# SCOTLAND - Stadium and Arena Development News



## Carter (Oct 14, 2002)

This is getting boring, so knock it off...you all sound like a couple of old ladies who have nothing better to do then complain about your neighbours, which incidently, you are.
Rangers and Celtic both suck, why don't you go suck together? 
So shake hands or shut up.
(I agree with boy david though)

Cart,


----------



## DaveF (May 8, 2005)

PHXbevo said:


> Both those stadium are awesome in their own right, but it is very alarming to anyone to see the obvious social-economic discrepancy between the two sides and its fans, i.e. protestants v. catholics.
> 
> nice post


The surrounding area is not down to the fans - the majority of both don't live in the immediate area (The stadia are only about 4 miles apart anyway).

The pictures of the fencing and waste land around Celtic Park is a real life portrayal of that area - much of the previous housing has been cleared. Also, much of it in the immediate area is owned by Celtic (The footprint before redevelopment was much bigger at each end), and I guess there is no return in concrete and tarmac

Both Ibrox and Hampden hav acres of tarmac outside the stadia.

The redeveloped Celtic Park was built to a budget, which meant that there was not the 'finishing touches' in terms of cladding etc - hence it's more utilitarian appearance.

It's strange that a city of 800,000 people has three stadiums of 50,000+ capacity - any pics of Hampden?


----------



## TheRangers (May 7, 2005)

Carter said:


> This is getting boring, so knock it off...you all sound like a couple of old ladies who have nothing better to do then complain about your neighbours, which incidently, you are.
> Rangers and Celtic both suck, why don't you go suck together?
> So shake hands or shut up.
> (I agree with boy david though)
> ...


Shhhhhh

@The Boy David 








What was the final score that day?


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

On average, Celtic fans are less wealthy than Rangers fans. If you go into the nice areas in Glasgow & suburbs, it is mainly Rangers fans, whereas Celtic fans tend to reside in 'deprived' housing estates. Of course this is on average - not all celtic fans are unemployed people who live in council houses, and not all Rangers fans live in decent areas with decent jobs. However, the 2 stadiums DO reflect the difference in wealth of the fans. I live in Bearsden, not many celtic fans round here.


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

Yes, celtic fans did behave themselves in Seville. Well done.




http://www.soccer-stats.com/divisions/attendances.asp?divno=5&asid=93

http://european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/archive/avesco.htm


10,602 - celtics lowest of the season 93/94. Parkhead wasn't very noisy that day.


----------



## Empire State Human (May 8, 2005)

These are nice old pictures of Ibrox


----------



## Empire State Human (May 8, 2005)

The inside of Ibrox is quite special on matchdays too:
















From yesterday

And for balance - here's one of Hampden before the last cup final!


----------



## Boab (May 8, 2005)

Here's the subway loyal heading for the exits a few weeks back



My what a handsome bunch,they arra peepul indeed



Beachball Sunday!!!



A lovely aerial shot of the death star from the game a few weeks back



When visiting ibrox,protective clothing is highly recommended



Yer average bear 

And finally...Ye can keep yer five stars/fifty league titles/fancydan hospitality cos at the end of the day we've always got this in our trophy room

http://img233.echo.cx/my.php?image=thebigcup6ep.png


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## Be_Happy (Aug 21, 2004)

haha, Dave. Best to ignore the likes of bubomb and TheRangers. They just lower the tone of the forum.


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## benedict16 (May 9, 2005)

Hello there, Celtic fan here. 

First point - imo Ibrox *IS * a better stadium than Celtic Park, *IF * we are talking architecture, and correct me if I'm wrong, but this is what this forum is about, isnt it?

Secondly - the post is aboviously a wind-up, so dont take it so seriously. 

Thirdly - it shows how desperate some Rangers fans really are for success, drawing on comparisons of who's stadium looks the best rather than current league positions. 

Fourthly - to the person who posted the Stadium half empty *30 SECONDS * before the end of the Hibs game that we could not win, do you really want me to dig up photos from last season after we had won the League before the split, or shall I leave the 30,000 attendance photos during the game in my photo vault? You decide, after all YOU are the people aren't you.... 

So feel free to continue using UEFA's stadium ratings as a means to get one over on us, as there will only be one set of fans laughing in 2 weeks time when the league is decided. I'm not saying we will definitely be the ones laughing, but at least with 2 games to go our destiny is in our own hands. So we have to blow it, instead of you winning it. Remember that.


----------



## TheRangers (May 7, 2005)

The Boy David said:


> Final score? 1-0 Celtic, Thompson screamer in the 85th minute. I trust you will remember that goal well


LIES! If you look in front of the Rangers fans you can see red, white and blue streamers lying on the trackside...we did that during the 0-2 game... 

EDIT: Not forgetting the fact that we have 2 players who we signed in late January playing in the squad that day! Wasn't Thompsons "screamer" in August/September?


----------



## TheRangers (May 7, 2005)

benedict16 said:


> Hello there, Celtic fan here.
> 
> First point - imo Ibrox *IS * a better stadium than Celtic Park, *IF * we are talking architecture, and correct me if I'm wrong, but this is what this forum is about, isnt it?
> 
> ...



Feel free to post those pictures...I don't care. Maybe that's because I don't go around claiming to be the best fans in the world (c) Timmy...


----------



## TheRangers (May 7, 2005)

The Boy David said:


> Ah poor lad, you forget that Celtic Park was being rebuilt at that point, and so only the old stand existed.
> 
> Also, I asked you for Rangers attendances, not Celtics. Rangers attendances whilst we were winning 9 in a Row, that is.
> 
> Next.


You played at Hampden when Celtic Park was getting re-built. Plus the fact is you can't turn it against Rangers fans because once again...we don't go around claiming to be "The Greatest Fans In The World" (c) Timmy...now do we?


----------



## TheRangers (May 7, 2005)

The Boy David said:


> I say that you can only dream because I have been to Ibrox on several occasions (splendid stadium inside and out - of that there is no doubt), and not ONCE has any of your chants or songs even come CLOSE to the sound and passion of of the Celtic fans singing "You'll never walk alone". Not once.
> 
> 
> Even the media are in agreement that no-one does it quite like the Celtic fans do.


Och sheest. Aye you are correct Celtic fans singing the stolen "You'll Never Walk Alone" is quite special but how can you claim that it's better than anything Rangers have ever done? Since you have the habit of asking for facts, well I'm going to ask you the same, prove that!

Why is it most champions league stars that come to Ibrox seem to always comment on our atmosphere? Buffon, Crespo, Prso, Veron, Roy Keane, Scholes, Half of the Stuttgart team (who incidently made no such comment when they played Celtic in the UEFA cup the year before!) and quite a few more people. 

Both fans are very passionate with great atmospheres so don't claim it's all Celtic.



The Boy David said:


> And the behaviour of Celtic fans during the UEFA cup:
> 
> 
> 
> Very good. Despite your statement not actually making any real sense, I enjoyed your attempt at trying to take away from our incredible achievement. We had 80,000+ fans in Seville. That is the population of the City of Inverness. And there was not one arrest on the day of the game. Not one. How does this constitute as appalling behaviour?


I'm still waiting for you to reply on the comments I made about incidents before the Seville game...plus like I said, fans lying around half naked beamed all over the world with cans of beer lying around them isn't a great advert for the whole of Scotland, Celtic or the city of Glasgow, now is it?



The Boy David said:


> Has every Rangers fan that has traveled to the away games in Europe been impeccably behaved.


