warm 'Pale Ale' when we scored the 2nd, couldn't take the smile off my face ! Still in the 70's - 1973 - Scotland 2 Czechoslovakia 1 - what a game, what a train-journey back to Edinburgh, what a day at school the morning after- 'BUZZING' just doesn't sum it up sufficiently enough ! In those days, a big game at Hampden WAS a joy to go to, even though it really was on it's last legs !. The WC Qualifier against Czechoslovakia, my mate and me were in the Hun-end and when Jim Holton equalised, the effect was like every single person in the stadium had lit-up a ciggie due to the 'Cinder/Ash' terracing taking a pounding from the absolutely ecstatic celebrations and the clouds of cinder/ash just billowed up - honestly, it took roughly 2-3 minutes before we could see the other end of the pitch !

Sadly, imho, the last 'Major redevelopement' ruined Hampden, I don't know how or why (perhaps the position/angle etc of the stands/roofs have affected Hampden 'acoustically' ??) but the level of noise just seems muted, it's certainly not the 'Hampden Roar' of old !. Maybe it's because the redevelopement was done on the cheap, I don't know, I'm certainly no architect but perhaps if the original redevelopement had been done in 1980, it would've been done properly but thanks to our old chums - THE HUN - who, as usual, out for themselves and themselves alone, scuppered it in an attempt to have all the big-games played at 'Greyskull' !

http://www.qpfc.com/hampden/hampden04.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phil MaGlass

I think, someone mentioned earlier on another thread, the SRU also have financial woes and Murrayfield is becoming a bit expensive to maintain.

---

Isn't that generally caused by them underwriting the Edinburgh and Glasgow pro clubs?

Burn it down down start again, disgrace of a National Stadium.....

... as long as we can have the goals that SDG scored the winner against the Huns on 21 May 2016. That is sacred ground :thumbsup:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Onion

Burn it down down start again, disgrace of a National Stadium.....

... as long as we can have the goals that SDG scored the winner against the Huns on 21 May 2016. That is sacred ground :thumbsup:.

---

I would happily buy the seat I was sitting in too if that helps fund a new ground should they go down that route.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lago

It's had it's day. Time to move on

---

I think we are all agreed on that mate .... the question is what do we move on to? Do we pump even more money into the ugly sisters coffers?

The other thing to think about and something I didn't consider before now is the affect on the psyche of Scottish football if we don't have a national stadium .... in the minds of the SFA its already all about the Glasgow giants .... if their stadiums became home for the national team and national cup finals it will go even further towards making the rest of us an afterthought.

One of the few things Scottish football still has that could be considered notable to the rest of the world is one of the worlds oldest and most historic football venues ... it holds a number of attendance records and has hosted a number of famous matches, not least Real Madrid v Eintracht Frankfurt back in the day. Its loss would just be another negative to the standing of our game, from this point of view there's a lot to be said for saving the place.

Don't get me wrong, if the alternative was a shiny new stadium elsewhere I wouldn't be against that, but I don't find the prospect of replacing Hampden with Parkhead and Ibrox in the least bit appealing or desirable.

How much would the sale of Hampden generate should that option be taken?

Is there scope for scrapping a national stadium but the SFA support the redevelopment of our club stadiums? I'm thinking about specifically filling the corners at ER/Tynie and the SFA subsidising Aberdeen's venture?

Having 30k stadiums in the capital and north of the country would help for the less glamorous cup and international games.

Would also generate more income for some clubs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenNWhiteArmy

How much would the sale of Hampden generate should that option be taken?

Is there scope for scrapping a national stadium but the SFA support the redevelopment of our club stadiums? I'm thinking about specifically filling the corners at ER/Tynie and the SFA subsidising Aberdeen's venture?
.

---

Best of luck trying to fill in the corners at Tynie! There ain't no corners to fill in with goalpost stands.

Why would SFA put money into a non compliant stadium anyway?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenNWhiteArmy

How much would the sale of Hampden generate should that option be taken?

Is there scope for scrapping a national stadium but the SFA support the redevelopment of our club stadiums? I'm thinking about specifically filling the corners at ER/Tynie and the SFA subsidising Aberdeen's venture?

Having 30k stadiums in the capital and north of the country would help for the less glamorous cup and international games.

Would also generate more income for some clubs.

---

I don't think the SFA own Hampden though I think it belongs to Queens Park.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenNWhiteArmy

How much would the sale of Hampden generate should that option be taken?

Is there scope for scrapping a national stadium but the SFA support the redevelopment of our club stadiums? I'm thinking about specifically filling the corners at ER/Tynie and the SFA subsidising Aberdeen's venture?

Having 30k stadiums in the capital and north of the country would help for the less glamorous cup and international games.

