The final World Cup game at Hampden? - Page 11 - TA specific - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

The final World Cup game at Hampden?


Toepoke

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, macy37 said:

It’s relevant in the fact that it isn’t actually a good stadium and is in UEFA eyes the 3rd ranked in the city. 

Also where it’s ranked by fans.

Is Hampden and Ibrox not the only two stadiums in Scotland to have UEFA 5 star Elite status? With Celtic Park falling short of this due to the size of the changing rooms, tunnel area and media facilities in the main stand at Celtic Park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, wanderer said:

Is Hampden and Ibrox not the only two stadiums in Scotland to have UEFA 5 star Elite status? With Celtic Park falling short of this due to the size of the changing rooms, tunnel area and media facilities in the main stand at Celtic Park.

That's correct. Parkhead never achieved 5 star status. That system is now obsolete, so they never will. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2017 at 1:49 AM, SpiderAlba said:

Toepoke has correctly pointed out a few times that a burn still runs beneath Hampden Park. 

The pitch cannot be lowered any further.

You honestly think if there was a will, the Engineers of Scotland couldnt re route the Burn.        FFS we straightened the Clyde a few years back to move it where we wanted. 

 

The burn under the ground is not an excuse for the lowering of the pitch. 

If thats what we wanted to do, we would do it..

Edited by stocky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/12/2017 at 9:49 AM, stocky said:

You honestly think if there was a will, the Engineers of Scotland couldnt re route the Burn.        FFS we straightened the Clyde a few years back to move it where we wanted. 

The burn under the ground is not an excuse for the lowering of the pitch. 

If thats what we wanted to do, we would do it..

Whilst it could be done, it would cost a feckin eye watering amount of tax payers money and would involve significant disruption to housing and businesses in the locality as gas, electricity and water services would probably also be affected.

It wouldn't be worth the huge cost is all I'm saying.

The best we can do is bring the stands in I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Caledonian Craig said:

And who exactly is going to pay for that? Alterations to an already top notch stadium is never going to be funded by lottery grants or governments.

We'll hold a raffle and have bucket collection at the next international.

Problem solved :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 17/12/2017 at 5:04 AM, Caledonian Craig said:

Lets end this talk of rebuilding Hampden because IT WON'T HAPPEN.

Funding is not there and wouldn't be given. Why would it? It is a Grade A stadium which UEFA have chosen to host Champions League Finals and other club finals. It has hosted domestic finals and Commonwealth Games - that says it all. It is regarded as a premier stadium as is and not meriting funding for a revamp.

Correct. It’s an outstanding stadium.

No reason to move anywhere or spend a penny. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite having 4 star status now (5 star in the old days), it's not a great ground to visit as a fan. It has obvious deficiencies: very shallow terraces that make it difficult to see over folk, being a fair way from the park particularly behind the goals, poor atmospherics.

 

However, despite all this, we will not move. The Scottish FA get a reasonably good deal at Hampden, which they are unlikely to get elsewhere.

 

Ideally we would stay and see a fully redeveloped Hampden Park, however it is very unlikely. There is little appetite in corporate Scotland to plough money into football and the governments can happily point to the high stadium rating.

 

The Scottish FA could surprise us and press for something better at Hampden but not going to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎09‎/‎01‎/‎2018 at 8:58 PM, BucksburnDandy said:

 It has obvious deficiencies: very shallow terraces that make it difficult to see over folk

There are modern stadia, which are even worse for that.

The Emirates (when we played our Brazil match) and Wembley are both dreadfully shallow on the lower tiers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Rich NATA said:

There are modern stadia, which are even worse for that.

The Emirates (when we played our Brazil match) and Wembley are both dreadfully shallow on the lower tiers.

 

I missed the game at the Emirates but on both occasions at the new Wembley, I've been in the bottom tier and you are correct. Poorly done.

 

I'm of an average height, about 5 ft 10 inches and on probably over half of my Hampden games, I have struggled to see over tall folk in the row in front of me. It's not a good place for watching the game at times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BucksburnDandy said:

 

I missed the game at the Emirates but on both occasions at the new Wembley, I've been in the bottom tier and you are correct. Poorly done.

 

I'm of an average height, about 5 ft 10 inches and on probably over half of my Hampden games, I have struggled to see over tall folk in the row in front of me. It's not a good place for watching the game at times.

Re. Hampden; have you ever been in the South Stand Upper?

If you haven't, give it a try; it's an absolutely fantastic view.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Rich NATA said:

There are modern stadia, which are even worse for that.