I never said we had, so I am lost with your comment here. Then again...we don't claim to be "The Greatest Fans In The World" (c) Timmy....now do we?



The Boy David said:


> No. Football fans are football fans no matter who they support and where they go. Celtic fans were commended for their outstanding behaviour in Seville. Say what you like: the award speaks for itself.


So obviously UEFA overlooked the games pre Seville when you rioted in an airport and on a plane to give this award to you then.



The Boy David said:


> There are just as many violent crimes (some would argue more) commited by Rangers fans mate. So dont even pretend that your fans are blameless in this matter. Most of the time on the News it is the Rangers fans who have started the trouble.


I never said Rangers fans are blameless did I? All I said is that it's funny how when ever you lose, Glasgow's A&E departments are a lot more busier than they would be if you win. It's been proved! 



The Boy David said:


> I laugh at the suggestion that I am "very young". I believe this is the third time now I have firmly put the both of you children in your place.


This is a "toys out the pram" type of comment and you haven't put anyone in their place...son!



The Boy David said:


> You people clearly dont realise that no-one can win this argument in its totallity. This is an age old argument that will go round and round in circles for ever.


So why are you arguing then?



The Boy David said:


> Lets just leave it that My team is better than yours, and Your team is better than mine.


No because I like to argue. Plus I like how to dodged a few of the comments I made earlier.


----------



## dannyboy83 (May 9, 2005)

*Hampden*

Well I'm a Motherwell fan.

Although the thread title is Rangers and Celtic's stadia, I thought I'd put up some photos from Hampden, the other big stadium in Glasgow, and Scotland's national football stadium. These are from the CIS cup final 2005 where unfortunately, we got gubbed by Rangers 5-1.
































































In case you're wondering, the smoke is from pre-match organised fireworks, and not flares or fireworks thrown by fans (like in the San Siro for example).


----------



## GASpedal (Apr 10, 2005)

Just wanted to say that I got a really nice impression of the Celtic supporters in Munich two years ago.
Very friendly atmosphere, though there was no seperation of both sides at the stadium entrance.

Don't know what the Rangers are like, but it really seems to me that you guys polemize a bit...


----------



## daviecooperforever (May 9, 2005)

yes there are plans to extend both ibrox and the tattiedome. tattiedome to 75000 and ibrox to get 3rd tears in broamloan, govan, copland, i imagine that would bring ibrox up to 70000 odd. though neither will happen until (and it will happen), they both get entry to premiership. there is talk of ibrox being extended soon but that wouldnt be the complete transformation. imagine just few extra thousand, though that probably won't be for 2-3 years if at all


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## WeasteDevil (Nov 6, 2004)

I think that you are all mad. It's like "My dick is bigger than your dick" type of an argument, when we all know that the vaginal tract is only four inches deep anyway!

Potty!


----------



## TheRangers (May 7, 2005)

The Boy David said:


> You post a compelling argument, TheRangers, and you are so very up to speed with the goings on around here. I respect the degree of tact and reason that you display during this discussion.


Why thank you Kind sir...  



The Boy David said:


> And yes, you are right, it was 0-2 to your good selves! I thought id try get away with that one - cant blame me for trying can you?


I suppose not. It was a pretty good day I have to say.  



The Boy David said:


> But that was not the point of the picture I posted. It is a great (albeit not the best) view of the stadium, and shows the huge away support during the old firm ties.


It does indeed...  



The Boy David said:


> What was the score in the pictures that Boab posted, incidentally?  (Two can play at this game matey)


2-1 to Celtic I believe.




The Boy David said:


> Right. Since you believe that I am dodging some of your points, I will try and answer to the best of my ability, seeing as I am only a "young one". (I still dont understand the grounds on which you base this comment. I like to think of myself as "enthusiastic", not young.
> But, as your old-firm friend bubomb has clearly stated, i _probably_ "reside in (a) 'deprived' housing estate.", and so would naturally posess an inferior diction and come across as less learned than you posh Rangers supporters. That hurts, by the way. Im glad you, TheRangers, have not stooped so low - I believe you will continue to argue your point in better taste)


I don't understand why you have brought someone elses post into this, but hey what ever makes you happy.  




The Boy David said:


> Seville. So there were a handful of guys lying drunk on the street. And? Thats a rare one. The Scots are sadly too well known for such behaviour. And by that I mean the tartan army, not just Celtic fans. I am dismayed that you would pick up on such a petty problem as this. Credit where credit is due, no? No fans are perfect. Drunk fans are only to be expected.


The Tartan army are just as bad yes. Although you know perfectly well it wasn't a hand ful of guys lying drunk at Seville. I'm almost positive it was a mistake on your part though, one which you are very sorry about.  

The reason the problem is picked up is because you claim to be "The Greatest Fans In The World" (c) Timmy...

You are indeed right no fans are perfect but see what I wrote in the above sentence. ;-)



The Boy David said:


> As for the problem with the plane, I never heard of it. Show me an article (I love me facts, I do ) If that was the case, it is indeed a disgrace. But again, and this is where you seemed to miss the point the first time, Rangers fans are not exactly as good as gold where ever they go. You have no leg to stand on here. Thanks for the backup, GASpedal.


I have not mentioned Rangers fans are perfect but, us, Rangers fans don't claim to be "The Greatest Fans In The World" (c) Timmy...now do we?  

Oh and since you love your facts so much:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/2573741.stm 



The Boy David said:


> You are correct in saying we played at hampden for most of the renovation, but not all of it. Anyway at that point Hampden was a complete dump. The poor attendances do not surprise me - what is a club without its own turf?


I seem to remember when Celtic won the league title in 2001, they came out wearing t-shirts with the words "No Excuses". Funny how things change eh?  



The Boy David said:


> Speaking of attendances - you still havent provided me what I have asked for. (I love me facts, I do )


I think this was an argument you were having with the other guy and not me.




The Boy David said:


> As for the singing - so we stole "You'll never walk alone". Big deal. You guys didnt write "Rule Britannia", did you?


For starteres "Rule Britannia" is a British song so it is free to be sung at any British stadium, any British street or any British house, yes? It's funny because you are actually the first timmy EVER to admit to me that Celtic fans stole the said song from another club! Hat's of to you timmy. :eek2: 



The Boy David said:


> Of all my experiences, Ibrox just isnt as atmospheric. Our Award from the BBC proves this. The video I have posted proves this. On BBC 1's coverage of the Barcelona game, the commentator, Rob McLean (.....) was openly blown away. Jealousy mate. You know that ours just sounds better  Theres more of us to sing it too......


Isn't Rob McLean one of you? I take it you have been to Ibrox on a Wednesday night, Champions League game then? 

The video you have posted proves what? That you deserve best British fans? What about the kop? What about Aberdeens red ultra display last weekend? You only sing "You'll Never Walk Alone" against the big teams anyway!




The Boy David said:


> Please. Who's being childish now?


???




The Boy David said:


> Prove it then. (I love me facts, I do )


TBH with you I can't prove that as it was in the Sun newspaper a few days after we beat you in November. I know what I read though.




The Boy David said:


> Anything else?


Yes..  




The Boy David said:


> Daviecooperforever: Do you think calling Parkhead the tattiedome is clever?


I prefer piggorie...;-)




The Boy David said:


> Nice pics dannyboy83


They are indeed. 