Would also generate more income for some clubs.

---

Financially makes sense but the old firm will still play finals in their own back yards and in one case at home in an old firm final. It’s a no from me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

I think we are all agreed on that mate .... the question is what do we move on to? Do we pump even more money into the ugly sisters coffers?

The other thing to think about and something I didn't consider before now is the affect on the psyche of Scottish football if we don't have a national stadium .... in the minds of the SFA its already all about the Glasgow giants .... if their stadiums became home for the national team and national cup finals it will go even further towards making the rest of us an afterthought.

One of the few things Scottish football still has that could be considered notable to the rest of the world is one of the worlds oldest and most historic football venues ... it holds a number of attendance records and has hosted a number of famous matches, not least Real Madrid v Eintracht Frankfurt back in the day. Its loss would just be another negative to the standing of our game, from this point of view there's a lot to be said for saving the place.

Don't get me wrong, if the alternative was a shiny new stadium elsewhere I wouldn't be against that, but I don't find the prospect of replacing Hampden with Parkhead and Ibrox in the least bit appealing or desirable.

---

I wouldn’t want finals played at other Glasgow grounds but there really is nothing at Hampden to connect it with past glories.

Hampden's fine. We play there at the very max a couple times a year not every other week.

Theres nothing better than the early train through, few drinks and soaking up the atmosphere before a big semi/ final through there. Ibrox and Celtic Park wouldn't be the same plus sack giving Celtic or Rangers any more money.

Can you honestly imagine a Scottish Cup Final in some nondescript field on the outskirts of Perth or Stirling? Total pish.

Hampden is what it is, and the views from behind the goals are nowhere near as bad as some make out. Only in Scotland would you get supporters moaning about the view they need to 'endure' for all of 90 minutes while being lucky enough to watch their team in the latter stages of a national cup competition. Some supporters never get to see their teams play in finals and semi's yet you've got folk whining cause they're sitting twenty yards behind the byeline. Oh the hardship.

Murrayfield

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by .Sean.

Hampden's fine. We play there at the very max a couple times a year not every other week.

Theres nothing better than the early train through, few drinks and soaking up the atmosphere before a big semi/ final through there. Ibrox and Celtic Park wouldn't be the same plus sack giving Celtic or Rangers any more money.

Can you honestly imagine a Scottish Cup Final in some nondescript field on the outskirts of Perth or Stirling? Total pish.

Hampden is what it is, and the views from behind the goals are nowhere near as bad as some make out. Only in Scotland would you get supporters moaning about the view they need to 'endure' for all of 90 minutes while being lucky enough to watch their team in the latter stages of a national cup competition. Some supporters never get to see their teams play in finals and semi's yet you've got folk whining cause they're sitting twenty yards behind the byeline. Oh the hardship.

---

:top marks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by .Sean.

Hampden's fine. We play there at the very max a couple times a year not every other week.

Theres nothing better than the early train through, few drinks and soaking up the atmosphere before a big semi/ final through there. Ibrox and Celtic Park wouldn't be the same plus sack giving Celtic or Rangers any more money.

Can you honestly imagine a Scottish Cup Final in some nondescript field on the outskirts of Perth or Stirling? Total pish.

Hampden is what it is, and the views from behind the goals are nowhere near as bad as some make out. Only in Scotland would you get supporters moaning about the view they need to 'endure' for all of 90 minutes while being lucky enough to watch their team in the latter stages of a national cup competition. Some supporters never get to see their teams play in finals and semi's yet you've got folk whining cause they're sitting twenty yards behind the byeline. Oh the hardship.

---

Word for word spot on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by .Sean.

Hampden's fine. We play there at the very max a couple times a year not every other week.

Theres nothing better than the early train through, few drinks and soaking up the atmosphere before a big semi/ final through there. Ibrox and Celtic Park wouldn't be the same plus sack giving Celtic or Rangers any more money.

Can you honestly imagine a Scottish Cup Final in some nondescript field on the outskirts of Perth or Stirling? Total pish.

Hampden is what it is, and the views from behind the goals are nowhere near as bad as some make out. Only in Scotland would you get supporters moaning about the view they need to 'endure' for all of 90 minutes while being lucky enough to watch their team in the latter stages of a national cup competition. Some supporters never get to see their teams play in finals and semi's yet you've got folk whining cause they're sitting twenty yards behind the byeline. Oh the hardship.

---

I agree with much of that. But I think the issue with Hampden is not even so much the state of it as the deal the SFA have with Hampden Park Ltd to rent it. As I've said before its a fact that Hampden is only still usable as a national stadium because the owners have been able to attract grants and sponsorship on the back of the SFA and SPFL using it, without football it would be little more than a rarely used concert venue and they would find it next to impossible to keep it maintained, far less pay for any upgrades.