The Emirates (when we played our Brazil match) and Wembley are both dreadfully shallow on the lower tiers.

Agreed.   Worst view I've ever had was at the Emirates.

8 hours ago, BucksburnDandy said:

 

I missed the game at the Emirates but on both occasions at the new Wembley, I've been in the bottom tier and you are correct. Poorly done.

 

I'm of an average height, about 5 ft 10 inches and on probably over half of my Hampden games, I have struggled to see over tall folk in the row in front of me. It's not a good place for watching the game at times.

Agreed, ever since I was young a teen in the North Enclosure trying to see past men in bunnets, but it is a naturally safe standing area.   Have seen some injuries at goals in steeper stadia.   Well one anyway.

8 hours ago, Rich NATA said:

Re. Hampden; have you ever been in the South Stand Upper?

If you haven't, give it a try; it's an absolutely fantastic view.

 

 

 

 

 

Agreed again, but it's the last to go on sale, so can get screwed.   If only marketing men were in charge :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
On ‎1‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 1:17 PM, BucksburnDandy said:

 

I missed the game at the Emirates but on both occasions at the new Wembley, I've been in the bottom tier and you are correct. Poorly done.

 

I'm of an average height, about 5 ft 10 inches and on probably over half of my Hampden games, I have struggled to see over tall folk in the row in front of me. It's not a good place for watching the game at times.

My wee sister manages and she's a hell of a lot smaller than that!

God forbid you ever have to stand on a terrace!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 10/5/2017 at 6:25 PM, blue_knight said:

 

Glasgow is scottish footballs capital so id probably agree to improving hampden.

The trains are a joke 

I hate the traipsing home into town after a crap result

Glasgow the home of Scottish football, Aye 60,70 years ago,now it,s the home of two teams that would leave Scotland at the drop of a hat,half the fans of one team hate the SFA &Tartan Army,half the fans of the other team support another country,home to a antiquated stadium living on past history .Time to drag Scottish football to a new level ,it has to be Murrayfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Langspoon said:

Glasgow the home of Scottish football, Aye 60,70 years ago,now it,s the home of two teams that would leave Scotland at the drop of a hat,half the fans of one team hate the SFA &Tartan Army,half the fans of the other team support another country,home to a antiquated stadium living on past history .Time to drag Scottish football to a new level ,it has to be Murrayfield.

 

See that Langspoon, is it burning by any chance?

Glasgow has more football fans than anywhere else in Scotland. Like it or loath it, Old Firm fans make up the biggest % of the Scotland support.

Murrayfield is utter shite for football - views are horrendous behind the goals and unlike Hampden it even has a running track along one side. Folk slag Hampden and for some good reasons but Murrayfield is a concrete bowl too with shite facilities and shite views. It's not like we'd be moving to a massive upgrade in stadium.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Squirrelhumper said:

 

See that Langspoon, is it burning by any chance?

Glasgow has more football fans than anywhere else in Scotland. Like it or loath it, Old Firm fans make up the biggest % of the Scotland support.

Murrayfield is utter shite for football - views are horrendous behind the goals and unlike Hampden it even has a running track along one side. Folk slag Hampden and for some good reasons but Murrayfield is a concrete bowl too with shite facilities and shite views. It's not like we'd be moving to a massive upgrade in stadium.

 

It's genuinely baffling that folk argue for Murrayfield on the basis that Hampden has poor sightlines. Been to a couple of Rugby games behind the posts at Murrayfield and the view was pish, just as bad as Hampden.

Hampden certainly needs to improve on the views from behind the goals, especially for those lower down (I don't actually think being close to the back of the West/East stands is actually too bad). If we stay at Hampden and have more control of it then we at least retain the opportunity to make those changes at some point.

Move to Murrayfield and we'd lose that level of control. Not worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Lion Rampant said:

It's genuinely baffling that folk argue for Murrayfield on the basis that Hampden has poor sightlines. Been to a couple of Rugby games behind the posts at Murrayfield and the view was pish, just as bad as Hampden.

Hampden certainly needs to improve on the views from behind the goals, especially for those lower down (I don't actually think being close to the back of the West/East stands is actually too bad). If we stay at Hampden and have more control of it then we at least retain the opportunity to make those changes at some point.

Move to Murrayfield and we'd lose that level of control. Not worth it.

 

Aye and for football the view is even worse! If you are low down behind the goals it's worse than Hampden! At least at Hampden it goes to a red surface, Murrayfield is just a continuation of grass which makes it even harder to make out at opposite end of the stadium.

Image result for murrayfield football

Image result for murrayfield football

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...