Now then....Anything else? :runaway:


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## skog (Mar 2, 2005)

Let's just get something straight:

First:

The rioting on the plane happened bechause the people on board were scared shitless as the aircraft seemed to be in incredibly bad shape. It was a dodgy charter aircraft.They hit an air pocket in mid flight, sending the plane crashing down. Thankfully the pilot recovered but a lot of people panicked and most were happy to get off. That's what i read.


Second:

The behaviour of the Spanish Guardia Civil in Vigo was completely out of order.
They attacked chanting fans moving through the airport with sticks and beat them up. One of those who were beaten was a fan in a WHEELCHAIR (Son of a Celtic boardmember i think).



Third: 

I would't talk about rioting if i were a Rangers fan. After all, your biggest european night in club history when you won the UEFA Cup was ruined by the behaviour of the fans who rioted in the ground after they WON.
The trophy was handed over in an office in the stadium bechause they had to evacuate the pitch, and next year Rangers were banned from european competition for 1 year making sure they would not be able to attemt to retain the trophy.


----------



## WeasteDevil (Nov 6, 2004)

The Boy David said:


> Obviously Liverpool used it first - the song was written by a Liverpudlian afterall.


It was written by two Yanks, Rogers & Hammerstein, for their 1945 musical Carousel!


----------



## jonjon (May 7, 2004)

sorry but this thread is a bloody embarrassment - this is about the stadia, not all the other crap spouted ie whose more passionate, crime, sectarianism or that Rangers fans are more wealthy (possibly 25years out of date there mate!!!). i read about 3 posts and skimmed throught the rest - sorry guys this is not the forum to be deabting this.

Back to the original point and clearly those original pictures showed Ibrox in the best light and Celtic Park in the worst, but the point is Glasgow has 3 top class stadium, why not celebrate/boast about that rather than engage in this stupid bickering?


----------



## MoreOrLess (Feb 17, 2005)

daviecooperforever said:


> yes there are plans to extend both ibrox and the tattiedome. tattiedome to 75000 and ibrox to get 3rd tears in broamloan, govan, copland, i imagine that would bring ibrox up to 70000 odd. though neither will happen until (*and it will happen* ), they both get entry to premiership. there is talk of ibrox being extended soon but that wouldnt be the complete transformation. imagine just few extra thousand, though that probably won't be for 2-3 years if at all


Going a bit off topic for this forum but what do does everyone think about that highlighted point? 

In terms of the stadia I could definately see those redevolpments being filled quiet often considering that both clubs come very close to filling their grounds most matchs(both over 95% on average attendance) with the added attraction of playing big premiership teams.

In terms of what it would mean for Scottish football in general I think its hard to predict. On the one hand it would surely be good for Rangers and Celtic as they have the added interest of competing on a bigger stage without losing their main historical rival(unless one of them religated ). On the other you have all the remaining scottish clubs deprived of the revenue of the two biggest teams in the the league. In the long term I could see this being a postive however as they'd be competing in a competive league again rather than the current two horse race.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

"Ah poor lad, you forget that Celtic Park was being rebuilt at that point, and so only the old stand existed"



erm, no it wasn't. If only the old stand existed, then celtic would have had a max average of 9000, as that's what the main stand held. The stadium was redeveloped later, and when it was, celtic played that season at HAMPDEN. Check the links again, did you not notice that when celtic averaged 22000, the old parkhead had a capacity of +50000.


Some celtic fan you are. (do you live in Scotland? I doubt it)




Also, I have supplied no evidence that Rangers have always averaged higher gates than celtic until celtic got a bigger stadium (I know it's true, as it used to be supplied in the 'wee red book' that came with the evening times every year), and so you say you don't believe me. Fair enough (as I can't show you the book). BUT, you also have absolutely no evidence that Rangers averaged under 10000, yet you are willing to believe the word of whoever told you that nonsense. Explain why you believe the word of somebody who's claim is anti-Rangers, yet you don't believe the word of somebody who's claim is pro-Rangers. In both cases there is no evidence at all, so why believe one and not the other?


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

"The rioting on the plane happened bechause the people on board were scared shitless as the aircraft seemed to be in incredibly bad shape. It was a dodgy charter aircraft.They hit an air pocket in mid flight, sending the plane crashing down"



Jesus, that's the best one yet. I guess the highly educated and experienced pilot and crew just made the stuff up about celtic fans being totally steaming .... for a laugh. The revisionism of celtic fans never fails to amaze me.



What next? celtic fans pelted Mark Walters with flowers and petals, NOT bananas?

Both sets of fans have idiots in their support. The difference is that most Rangers fans can admit they have idiots in their support, whereas your average celtic fan wants to be loved by everybody and will always paint celtic fans whiter than white. It's simply an inferiority complex that most celtic fans have. They always have and always will. They can never admit their to blame, it's always somebody else's fault. 

If their team loses, it's the ref's/linesman/sfa/masonic lodges fault, never celtics fault.

If the celtic fan fails to get a job/council house/disability benefit he wants, it's beacuse the employer/DHSS interviewer is anti-catholic/anti-celtic/an orangeman etc, not the fact that the celtic fan wasn't good enough for the job or wasn't entitled to disability benefits.

Why can't celtic fans ever take responsibility for their own actions? Why is it always somebody else's fault?

Why can't most celtic fans never tell the truth? why?


----------



## WeasteDevil (Nov 6, 2004)

You're all fucking wierd. **** off to a football forum and have this argument!


----------



## carlspannoosh (Apr 12, 2004)

Celtic and Rangers should look to Milan and Munich as examples. Build an 80000 capacity stadium and share it.That would please everyone.


----------



## JimB (Apr 7, 2005)

MoreOrLess said:


> Going a bit off topic for this forum but what do does everyone think about that highlighted point?
> 
> In terms of the stadia I could definately see those redevolpments being filled quiet often considering that both clubs come very close to filling their grounds most matchs(both over 95% on average attendance) with the added attraction of playing big premiership teams.
> 
> In terms of what it would mean for Scottish football in general I think its hard to predict. On the one hand it would surely be good for Rangers and Celtic as they have the added interest of competing on a bigger stage without losing their main historical rival(unless one of them religated ). On the other you have all the remaining scottish clubs deprived of the revenue of the two biggest teams in the the league. In the long term I could see this being a postive however as they'd be competing in a competive league again rather than the current two horse race.


I very much doubt it will ever happen. Rangers and Celtic fans bore on about how Premiership chairmen will see dollar signs at the prospect of Rangers and Celtic moving south. But the plain fact is that the Premiership is already a huge success story. Most grounds are full for every game as it is. Clubs will be able to get no more fans through the turnstiles when the Old Firm are visiting than they already do when any English club is visiting.

More to the point, other than Man Utd, Chelsea and Arsenal, any club voting for Celtic and Rangers to join the Premiership would be akin to a turkey voting for Christmas.

Rangers and Celtic play in a crap league but, no doubt about it, they are both big clubs. And with the financial muscle and the status of the Premiership behind them, they would soon be challenging near the top. And that would mean two extra Premiership clubs being relegated (in addition to the usual quota of relegated clubs). And it would make winning the title or (more realistically) earning a Champions League / UEFA Cup place an even more distant dream for those second tier Premiership clubs. So really, the incentive for a "yes" vote is very small indeed. The reasons for saying "no" are far more compelling.