This is why Hampden's future is now in doubt .... You can understand why the SFA and SPFL are at the point of asking 'why the hell are we paying so much to rent a stadium that only exists because of us?' and more to the point, why should Scottish football make any attempt to stay at the stadium under these circumstances, let alone spend time, money and effort on any project to give the stadium the revamp it so badly needs ... saying its bearable for 90 minutes a couple of times a year is fine, but that doesn't detract from the fact that its lagging miles behind its equivalents in England, Wales and Ireland and there are clubs around Europe who have and are building stadiums that make it look like a 1970s hovel in comparison.

Queens park have been taking the piss for years ...... They are a club engrained in the history of Scottish football but clearly have little interest in its wellbeing, even to the point where they screw up the pitch inside the stadium they haven't paid for because they are too up themselves to use lesser Hampden for their games which are attended by about 300 people.

Its time the SFA called their bluff and put it to them that they either enter into an agreement that gives the SFA control of the stadium or they bolt .... The SFA must know that without them the stadium is doomed and more to the point Queens Park must know it as well. There are three scenarios here:

The SFA / SPFL renew the current deal ....... The stadium remains a dump and nobody gains apart from Queens Park.

The SFA / SPFL withdraw altogether ...... within 20 years the stadium becomes a housing scheme.

The SFA /SPFL enter into an agreement that gives them control of the stadium ..... That not only gives them scope to investigate ways to revamp it, in the long run events like concerts will put money into the coffers of Scottish football rather than Hampden park Ltd.

I would love to see a breakdown of exactly how Hampden operates .... Does it make a profit and if it does where does that money go? How much of it is used to maintain the stadium and how much of it goes into folks pockets? It should be noted that 17 years ago the stadium was a baw hair from liquidation, which the owners blamed on failure to quickly reach an agreement with the SFA on a rental agreement ... nuff said !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by .Sean.

Hampden's fine. We play there at the very max a couple times a year not every other week.

Theres nothing better than the early train through, few drinks and soaking up the atmosphere before a big semi/ final through there. Ibrox and Celtic Park wouldn't be the same plus sack giving Celtic or Rangers any more money.

Can you honestly imagine a Scottish Cup Final in some nondescript field on the outskirts of Perth or Stirling? Total pish.

Hampden is what it is, and the views from behind the goals are nowhere near as bad as some make out. Only in Scotland would you get supporters moaning about the view they need to 'endure' for all of 90 minutes while being lucky enough to watch their team in the latter stages of a national cup competition. Some supporters never get to see their teams play in finals and semi's yet you've got folk whining cause they're sitting twenty yards behind the byeline. Oh the hardship.

---

Quite. Hampden is where cup finals and certainly big Scotland games should always be played.

Finito for me. Chat of a national stadium built on the greenbelt in some central Scotland retail park because it's "easier to park" or whatever. Naw.

Probably some tweaking to be done on the rental deal, about which I confess to knowing zip, and the place could do with a new lick of paint perhaps.

But it's Hampden and should always remain so.

Hampden cost more to build that the millennium stadium. It has more seats and roof. Hate Hampden

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicho87

Hampden cost more to build that the millennium stadium. It has more seats and roof. Hate Hampden

---

Hampden sums up everything that is wrong with Scottish football the blazers have an impressive main stand while the fans get seats put into the terracing with appalling sight lines and miles from the pitch. Atrocious stadium especially in comparison to the Millenium stadium.

If Queens Park do own the holding company then the SFA should offer the ultimatum that we’re off to build a new stadium or use Murrayfield/Ibrox/Parkhead unless they sign the stadium over to the SFA. Pay them a small upfront fee, give them 10 years of rent free match day use of the stadium but stipulate that 3 weeks before any Internationals or cup games they have to play at Lesser Hampden and also agree to renovate Lesser Hampden before the 10 year point at which they have to make that their permanent home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus_Hibs

If people are talking on this thread about £60-70m Hampdem revamps, how much do you think the idea of moving then reconstructing a Qatar stadium would cost? Genuinely curious as it's never crossed my mind!

---

Logistical nightmare. Leith Street's been closed for ages just to move The King James hotel to Gorgie.

Knock down behind the goals and build two tier stands closer to the pitch. Add a tier above north and thats it done. Stuttgart managed it for 70m euros when they renovated the Mercedes-Benz Arena

Before
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...adion-2007.jpg

After
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4379/3...7b1dbec7_b.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scott_b_

Knock down behind the goals and build two tier stands closer to the pitch. Add a tier above north and thats it done. Stuttgart managed it for 70m euros when they renovated the Mercedes-Benz Arena

Before
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...adion-2007.jpg

After
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4379/3...7b1dbec7_b.jpg

---

I think that would be the best idea.

