theweestevie

Yes, but the question that was asked was where were the prime seats that Aberdeen had to sell if they didn't get any of the North stand.

South stand and south stand upper are prime seats. There's actually more prime seats in these sections than in the north stand.

Ok one of the major issues. The fact that only one stand of 4 is where people want to sit doesn't help matters

I hope that's not the view Aberdeen players get. That's the west stand that's empty so if the Aberdeen players are seeing that then it's safe to say I won't enjoy the game

But they couldn't return the tickets and allow Rangers to sell them if they started from the north stand as Aberdeen's sponsors and corporate tickets are for the south stand and they won't have then surrounded by Rangers fans, that's why they were encouraged to sell them from the south stand round. Theoretically there are more prime seats in the south stand than the north stand although we all know this is push and just a ploy to get more money from punters in the south stand. The real issue is Hampden is shite and the majority of the seats there have a shit view.

Sevco

Couldn't agree more

Going from the statement it looks like you were already getting the North Stand? Leaves me with just over 50% chance of getting a ticket if we were also allocated 20,300

Awful from Hearts, one player moves up much later than the rest of his team.

This all goes to show that Hampden is not fit for purpose. On a 50-50 split you get 5 sections in the north stand with decent views, 16 sections behind the goal with shite view, 4(?) Sections in the south stand lower with an ok view, and 6(?) Sections in South stand lower with an ok view, but miles away. So of the 31 sections people only really want to sit in 5 of them, will make do with a few more and don't really want to sit in the rest

The choice of where to sit would be nice, I just have to hope I get one in the ballot and sit wherever I'm told. Going by my allocation over the last 15 years or so I've only had the north stand once and that was against Celtic last season for the Scottish cup semi. Funnily enough I wouldn't have minded a seat with a shit view for that game.

I don't think giving Rangers an initial allocation of more than Aberdeen is unfair, providing it is no more than 50% of the total allocation. Rangers will sell that immediately, so they would need the extra allocation straight away (there are around 28k season ticket holders who are signed up to get tickets for cup games automatically and that's before the supports clubs and club sponsors etc get there tickets). With regards to the way the tickets are sold in batches selling the south stand first, I imagine it's because thete are more seats there which are considered prime seats than there would be in the north stand (as much as everyone knows the north stand is significantly better)

For semi finals that don't sell out I wish they would open a neutral section, even if it was just pay at the gate on the day. If I had nothing else on i would definitely pop along.

At the last semi-final 6 months(ish) ago the attendance was circa 18k, and that was including the Motherwell fans and sponsors etc.

What trust do you need if Rangers were paying the money up front??

Rangers are guaranteed to sell the tickets so probably

I agree with the idea of selling in batches to reduce the chance of having empty sections but personally I would do it the other way around though, start from the north stand and then work round rather than starting at the south stand

Tbf I think there would be a lot of discussion about it if McKenna was a Celtic player. It would have been hilarious if a player did that to his own teammate

Fans leaving Edinburgh an hour before kick off for the Rangers Aberdeen game would be cutting it quite tight to get into the ground for kick off by the time they get to the stadium and parked etc

Would have preferred for the Rangers Aberdeen game to be at Murrayfield from a selfish perspective, more chance of a ticket. Hopefully get one from the ballot.

I would say Sunday 4th for Hearts v Celtic as it means it could be showin on tv.

I disagree with it being UEFAs fault. The SPFL did not have to schedule the semi finals the weekend after a CL and Europa League week. The schedule of these games is known well in advance so they knew exactly when these games were going to be before they scheduled our fixtures. Why didn't the SPFL make the semi finals for the following weekend? If they did then we wouldn't have this issue as we could play one game on the sat and one on the Sunday. Also why schedule a full fixture card for the midweek after these games? You know you are going to have to postpone games for the semi finals, why not keep the midweek free and then just move the postponed games back 3/4 days instead of having to try and slot them in a couple of months later? A little bit of common sense is all that's needed.

You're going the wrong way bud, not that it will change things much

That rules out the Monday games then

Common sense says play one of the games at Murrayfield. The hearts game would make most sense logistically though they did use it for home games last season so that may not exactly be neutral. If this was the Scottish cup I would have put the money on the SFA playing the Rangers game on the Monday, making it perfect for the Aberdeen fans