Another argument that Old Firm fans churn out is that the precedent has already been set because Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league rather than Wales and because Berwick play in Scotland, not England. But the crucial difference is that all these clubs have always (to my knowledge) played in their current leagues. Rangers and Celtic have only become the giants that they are because they have held a near monopoly on Scottish football for the past century and a bit. Had they always played in England, they wouldn't have even half the support and stature that they have now.

One last reason for keeping the Old Firm where they are: quite frankly, as this thread has amply demonstrated, the Premiership can do without the hatred, bitterness and bigotry (of a minority, granted) that seems to follow Rangers and Celtic wherever they go.


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## Zizu (Jan 17, 2005)

Administrator, please close this thread!! Terrible!!


----------



## WeasteDevil (Nov 6, 2004)

JimB said:


> More to the point, other than Man Utd, Chelsea and Arsenal, any club voting for Celtic and Rangers to join the Premiership would be akin to a turkey voting for Christmas.


Surely it isn't a Premiership issue, as they could not go straight into the premiership. Surely the old firm entrance into English football would be a football league or conference matter.


----------



## JimB (Apr 7, 2005)

WeasteDevil said:


> Surely it isn't a Premiership issue, as they could not go straight into the premiership. Surely the old firm entrance into English football would be a football league or conference matter.


You'd think so, wouldn't you? But no. The way various Old Firm officials and fans have been talking about it, they appear to want to move straight to the Premiership. As far as I'm concerned, if Premiership football is what they really want, they can earn it the same way that AFC Wimbledon are hoping to earn it - from the very lowest rungs of the FA ladder. With successive promotions, they might reach the Premiership within ten years or so.

Somehow, I don't think they want Premiership football that badly!


----------



## pal (May 9, 2005)

If I wanted to read about Rangers and their sectarian baggage I would go elsewhere. Isn't this a skyscraper forum ?


----------



## WeasteDevil (Nov 6, 2004)

JimB said:


> You'd think so, wouldn't you? But no. The way various Old Firm officials and fans have been talking about it, they appear to want to move straight to the Premiership. As far as I'm concerned, if Premiership football is what they really want, they can earn it the same way that AFC Wimbledon are hoping to earn it - from the very lowest rungs of the FA ladder. With successive promotions, they might reach the Premiership within ten years or so.
> 
> Somehow, I don't think they want Premiership football that badly!


You echo my sentiments. If they want it, they should earn it. After all, if they are that good, they should get it within four years.

If they don't want it, fair enough, it's their business. The whole structure of British Football is fecked anyway, four FAs? Bit daft! Still, they will not amaglamate. Probably worried about losing influence on the IFAB, but any amagamated FA should still have 50% voting rights on the IFAB. These are not really countries we are talking about, but highy dubious nations that are not states.

A British Football Association should be formed, with each FA providing a single (or two) member/s for its board. If UEFA can exist why cannot a BFA?


----------



## Laudrup11 (May 12, 2005)

I've watched this thread for a few days now and finally I have got round to registering. so heres what I'll say.

There is no argument over which stadium is better, Ibrox is 5 star, Parkheed is 3 star or maybe even 4 star. 

as for Parkhead having a better atmosphere, dont kid yourselves on. It is just as quiet as Ibrox on home games against 'the wee diddy teams'. On European nights and at Old Firm games, it is different though, this is how I compare. At Parkheed, even if we are getting beat we still sing for 90 minutes,even when yous are winning yous hardly sing! Youll never walk alone at the start, maybe 2 other songs which only half your support sing throughout the game. yous do not sing when yous are getting beat at Ibrox, infact at the 2-0 game earler on this season I remember we are celtic supporters near the end when half your end was empty, found that one a cracker. Now at Ibrox, plenty of songs are sung at Old Firm games throughout the game. FACT.


European Nights - At Parkhead, you get YNWA before the game, would hardly call it intimidating though as all you really hear is walk on, with hope.. etc. the rest of the words are very unclear to make out, personally I think thats because a good amount of your fans only know the basic youll never walk alone and not infact the full words. then you'll get a few songs throughout the game most noticeably at corners when you get a burst of 'SELLIK SELLIK'. I have hardly heard a player saying he was blowing away with the atmosphere at Parkheed, Gerard of Barca said something thats all I can think of.


Now Ibrox - European Nights, I seem to remember Gerry McKnee saying after the Man Utd Game last season 'its the only game where hes never been able to hear the Champions League theme tune because of the noise'. not only him, Gary Neville also said he has played in big stadiums before Nou Camp etc.. but 'he had never heard anything like that in his life and was thankful we never scored because of the noise which would have been made'.

Buffon, Cannavaro, Thuram, basically the Parma team, Kahn, Van Nistelrooy, half the Stuttgart team who claimed Rangers would not have came back and won had it not been for the noise which 'intimidated' their players, Prso when he played with Monaco, Mendieta, Markus Schopp, now they are only just a few players who I can name of at the top of my head however I'm 110% certain I could find at least another 20. 


Moving onto the fans - Now Celtic claim to be the greatest in the world etc.. - right:-

Valencia - the riot police had to battle with Celtic fans before kick off because of carry on, funnily enough it was the 'Spanish Police fault'.

Ajax - One of your fans stabbed, some trouble with the police in the City Centre as well.

Vigo - couldnt behave yourselves, and no not just the 1 guy, the fans on board were 'drunk, aggressive and threatening fellow passengers' that bad, the plane had to do an emergency landing in Cardiff.

Blackburn - lots of forge tickets made, led to fans been locked out, led to fighting with the police and also Blackburn fans.

Tynecastle - Craig Gordon spat on by 2 of your supporters while collecting the ball infront of yous.

Ibrox - making aeroplane gestures to Claudio Reyna days after September 11th.
Booing through a minutes silence for the Ibrox disaster, that bad Paul McStay had to run to your end and try and get yous to bequiet.
Singing just 2 weeks ago at the Old Firm Game about 'Feck the Queen and Davie Cooper - hes dead'.

Your own stadium - we won the league at your stadium, guy jumps off the upper tier, claims he was going for a pie and tripped, Hugh Dallas hit with a coin, several of your fans tried entering the field of play that day, alot of your fans hurled plenty of objects and spat at our team as they were going up the tunnel. Ricksen also hit with a lighter at the last Old Firm game at your poor excuse for a stadium for simply clapping his own fans while taking a corner. you can give me the 'plastic cup thrown at Petrov' but the cup hit Hartson more than it hit Petrov, but as usual the Bulgarian Diver goes down like a tonne of bricks, then gets up and says sorry to the Rangers fans for his celebrations towards them. 

Fir Park - minutes silence, cant mind if it was for Sept 11th or the Queen Mother but there was booing and and I.R.A song clearly heard, was on tele the other week on Panorama.


Now, I'm not going to claim we are angels, as we also sing songs which we shouldnt. but yous sing songs which mock british soldiers, sing constantly about the I.R.A and dont give me the 'only at away games crap'. also couldnt believe someone said the media even say we are worse than Celtic, when have the media ever called anything fair ? call me paranoid etc.. if you want but its clear there is a lot of anti-Rangers journalists out their, I'll give a few examples, Mark Guidi 'Its not that I hate Rangers, I just dont like them' ? 

Paul Cooney in reaction to our last minuite penalty at Tynecastle for a push on Kyrgiakos 'the linesman should be demoted it was a disgraceful decision etc. etc.' now compare that to our 1-1 draw with Dundee Utd at the start of the season when they were awarded 2 free kicks for nothing at the death which they scored from to make it 1-1, we go up the park, Thompson is blatantly hauled down in the box but Coneoy says no. the same Conroy who disallowed a Prso goal against Kilmarnock for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Cooneys thoughts 'well you have to give him the benefit of the doubt, hes only a newcomer' .