But still a pretty big project but do 1 end first then other and it should keep disruption to a minimum.

You wonder if they plan to ever use the stadium for athletics again?

Concerts could still take place as views and access would be better if required.

As a poster stated about - is there anyway finding out the agreement and money spent / used to rent the stadium and what it generates ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by City of Green

I think that would be the best idea.

But still a pretty big project but do 1 end first then other and it should keep disruption to a minimum.

You wonder if they plan to ever use the stadium for athletics again?

Concerts could still take place as views and access would be better if required.

As a poster stated about - is there anyway finding out the agreement and money spent / used to rent the stadium and what it generates ?

---

Won’t be anything done before 2020, as it’s a venue for Euro 2020

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billy Whizz

Won’t be anything done before 2020, as it’s a venue for Euro 2020

---

UEFA continuing to accept Hampden as a venue for finals and now the Euros doesn't do us any favours. But its indicative of how the blazers at all levels see the ordinary fans ... so long as the south stand is ok for their jollies who cares about the poor views and crap facilities in the rest of the stadium.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

UEFA continuing to accept Hampden as a venue for finals and now the Euros doesn't do us any favours. But its indicative of how the blazers at all levels see the ordinary fans ... so long as the south stand is ok for their jollies who cares about the poor views and crap facilities in the rest of the stadium.

---

What facilities does one require for the odd one of game that Hampden doesn't provide? A pie stand for grub to help soak up the bevvy and a pisser at half-time? The view directly behind the goal can be pish granted but its not quite central park that some are making it out to be!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by high bee

If Queens Park do own the holding company then the SFA should offer the ultimatum that we’re off to build a new stadium or use Murrayfield/Ibrox/Parkhead unless they sign the stadium over to the SFA. Pay them a small upfront fee, give them 10 years of rent free match day use of the stadium but stipulate that 3 weeks before any Internationals or cup games they have to play at Lesser Hampden and also agree to renovate Lesser Hampden before the 10 year point at which they have to make that their permanent home.

---

One thing is certain .The SFA don’t have the money to build a new stadium.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scott_b_

Knock down behind the goals and build two tier stands closer to the pitch. Add a tier above north and thats it done. Stuttgart managed it for 70m euros when they renovated the Mercedes-Benz Arena

Before
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...adion-2007.jpg

After
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4379/3...7b1dbec7_b.jpg

---

What about just lowering the pitch and building new seating between existing and lower pitch level??

Knock 3/4 of the stadium down and building stands with decent views of the pitch and closer, with a sliding room of course 😂😂

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

I agree with much of that. But I think the issue with Hampden is not even so much the state of it as the deal the SFA have with Hampden Park Ltd to rent it. As I've said before its a fact that Hampden is only still usable as a national stadium because the owners have been able to attract grants and sponsorship on the back of the SFA and SPFL using it, without football it would be little more than a rarely used concert venue and they would find it next to impossible to keep it maintained, far less pay for any upgrades.

This is why Hampden's future is now in doubt .... You can understand why the SFA and SPFL are at the point of asking 'why the hell are we paying so much to rent a stadium that only exists because of us?' and more to the point, why should Scottish football make any attempt to stay at the stadium under these circumstances, let alone spend time, money and effort on any project to give the stadium the revamp it so badly needs ... saying its bearable for 90 minutes a couple of times a year is fine, but that doesn't detract from the fact that its lagging miles behind its equivalents in England, Wales and Ireland and there are clubs around Europe who have and are building stadiums that make it look like a 1970s hovel in comparison.

Queens park have been taking the piss for years ...... They are a club engrained in the history of Scottish football but clearly have little interest in its wellbeing, even to the point where they screw up the pitch inside the stadium they haven't paid for because they are too up themselves to use lesser Hampden for their games which are attended by about 300 people.

Its time the SFA called their bluff and put it to them that they either enter into an agreement that gives the SFA control of the stadium or they bolt .... The SFA must know that without them the stadium is doomed and more to the point Queens Park must know it as well. There are three scenarios here:

The SFA / SPFL renew the current deal ....... The stadium remains a dump and nobody gains apart from Queens Park.

The SFA / SPFL withdraw altogether ...... within 20 years the stadium becomes a housing scheme.

The SFA /SPFL enter into an agreement that gives them control of the stadium ..... That not only gives them scope to investigate ways to revamp it, in the long run events like concerts will put money into the coffers of Scottish football rather than Hampden park Ltd.

I would love to see a breakdown of exactly how Hampden operates .... Does it make a profit and if it does where does that money go? How much of it is used to maintain the stadium and how much of it goes into folks pockets? It should be noted that 17 years ago the stadium was a baw hair from liquidation, which the owners blamed on failure to quickly reach an agreement with the SFA on a rental agreement ... nuff said !

---

How are Queen's Park "taking the piss"? They own the stadium because they bought it and developed it over many years. It's not theirs by chance. They've got every right to charge a rent that will help cover costs. They're not owned by anyone other than the members - fan ownership since 1867 is pretty impressive - and no individual is making a profit from this. Queen's are pretty much a model club for community football running a host of teams for all ages and promoting football in a wide area. You're painting them like some ogres screwing money out of football and that's nonsense. Unlike almost every other club (including ours) they are non-profit making with every penny going back into football through the practical set up or maintaining the ground. What makes you think it "goes into folk's pockets"?

In the late 70s we were on target for a completely rebuilt Hampden until the Thatcher government came along and pulled the funding plug to the loud applause of those who were rebuilding Ibrox and saw the potential for a cash cow (not the plastic Tynecastle type) and the then Glasgow District Council (who were said by many to be the political wing of Celtic).

The SFA and SPFL are perfectly free to take their custom where they want if they can find a better deal somewhere but the idea that they're somehow being held to ransom by Queen's Park is a myth perpetuated best by those who want to see the revenue for international and neutral games monopolised by the sinister sisters of Ibrox and Parkhead.

I'd love to see more of these games taken round the country including to ER but there is still a crying need for a neutral national venue that doesn't fill the money chests of the combined forces of darkness and unless someone's serious about building a new one Hampden is the best we've got by a long way.

I wish it was bigger and I wish the seats were raised a bit steeper but the sight lines and distance from pitch are better than many large stadia in Europe and with a full crowd in the atmosphere can still be brilliant (eg. 21/5/16).

Instead of throwing unfounded accusations at Queen's Park they should be applauded both for their custodianship of Hampden and also for staying clear of the bigotry temptation whilst they were shaping so much of the Scottish game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cropley10

What about just lowering the pitch and building new seating between existing and lower pitch level??

---

I can't envision that being the simpler solution. That would be a deep hole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenfly

How are Queen's Park "taking the piss"? They own the stadium because they bought it and developed it over many years. It's not theirs by chance. They've got every right to charge a rent that will help cover costs. They're not owned by anyone other than the members - fan ownership since 1867 is pretty impressive - and no individual is making a profit from this. Queen's are pretty much a model club for community football running a host of teams for all ages and promoting football in a wide area. You're painting them like some ogres screwing money out of football and that's nonsense. Unlike almost every other club (including ours) they are non-profit making with every penny going back into football through the practical set up or maintaining the ground. What makes you think it "goes into folk's pockets"?

In the late 70s we were on target for a completely rebuilt Hampden until the Thatcher government came along and pulled the funding plug to the loud applause of those who were rebuilding Ibrox and saw the potential for a cash cow (not the plastic Tynecastle type) and the then Glasgow District Council (who were said by many to be the political wing of Celtic).

The SFA and SPFL are perfectly free to take their custom where they want if they can find a better deal somewhere but the idea that they're somehow being held to ransom by Queen's Park is a myth perpetuated best by those who want to see the revenue for international and neutral games monopolised by the sinister sisters of Ibrox and Parkhead.

I'd love to see more of these games taken round the country including to ER but there is still a crying need for a neutral national venue that doesn't fill the money chests of the combined forces of darkness and unless someone's serious about building a new one Hampden is the best we've got by a long way.

I wish it was bigger and I wish the seats were raised a bit steeper but the sight lines and distance from pitch are better than many large stadia in Europe and with a full crowd in the atmosphere can still be brilliant (eg. 21/5/16).

Instead of throwing unfounded accusations at Queen's Park they should be applauded both for their custodianship of Hampden and also for staying clear of the bigotry temptation whilst they were shaping so much of the Scottish game.

---

My beef with Queens Park is that their continued ownership of the stadium is a nonsense .... without the input of the SFA and SPFL over the years the place would have been a housing estate by now, or at the very least a crumbling ruin. Any money made available to it from public funds or sponsorship has been on the back of the stadiums connection with the Scottish national team and major cup finals and absolutely nothing to do with Queens Park .... on that basis the fact that they still own it and make the SFA and SPFL pay for the privilege of using it is a joke in my opinion.

You might be impressed with their custodianship of the stadium, I'm not. Thatcher might have pulled the plug on the redevelopment, but that was over 25 years ago, in the time since then they have built the millennium stadium ( with 46 million quid from the national lottery funding nearly half of it ) Wembley stadium has been constructed ( with nearly 300 million coming from the national lottery and local public funds ) and the AVIVA stadium in Dublin has been built. Not to mention Murrayfield, a far more impressive stadium with not a single penny of lottery or government money. I think the time to stop blaming Thatcher for the current state of Hampden has long passed. The last meaningful development at the stadium was 20 years ago.