I could go on and on all night but I dont have all night unfortunately as work calls in the morning.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

Parkhead has NO stars. There is no 3 star list. You are either 4 or 5 stars.


http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/4and5stars.html


----------



## Laudrup11 (May 12, 2005)

says it all really then doesnt it. the gutter once fell off before 


bubomb said:


> Parkhead has NO stars. There is no 3 star list. You are either 4 or 5 stars.
> 
> 
> http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/4and5stars.html


----------



## Be_Happy (Aug 21, 2004)

Laudrup11, if you don't mind me asking ... what is "yous"?


----------



## Iain1974 (Jun 16, 2004)

*Old Firm in the Premiership*



daviecooperforever said:


> yes there are plans to extend both ibrox and the tattiedome. tattiedome to 75000 and ibrox to get 3rd tears in broamloan, govan, copland, i imagine that would bring ibrox up to 70000 odd. though neither will happen until (and it will happen), they both get entry to premiership. there is talk of ibrox being extended soon but that wouldnt be the complete transformation. imagine just few extra thousand, though that probably won't be for 2-3 years if at all


Does anyone from England really want these two in our league, at any level?

No offense boy's but the rancour both sides are displaying are a perfect example of why both Celtic and Rangers are not welcome south of Hadrians Wall.

BTW, I've been to both stadiums and think Ibrox is nicer but Celtic is more of a 'fans stadium'. Just my opinion lads and yes, I am a catholic.


----------



## Empire State Human (May 8, 2005)

Amazing you think Celtic Park is more of a fans stadium. Ibrox is louder, more colourful, and has hosted nearly twice the amount of fans that Celtic Park has over the time they have stood together. The loudest recorded decibel level was at Ibrox in the 1990's beating Wembley 1966 and the famous Beatles' concert at the Albert Hall. 

This very weekend, two "friendly" games were played. Yesterday, over 30,000 were at Ibrox to watch their team play Borrusia Monchengladbach - the attendance was considered poor by Rangers standards. Today, less than 15,000 turned out for Celtic v Leeds Utd (a bigger draw - and Leeds brought thousands with them). 

Here are some photos. Judge for yourselves what the best fans arena is:










and in exactly the same corner at Ibrox:










Rangers have always been the biggest draw, home and away - and the most welcoming fans.

Spoken as a TRUE NEUTRAL.


----------



## carlspannoosh (Apr 12, 2004)

If you want to rave about Ibrox stadium go ahead but using this thread as an excuse to slag off Rangers's more famous city rival is being somewhat childish IMO.


----------



## HoldenV8 (Jul 18, 2005)

What Celtic Park used to look like. I am assuming this photo was taken in the 1970's but I honestly don't know.









And here are 3 shots of Ibrox Park. Again the dates of the pictures are unknown to me but they show how the ground, like Celtic Park, has evolved over the years.

























Pretty easy to see why Celtic Park's record crowd is 92,000 set back in 1938 and Ibrox's is 118,567 set in 1939.


----------



## 2005 (Jul 17, 2005)

Both very good stadiums I think. I don't shout to loud but Celtic Park is in a DUMP, I admit that Tottenham is bad but please the area looks well I don't need to say anymore.


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## BobDaBuilder (Jun 7, 2005)

What is the rest of the Scottish comp like?

Are the Glasgow clubs pretty much all there is?

How many Scotsmen actually play for the Old Firm clubs?


----------



## easysurfer (Dec 12, 2004)

How Ibrox is a 5 star stadium is beyond me. I would give it a 4 star at most. Maybe they need a re-classification or at the very least make a new category for the super stadiums like the new wembley 5 star +.


----------



## kingdomca (Apr 14, 2004)

dont read too much into this 4-5 star stuff. 
Its not a general assesment of the stadium, but a case of ticking-off boxes if minimum standards are achieved.

New Wembley will be stunning and obviously 5-star but if they for some reason had decided that the referee didnt deserve a quality dressing room then they wouldnt be a 5-star stadium as minimum standards would not be achieved in that category.

Ibrox is 5-star and celtic is not. This is most likely down to celtic park lacking something of a technical nature for media, staff or something like that and probably nothing to do with anything fans would ever notice.

Indeed Hampden is 5-star too, I think, though obviously much poorer than celtic park in a general sense.


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## hngcm (Sep 17, 2002)

What happened to Celtic....5-0...


----------



## BobDaBuilder (Jun 7, 2005)

Celtic getting flogged 5-nil is a worrying sign for the SPL.

The SPL is technically a lower standard than the Slovakian league.


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## hngcm (Sep 17, 2002)

4-0

Not enough.


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## Noostairz (Sep 11, 2002)

The Boy David said:


> Go down to the bottom of the page where it says YNWA Vs Barcelona underneath the Champions picture.
> 
> I guarentee that this video WILL move you. It was sang on the night of the Madrid train bombing for Spain as we where playing Barcelona (we won that game). The Spainish media said that they had never experienced anything like it before, and were touched by the sheer compassion of the Celtic fans. Absolutely breath taking - I was almost in tears, the emotion was incredible.
> 
> ...


get your own song. it doesn't matter how loud you sing it son, that is LFC through and through and celtic will never be the club LFC are.

ibrox wins. proper british club unlike the foreign insurgents parkhead hosts. GB 1 v 0 IRE


----------



## manicants2004 (Nov 29, 2004)

Celtic Park is much like its surroundings: dull and uninspiring. Give me the history and tradition of Ibrox.


----------



## Roekie (Aug 10, 2005)

What a sad view on the Celtic stadium, on TV it looks great but these pics give me a different idea.
Ibrox wins defenately


----------



## Prometheus (Jan 10, 2003)

Hmmm those have to be some of the most unflattering photos of Celtic Park I have ever seen. Absolutely nasty. Totally not what I expected.

Ibrox looks nice, but I really do detest the bricks.


----------



## gorgu (Mar 16, 2003)

As a Glaswegian Aberdeen supporter, Ibrox is built to a higher spec, but Parkhead is a better stadium in terms of size and atmosphere.

This thread is case and point as to why I don't support either of the Old Firm, makes me glad not to be in Scotland sometimes!

Thanks god we don't have this sort of banter on the Glasgow forum!


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

Here's a new pic of Ibrox -


----------



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

The Boy David said:


> Thats a great picture bubomb - Ibrox's frontage is magnificent.
> 
> And well done on getting through to the next round of the Champions League - good luck for the draw on friday! (Hope you get Barcelona   :jk
> 
> ...



Cheers. I hope we don't get Barcelona, they would totally pump us.


----------



## ghost_of_sin (Apr 28, 2004)

All that sectarian stuff is quite annoying to me. 

I just wanted to say that Ibrox is really really one of the most beautiful football stadiums in the whole world. Parkhead is surely a good stadium, but nothing special.

(BTW: I'm neither a Celtic nor Rangers fan).