They missed an absolute open goal when the Commonwealth games were going to be held there. The Scottish government and Glasgow city council between them spent between 500 and 600 million pounds ( even more by some accounts ) on the games. They were so desperate to see the games come to Glasgow they even went so far as to forcibly remove folk from their homes to make way for athletes accommodation.

They spent all that money and yet the one venue the games simply couldn't have taken place without, Hampden Park, emerged from the whole massively expensive process looking exactly the same and with the same facilities it started with, in spite of having an eye watering 14 million pounds spent on it to install a raised running track ..... That to me was a totally missed opportunity, they could have at the very least squeezed a promise out of the powers that be to commit to funding demolition and rebuilding of the east and west terraces after the games were finished, the cost of which would still have been a drop in the ocean compared to the massive amount of public money spent overall.

I'm sure Queens Park are a fine institution as a football club and do oodles for the community ..... as a business running what is supposed to be our national stadium they are not fit for purpose in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

They spent all that money and yet the one venue the games simply couldn't have taken place without, Hampden Park, emerged from the whole massively expensive process looking exactly the same and with the same facilities it started with, in spite of having an eye watering 14 million pounds spent on it to install a raised running track .....

---

If you’ve been to Hampden in the last five years, you would know the north stand was expanded for the Commonwealth Games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYHibby

If you’ve been to Hampden in the last five years, you would know the north stand was expanded for the Commonwealth Games.

---

I've been to all but two of Hibs visits to Hampden since 1979 and one of them was the Dunfermline replay which nobody went to :greengrin

The corporate facilities in the north stand were there before the games, but may have been tarted up for the occasion I suppose. If that's not what you are talking about I'm scratching my head to see where this expansion took place ..... according to Wikipedia 10 rows of seats were removed from the north stand for the games, reducing its capacity, and then reinstated afterwards. What was the expansion and how many seats did it add to the capacity making the post Commonwealth games stadium bigger than the pre games stadium? I'm not having a go, its a genuine question because for the life of me I haven't noticed it on my visits to the stadium.

Ditch it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

My beef with Queens Park is that their continued ownership of the stadium is a nonsense .... without the input of the SFA and SPFL over the years the place would have been a housing estate by now, or at the very least a crumbling ruin. Any money made available to it from public funds or sponsorship has been on the back of the stadiums connection with the Scottish national team and major cup finals and absolutely nothing to do with Queens Park .... on that basis the fact that they still own it and make the SFA and SPFL pay for the privilege of using it is a joke in my opinion.

You might be impressed with their custodianship of the stadium, I'm not. Thatcher might have pulled the plug on the redevelopment, but that was over 25 years ago, in the time since then they have built the millennium stadium ( with 46 million quid from the national lottery funding nearly half of it ) Wembley stadium has been constructed ( with nearly 300 million coming from the national lottery and local public funds ) and the AVIVA stadium in Dublin has been built. Not to mention Murrayfield, a far more impressive stadium with not a single penny of lottery or government money. I think the time to stop blaming Thatcher for the current state of Hampden has long passed. The last meaningful development at the stadium was 20 years ago.


They missed an absolute open goal when the Commonwealth games were going to be held there. The Scottish government and Glasgow city council between them spent between 500 and 600 million pounds ( even more by some accounts ) on the games. They were so desperate to see the games come to Glasgow they even went so far as to forcibly remove folk from their homes to make way for athletes accommodation.

They spent all that money and yet the one venue the games simply couldn't have taken place without, Hampden Park, emerged from the whole massively expensive process looking exactly the same and with the same facilities it started with, in spite of having an eye watering 14 million pounds spent on it to install a raised running track ..... That to me was a totally missed opportunity, they could have at the very least squeezed a promise out of the powers that be to commit to funding demolition and rebuilding of the east and west terraces after the games were finished, the cost of which would still have been a drop in the ocean compared to the massive amount of public money spent overall.

I'm sure Queens Park are a fine institution as a football club and do oodles for the community ..... as a business running what is supposed to be our national stadium they are not fit for purpose in my opinion.

---

I still can't understand why Queen's Park's absolutely legitimate ownership of a Hampden is such "a nonsense" nor why them wanting to charge a rent to anyone who wants to hire it offends you so much. They're perfectly entitled to rent out their asset at an agreed price. Presumably if the price wasn't competitive the SFA / SPFL etc. would be speaking to Celtic, Rangers (the) or the SRU to negotiate an alternative. QP don't make profit for any shareholder or line anyone's pockets as you suggested but they aren't a charity so of course they charge for renting out their ground. How else do they fund its upkeep for these events?

You're right to point out that other (and undoubtedly better stadia) have been built in other countries with vast lottery and other public funds in recent years. This underlines how underfunded Hampden has been from these pots in comparison. Yet you think it's bizarre that they charge rent to the football authorities for hiring it.

You're also right to speak of investment for a one off event by different levels of government as a missed opportunity but it was missed by the Scottish Govt and Glasgow Council, not by QP, who have historically spent an enormous sum on the creation and upkeep of Hampden. Do you think they should have held both of these public bodies to ransom? That's what you're accusing Queens of doing to Scottish football.

I think we can agree that we all deserve better than Hampden as it stands but whether that's a rebuild on site, a new build elsewhere (highly unlikely given the funding restraints you rightly point out) or simply alternating between Ibrox and Parkhead for all big games (please, no!), I still thing that Queen's Park as a club are not the culprits here and should not be accused of "taking the piss".

Incidentally, the reason why the North Stand can't be radically re-profiled was, at the time of the renovation, that the roof wasn't allowed to be higher. I think this was for daylight reaching the houses opposite. I doubt if that will have changed. I would be surprised (though can't be certain) if the same restriction applied to the east and west ends. ie. I think they could expand both of these is funding was there.

Article in today's record;

Queen's Park president warns SFA that Hampden exit for national team would leave Spiders on the brink

Alan Hutchison expects an answer from Stewart Regan before the end of the year on whether they will renew the current lease that expires in 2020.


Queen's Park president Alan Hutchison has warned the SFA that taking Scotland games away from Hampden would leave the country’s oldest club on the financial brink.
The Spiders chief expects an answer from Stewart Regan before the end of the year on whether they will renew the current lease that expires in 2020.


The SFA took out a 20-year rent deal - at £800,000 a year - after the £60 million Hampden rebuild with most of the cash paying of Queen’s Park debts.



Hampden has been home to Scottish football for 114 years and while Hutchison knows the decision will be based mainly on money, he hopes there is an element of sentiment.

Will Scotland move on? Regan hired a consultancy firm to investigate the pros and cons of a switch, which would mean taking national cup semi-finals and finals to other venues along with Scotland games.
Hutchison, in his second term as Queen’s Prak president, is deeply concerned and fears for the Spiders future and the Old Lady of Mount Florida if the SFA decide to relocate.
He was at Hampden last week as Queen’s Park were inducted into the Scottish Football Hall of Fame in the League One club’s 150th anniversary year.



SFA president Alan McRae presented Hutchison with the award yet couldn’t offer any hint at what way the decision will go that could have a huge bearing on Queen’s Park’s future.

Hutchison said: “The lease is up in 2020. We are having talks and have had for months. Nothing is decided yet.

“I gather the SFA board will state its position by the end of the year. There are so many options available to them.
“I hope they will stay. If they don’t stay it will not be good news for Queen’s Park. The football club would have to examine its finances very carefully.

“Since this version of Hampden was opened in 1903, Queens Park have relied on the income for its business model, whether run by ourselves or for the last 17 years by the SFA on the leasing agreement.
“If Queen’s Park did not have the income Hampden brings then Queen’s Park would not be able to operate our youth programmes and community programmes in the manner we currently do"

“Our model would have to change and then it would come down to what happens to this stadium. I don’t know the answer.

“At the end of the day it comes down to money but I’d like to think the history of Queen’s Park, what we have done for the game and what we continue to do might count for something.
“I’d hope we’d retain some degree of affection and support throughout the Scottish game. Is there a moral obligation to stay? I wouldn’t use the word moral in connection to football.
“I’ve supported Queens since 1960. A friend of mine gave me his scrapbook with pieces in about the financial troubles Queens got into because of the then modernisation of Hampden when they put in floodlights and it occurred to me that some things never change.”
Hampden has been slated for a lack of atmosphere and the state of the pitch but Hutchison still believes, when full, it is the best place for Scotland games and, on a weekend that will see the League Cup semi-finals staged there, national cups.
He said: “A lot of the criticism is unjustified. If you were at the England game or the Slovakia game there was no doubt that when Hampden is full the atmosphere is terrific

“In fact Harry Kane said something about it after the game. Criticism of parking and access are unjustified.

“There are three train stations, plenty of buses, roads to get in and out, parking is no worse than at any of the big stadiums in Glasgow.
“Yes, you have an oval stadium and some of the seats will be far away from the park but if you didn’t have an oval stadium you wouldn’t have got the Commonwealth Games and the investment that brought in to the city and the country.
“From a personal point of view, I think Scotland should have a national stadium. I accept if you have games that you’ll not attract big crowds then yes the atmosphere suffers.
“You can take them elsewhere which does happen. But for the important internationals, Scotland should be at Hampden and for the cup finals as well. The neutrality of Hampden is extremely important."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYHibby

If you’ve been to Hampden in the last five years, you would know the north stand was expanded for the Commonwealth Games.