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)

having read through this thread i find it pathetic.

both ibrox and celtic park are magnificent stadiums.

this "my dad is bigger than your dad" type argument is pointless.

the most important thing to me, a celtic fan, is not how my clubs stadium looks, but the fact that celtic are top of the scottish league, and 17 points ahead of rangers, who are fourth.

thats what *really* matters


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)

id also like to bring your attention to this article :

http://www.uefa.com/magazine/news/Kind=128/newsId=18479.html

"*Glasgow's three UEFA five-star stadiums - Celtic FC's Celtic Park,* Rangers FC's Ibrox stadium and Hampden Park - will be used as well as Edinburgh's Murrayfield stadium."

the celtic park dressing rooms were not the correct size when originally built, so it fell short of five star status. the dressing rooms were renovated in 2000.


----------



## footballaintforbirds (Jan 15, 2006)

May I just add that Celtic didn't wait until they had 2, yes 2 structural failures in their stadium before they carried out their upgrade.
Ibrox stadium has been built on the blood of many, many deaths of their supporters who innocently died trying to watch their team.

I am just glad all stadia are a safer place to be nowadays.


----------



## Magic_Zurawski (Jan 15, 2006)

Disappointed but not suprised to see the Rangers fans posting pictures of Celtic Park in the worst possible light, I have posted a few pictures that offer a more accurate reflection I think. Also if I was really sad I would travel to Ibrox and take pictures of the surrounding area there - which is also pretty deprived. Luckily though, I'm not that sad 





































An old one...









































For balance, here is one of Ibrox...


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)

also, another couple :


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

footballaintforbirds said:


> May I just add that Celtic didn't wait until they had 2, yes 2 structural failures in their stadium before they carried out their upgrade.
> Ibrox stadium has been built on the blood of many, many deaths of their supporters who innocently died trying to watch their team.
> 
> I am just glad all stadia are a safer place to be nowadays.


Sorry mate, but you don't have a clue what you are talking about. The Ibrox disaster was not caused by a structural fault, but by a crush caused by a late goal. This could have happened at any large ground in Scotland as they all were over-crowded at the time with poor exits. Rangers led the way in the UK for modern all seater stadiums and were partly responsible for the massive changes that have made UK stadiums safe places to watch sport. The 'Taylor Report' recommended Ibrox as the example for other UK clubs to follow. Rangers made theses changes well before the Taylor Report and were commended throughout Britain for making an Ibrox a safe stadium when they no legal obligation to do so. Rangers spent a fortune on a new stadium, sums of money that were unheard of in the late 70's. This massive outlay of money affected the clubs future for the next 10 years as no money was left for players or anything else, but this didn't matter to Rangers as the safety of their own fans was put ahead of everything else. No other club in the UK at the time was willing to spend this huge amount of money on their stadium in the interest of spectator safety. 

http://ayeready.com/ibrox/disaster.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrox_disaster

Each year celtic fans sing songs at old firm games mocking the deaths of those killed -

Those who lost their lives: (ages in brackets)

GLASGOW

DAVID ANDERSON [45]
JOHN BUCHANAN [32]
RICHARD BARKE [15]
DAVID DUFF [23)
PETER FARRIES [26]
JOHN GARDINER [32]
THOMAS GRANT [16]
CHARLES LIVINGSTON [30]
BRIAN HUTCHINSON [16]
JOHN JEFFREY [16]
ANDREW LINDSAY [18]
THOMAS MELVILLE [17]
FRANCIS DOVER [16]
ROBERT MULHOLLAND [16]
DUNCAN McBREARTY [17]
DONALD McPHERSON [30]
THOMAS McROBBIE [17]
ROBERT RAE [25]
WILLIAM SHAW [30]
WALTER SHIELDS
GEORGE SMITH [40]
WILLIAM SOMERHILL [17]
JAMES TRAINER [20]
JOHN CRAWFORD [23]
GEORGE FINDLAY [21]
JOHN NEIL

LIVERPOOL

NIGEL PICKUP [9]

EDINBURGH

WALTER RAEBURN [36]
JAMES SIBBALD [28]
ROBERT C CAIRNS [17]

LANARKSHIRE

THOMAS DICKSON [32]
IAN FREW [21]
JAMES GREY [37]
IAN HUNTER [14]
JAMES MAIR [19]
ROBERT MAXWELL [15]
ALEXANDER ORR [16]
MATTHEW RIED [49]
CHARLES STIRLING [20]
PETER WRIGHT [31]

ARGYLL

GEORGE IRWIN [22]

FIFE

PETER EASTON [13]
MARTIN PATON [14]
MASON PHILLIPS [14]
BRIAN TODD [14]
DOUGLAS MORRISON [15]

RENFREWSHIRE

HUGH ADDIE [33]
ROBERT GRANT [21]
ALEX McINTYRE [29]
GEORGE WILSON [15]

STIRLINGSHIRE

MARGARET FERGUSON [18]
ROBERT McADAM [36]
RICHARD McLEAY [28]
JOHN McLEAY [23]

WEST LOTHIAN

RUSSEL MALCOLM [16]

DUMBARTONSHIRE

GEORGE ADAMS [43]
ROBERT CARRIGAN [13]
CHARLES DOUGAN [31]
ADAM HENDERSON
DAVID McGHEE [14]
THOMAS MORGAN [14]
JAMES RAE [19]
JOHN SEMPLE [18]
THOMAS STIRLING [16]
DONALD SUTHERLAND [14]

EAST LOTHIAN

JAMES McGOVERN [24]


Only a celtic fan would use the deaths of so many young people as a subject to get one over your rivals on a stadium thread. Go back to the sewer where you came from.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

CraigyBhoy1888 said:


> id also like to bring your attention to this article :
> 
> http://www.uefa.com/magazine/news/Kind=128/newsId=18479.html
> 
> ...


The link is wrong. Parkhead has no stars. Why can't you accept that you don't have a 5 star stadium? Parkhead is clearly inferior to Ibrox. Rangers spent more money on one part of one stand than celtic spent on their entire stadium!!

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/4and5stars.html


----------



## Footyfan (Jan 16, 2006)

This is a pretty good site. some good reviews of matchdays throughout the country -

http://www.groundstour.freeserve.co.uk/spl.html


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)

its quite funny that your stadium is the only thing you have to cling to  








Home Away 
Team P W D L F A W D L F A GD PTS 
*1 Celtic 22 9 1 1 27 9 8 2 1 30 13 35 54 *  
2 Hearts 22 9 1 1 24 5 5 4 2 21 12 28 47 
3 Hibernian 22 6 1 4 20 14 6 1 4 17 15 8 38 
*4 Rangers 22 7 3 1 23 8 3 4 4 14 17 12 37 *  
5 Kilmarnock 22 5 3 3 25 19 4 3 4 16 18 4 33 
6 Inverness CT 22 3 4 4 13 13 4 6 1 13 8 5 31 
7 Motherwell 22 4 3 4 22 19 4 2 5 14 20 -3 29 
8 Aberdeen 22 3 5 3 13 11 3 4 4 11 15 -2 27 
9 Dundee Utd 22 4 5 2 12 12 2 1 8 12 23 -11 24 
10 Falkirk 22 0 3 8 8 21 4 2 5 14 23 -22 17 
11 Dunfermline 22 1 1 9 7 23 2 3 6 10 18 -24 13 
12 Livingston 22 1 4 6 8 22 1 2 8 4 20 -30 12 


ah, bliss  


since you love ibrox so much, heres another pic for your collection :


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)

oh dear, this isnt very complimentary now, is it?

http://www.groundstour.freeserve.co.uk/groundstour/rangers.html


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)

More than anything else, the home supporters were completely devoid of a sense of humour. Every chant from the Kilmarnock fans was greeted with two fingered salutes and vitriol from the Rangers spectators, with some ejected from the Broomloan Stand by police. The most innocuous challenges against Rangers players were met with tirades of verbal abuse being hurled at the match officials and opposition players, all highly unnecessary given the one-sided nature of the game. With fans sat in the ground wearing Ulster scarves, holding their arms aloft singing "Rule Britannia", it was an *uncomfortable and unpleasant ninety minutes sat amongst the Rangers spectators whose antics were as predictable as they were bigoted.* It was not hard to see why so few Kilmarnock fans had wanted to make the trip, with the Rangers fans' never tiring of telling the Kilmarnock followers what they thought of the visiting team.