---

Only the facilities at the rear. The stand itself is exactly the same size and capacity.

A new Scotland Stadium venue needs to be constructed out of any large urban area, where there is good rail and motorway links, with ample parking around the Stadium not up side streets or derelict areas ( I will never forgive the SFA for turning down Leyland Bathgate Site).

The area West of Falkirk and just South of Stirling would be ideal, great motorway and rail links from all over Scotland, and it is not heavily populated so would give the area a lift.

But as usual it has nothing to do with logic its all about Glasgow being the home of Scottish Football!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenfly

I still can't understand why Queen's Park's absolutely legitimate ownership of a Hampden is such "a nonsense" nor why them wanting to charge a rent to anyone who wants to hire it offends you so much. They're perfectly entitled to rent out their asset at an agreed price. Presumably if the price wasn't competitive the SFA / SPFL etc. would be speaking to Celtic, Rangers (the) or the SRU to negotiate an alternative. QP don't make profit for any shareholder or line anyone's pockets as you suggested but they aren't a charity so of course they charge for renting out their ground. How else do they fund its upkeep for these events?

You're right to point out that other (and undoubtedly better stadia) have been built in other countries with vast lottery and other public funds in recent years. This underlines how underfunded Hampden has been from these pots in comparison. Yet you think it's bizarre that they charge rent to the football authorities for hiring it.

You're also right to speak of investment for a one off event by different levels of government as a missed opportunity but it was missed by the Scottish Govt and Glasgow Council, not by QP, who have historically spent an enormous sum on the creation and upkeep of Hampden. Do you think they should have held both of these public bodies to ransom? That's what you're accusing Queens of doing to Scottish football.

I think we can agree that we all deserve better than Hampden as it stands but whether that's a rebuild on site, a new build elsewhere (highly unlikely given the funding restraints you rightly point out) or simply alternating between Ibrox and Parkhead for all big games (please, no!), I still thing that Queen's Park as a club are not the culprits here and should not be accused of "taking the piss".

Incidentally, the reason why the North Stand can't be radically re-profiled was, at the time of the renovation, that the roof wasn't allowed to be higher. I think this was for daylight reaching the houses opposite. I doubt if that will have changed. I would be surprised (though can't be certain) if the same restriction applied to the east and west ends. ie. I think they could expand both of these is funding was there.

---

It depends on your perspective. Queens Park would have absolutely no prospect of keeping Hampden going without the SFA and SPFL, outwith them they have no prospect of financing the stadium, as proved by their plea in the papers this week.

I stand by my point of view that their continued ownership of the ground, far from being a good thing, has and is holding it back, I'm not disputing their legal right to own it, their moral right to do so is far from clear, at least to me. Should Queens Park have held the Scottish government and Glasgow council to ransom over the Commonwealth games? ... absolutely, that would have made perfect business sense and its a different ball game from squeezing money out of their only tenant.

The Commonwealth games were a one off event and unlike the SFA / SPFL who have the option to remove their custom from Hampden Holyrood and GCC only had one option available if they wanted the games to come to Scotland / Glasgow and that was Hampden. The cost of building a brand new stadium was out of the question, because unlike the Manchester games stadium or the Olympic stadium in London there was absolutely no chance of finding a tenant or owner after the games for a 40,000 capacity athletics stadium.

The overall amount of money Holyrood and GCC were prepared to spend on the games has to be taken into consideration here, it was hundreds of millions of pounds. With a commitment of that magnitude I think Queens Park were in an extremely strong bargaining position when it came to persuading the politicians to commit to redeveloping the east and west ends of the stadium post games as part of the much trumpeted Commonwealth games 'legacy' ..... This 'legacy' being the only justification for the enormous amount of public money being spent.

Hampden was the fulcrum on which the games depended, no Hampden, no games .... in view of which why did Hampden not benefit one iota as a stadium from this 'legacy'? It was no skin off the nose of football if the games didn't take place, hell football isn't even a Commonwealth games sport. They spent 113 million quid on an F'ing Velodrome because we had one guy who was good on a bike, which apart from cycling is currently used for those massive Scottish sports Basketball and Badminton .... so don't tell me Queens Park couldn't have squeezed 50 million quid out of them for a Hampden redevelopment .... the fact that they couldn't tells me everything I need to know about Queens Park's custodianship of Hampden Park.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keekaboo

Only the facilities at the rear. The stand itself is exactly the same size and capacity.

---

Yeah they bolted a glass curtain wall on the back. It's now world class.