For the final ten minutes of the game, with the score at 2-0, thousands of Rangers fans poured out the ground to get a headstart on the journey home. I decided to join them with five minutes left and despite a slight hold-up on the M8, I was able to make it home in good time and before 1am. As an arena by itself, Ibrox compares pretty well with many of the UK's most *enthusing and dramatic football venues, but the Rangers experience left a nasty taste in the mouth. I think my love for the game would quickly extinguish if I had no other option but to visit Ibrox every fortnight.* It is a shame that the terrific reception afforded to Andy Goram was not mirrored by equally sporting behaviour by the home fans during the game, as this would have ensured that Ibrox was a less intimidating, hostile and, in many ways, unpleasant venue at which to watch football. I doubt I will return.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

easysurfer said:


> This thread was started just to flare up trouble. Bubomb is a know antagonist whose bigoted opinions of many issues pisses everyone off. Both stadiums are fantastic in their own right and each deserve their uefa star rating. There is no need to show pictures of the surrounding area at parkhead. Showing a minority of celtic fans in the after-match celebrations being drunk and one fan being arrested is a disgrace. Where are the photos of rangers fans being arrested it you wanted to include football disturbances in your post? As the title says it's about celtic and rangers stadiums.



Are you thick or something mate? Parkhead ain't go any stars. The morons who invaded the site are talking shite. I started this thread and most people enjoyed comparing the stadiums. But now, word had got out on a celtic forum and these morons are attacking the site. Where is the admin? as we have got morons with terrorists as their avatars and this is illegal in the UK.

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/4and5stars.html

Celtic fans do this all the time and unless admin do something then they will ruin the sports section of Skyscrapercity!!


----------



## XCRunner (Nov 19, 2005)

^^This thread was ruined from the start, Bubomb. It takes two people to have an argument, and you're spreading as much slander as they are. You complain about them hijacking this thread, yet you are the one who has hijacked countless threads on this forum in the past.


----------



## footballaintforbirds (Jan 15, 2006)

bubomb said:


> Admin, please do something about this. Celtic morons are ruining every thread. On one of their football forums they decided to attack this site. We now have idiots on it with terrorists as their avatars (Ghod7).


Get a grip you bigotted clown.
People with a brain know your game and have you sussed.
Go away or come back with something sensible that can't easilly be ripped to shreds.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

Rubbish. I posted pictures of stadiums (99% of my pics are stadiums) and most people enjoyed this thread up until now. We now have celtic morons posting absolute garbage, page long garbage that nobody is going to read. They are also doing it on every single thread. We also now have posters with terrorists as their avatars - 

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/member.php?u=44697

I have never done anything like that. I believe it is illegal to have terrorists as your avatar on a site like this. I have always given an honest opinion. Apart from stupid arguments with JimB, who I believe is mentally ill, I have always tried to stay on topic. A lot of posters congratulated me on this thread for great pictures (being a Rangers fan, I was naturally going to be a bit biased towards Rangers), but as I said, a celtic site has decided to hijack the sports section, and unless admin do something, it won't just be this thread that will be totally ruined.

I have contacted the admin as I don't think any of us want to see the promotion of paramilitaries on this site. At the end of the day, it is a stadium site and any terrorist related material should not be tolerated. From now on, I'm going to totally ignore the celtic idiots who have hijacked the site as this is the best method to get rid of these parasites.


----------



## cianobuckley (Nov 28, 2005)

Bubomb seems to be the kind of guy who doesnt know when to stop or when he has lost an argument (quite obviously!) . i agree with you that this thread has been ruined from the start and after reading through it i can see that Bubombs the main cause. parkhead may be scruffy on the outside but on the inside it is one of the best soccer grounds in the world and in my view better than ibrox also.when has the outside of a football ground ever mattered when it comes to atmosphere and a teams performance? the inside of a ground is what counts, all *true* football fans know that. i guess your not a true football fan bubomb.......


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)

do yourself a favour bubomb and shut the **** up.

you are embarrasing yourself.


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)

ah, i never tire of this :

Home Away 
Team P W D L F A W D L F A GD PTS 
*1 Celtic 22 9 1 1 27 9 8 2 1 30 13 35 54 * 
2 Hearts 22 9 1 1 24 5 5 4 2 21 12 28 47 
3 Hibernian 22 6 1 4 20 14 6 1 4 17 15 8 38 
*4 Rangers 22 7 3 1 23 8 3 4 4 14 17 12 37  * 
5 Kilmarnock 22 5 3 3 25 19 4 3 4 16 18 4 33 
6 Inverness CT 22 3 4 4 13 13 4 6 1 13 8 5 31 
7 Motherwell 22 4 3 4 22 19 4 2 5 14 20 -3 29 
8 Aberdeen 22 3 5 3 13 11 3 4 4 11 15 -2 27 
9 Dundee Utd 22 4 5 2 12 12 2 1 8 12 23 -11 24 
10 Falkirk 22 0 3 8 8 21 4 2 5 14 23 -22 17 
11 Dunfermline 22 1 1 9 7 23 2 3 6 10 18 -24 13 
12 Livingston 22 1 4 6 8 22 1 2 8 4 20 -30 12


----------



## Magic_Zurawski (Jan 15, 2006)

BuBomb why are you tossing your toys out of the pram ? 

You posted pictures that showed Celtic Park in an extremely misleading light, what did you expect the response to be ? 

You also seem to lack intelligence to differentiate between people, yes that guy posted alot of crap about Rangers and I don't know why but all the other people all they have did is post pictures of Celtic Park in a more accurate light and you can't take it.

Dry your eyes hun.


----------



## easysurfer (Dec 12, 2004)

Okay, parkhead hasn't got any uefa stars, I presumed it did because it looks like such a great stadium. Exuse my mistake. I'm not a big supporter of either Rangers or Celtic but i prefer to see Celtic do well and follow their progress. You are not only an embarassment to fair-minded Rangers fans bubomb but also to every British football supporter. No wonder the kind of image foreigners have of us is a group of yobbish lager louts who think Britain is best at everything and hit out if things don't go our way. When in fact most British supporters are decent people but don't get noticed as much as we act civilly.


----------



## Noostairz (Sep 11, 2002)

bubomb said:


>


that's absolute class.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

edennewstairs said:


> that's absolute class.


Cheers mate. Here's a better pic -


----------



## Ghod7 (Jan 16, 2006)

bubomb said:


> Admin, please do something about this. Celtic morons are ruining every thread. On one of their football forums they decided to attack this site. We now have idiots on it with terrorists as their avatars (Ghod7).


where as you just have idiots in yours.


----------



## Ghod7 (Jan 16, 2006)

easysurfer said:


> Okay, parkhead hasn't got any uefa stars, I presumed it did because it looks like such a great stadium. Exuse my mistake. I'm not a big supporter of either Rangers or Celtic but i prefer to see Celtic do well and follow their progress. You are not only an embarassment to fair-minded Rangers fans bubomb but also to every British football supporter. No wonder the kind of image foreigners have of us is a group of yobbish lager louts who think Britain is best at everything and hit out if things don't go our way. When in fact most British supporters are decent people but don't get noticed as much as we act civilly.


just to clear it up Celtic Park is a uefa 5 star venue. as i read on a uefa website only yeterday.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

edennewstairs - I've got some more pics. Out of curiosity, what team do you support?


----------



## BobDaBuilder (Jun 7, 2005)

Nice soccer stadium. Shame about the over the top patriotism however. 

"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." Samuel Johnson


----------



## Noostairz (Sep 11, 2002)

bubomb said:


> edennewstairs - I've got some more pics. Out of curiosity, what team do you support?


impressive pics. i'll be looking out for the display they put on when villarreal visit.

as for who i support...


----------



## footballaintforbirds (Jan 15, 2006)

bubomb said:


> On average, Celtic fans are less wealthy than Rangers fans. If you go into the nice areas in Glasgow & suburbs, it is mainly Rangers fans, whereas Celtic fans tend to reside in 'deprived' housing estates. Of course this is on average - not all celtic fans are unemployed people who live in council houses, and not all Rangers fans live in decent areas with decent jobs. However, the 2 stadiums DO reflect the difference in wealth of the fans. I live in Bearsden, not many celtic fans round here.


Bearsden ??????? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm......

Rangers fan fined £240 for sectarian rant 


A SHERIFF told a Rangers fan he had let the country down after he 
launched a 
sectarian rant at visiting Portuguese supporters. 
David Kearney shouted sectarian abuse at FC Porto fans during a 
Champions 
League clash at Ibrox Stadium last September. 
Kearney continued the abuse, which happened just minutes into the match, 

before police stepped in and arrested him. 
The 22-year-old print worker, a season ticket holder for 11 years, was 
fined 
£240 when he appeared at Glasgow Sheriff Court and admitted a breach of 
the 
peace aggravated by religious prejudice. 
Sheriff Fiona Reith, QC, told him: "Visitors should be welcomed when 
they 
come here. You have let down yourself and this country by your actions." 
The court heard when Kearney, of Bearsden, near Glasgow, was caught he 
protested other fans should also be arrested as he was not the only one 
shouting the remarks


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

edennewstairs said:


> impressive pics. i'll be looking out for the display they put on when villarreal visit.
> 
> as for who i support...


A most amusing banner!! :hahaha:


----------



## Magic_Zurawski (Jan 15, 2006)

Bubomb that rant about Rangers fans being more wealthy is utterly disgusting, you are nothing short of a bigoted piece of turd. I'm sure Rod Stewart and Billy Connolly are jealous of you're big house in Bearsden from their 'council estates' :hahaha:

Idiot.

Keep to the subject eh, you might not look as stupid that way


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)




----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

edennewstairs said:


> impressive pics. i'll be looking out for the display they put on when villarreal visit.
> 
> as for who i support...


We are still deciding on what display to do. I have suggested a massive 'Giro cheque' to wind up the beggars from the east end. In their east end slophouses they would be choking over their guinness when they saw it!!!

I also think a Giant Potato would be good!!


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)

bubomb said:


> We are still deciding on what display to do. I have suggested a massive 'Giro cheque' to wind up the beggars from the east end. In their east end slophouses they would be choking over their guinness when they saw it!!!
> 
> I also think a Giant Potato would be good!!



might i suggest a large 4, in honour of your league position?


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)

and also bubigot, why when shown a link from UEFA's *OWN* website, stating that we have a 5-star stadium, do you insist on posting a link to a non-UEFA site as some sort of rebuttal?


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

I was at this game and it was a great sight. Unfortunately you can only see 3 out of the 4 stands in the photo. Our main stand also had the same display that night. I have included some pics of the stand so everybody can get an idea of how it would of looked -


----------



## kingdomca (Apr 14, 2004)

Is anthing being done to expand Ibrox? I have seen plans for another tier to take it to 58,000 but also smaller expansions.

whats the future for sottish football? would scotland welcome it if the 6 most northern english clubs joined scotland

Its far-fetched of course, but more realistic than the old firm getting into the english league, and the increasing southern domination of english football could well make the switch a possibility in the future for Newcastle, sunderland, Boro, Darlington, Carlisle, Hartlepool.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

kingdomca said:


> Is anthing being done to expand Ibrox? I have seen plans for another tier to take it to 58,000 but also smaller expansions.
> 
> whats the future for sottish football? would scotland welcome it if the 6 most northern english clubs joined scotland
> 
> Its far-fetched of course, but more realistic than the old firm getting into the english league, and the increasing southern domination of english football could well make the switch a possibility in the future for Newcastle, sunderland, Boro, Darlington, Carlisle, Hartlepool.



The pitch is going to be lowered and moved nearer the main stand which will allow more rows of seats on all 4 stands. The executive boxes at the back of the govan stand (two tier, runs along pitch) are going to be removed, seats put in and the area behind turned into a massive bar with lots of lounges. Capacity will be 53500 - 54000. This is currently being looked at and the building work should be announced soon. The two tiered stands can have an extra tier put on them, but it would probably be cheaper to knock them down and rebuild them. This is not going to happen for some time, if at all! Rangers are also looking at stadium sponsorship.

I would love north English teams to join our league, but they would never do this due to history and TV money. Newcastle get something like 20 million a year from Sky. Rangers get 1 million a year from TV money!! Also they are English clubs and so would always want to play in a English league.


----------



## kingdomca (Apr 14, 2004)

yes Newcastle´sky money would be the difficult one. They are the only club with realistic long-term prospects of being a premiership club.
But an expanded scottish league should look to become a 3 CL team league and that would surely make it easier for Newcastle to get into the CL there than in England, where things like Arsenal opening their new ground with expected massive gate increases must worry Newcastle in the long term.

And the value of the scottish tv deal would surely go way up with such a league as I would imagine attendances would at the 2nd level scottish clubs like Heart, Hibs, Aberdeen.
It may be something for Newcastle to consider if they play another decade as a mid-table team.

I just think its sad to see well-supported clubs like Sunderland and Boro struggle ever more in the premiership. Their fans are being priced out and the clubs just cant compete. It would seem better with local derbies, battles for europe etc in a scottish league.
Carlisle has a lot of potential as the only club in a large, if sparsely populated area and Darlington, who are also lost in the lower levels of the english league, have a 27,000 capacity asset and would surely jump at the chance of getting to use it.

I think this could make sense, though I wouldnt have a clue how much it matters that it would be english clubs in a scottish league.


----------



## Iain1974 (Jun 16, 2004)

kingdomca said:


> yes Newcastle´sky money would be the difficult one. They are the only club with realistic long-term prospects of being a premiership club.
> But an expanded scottish league should look to become a 3 CL team league and that would surely make it easier for Newcastle to get into the CL there than in England, where things like Arsenal opening their new ground with expected massive gate increases must worry Newcastle in the long term.
> 
> And the value of the scottish tv deal would surely go way up with such a league as I would imagine attendances would at the 2nd level scottish clubs like Heart, Hibs, Aberdeen.
> ...



FIFA wouldn't allow it. That's pretty much the end of it.

It's makes business sense for the 'evil twins' to join the Football League but it'd suck the lifeblood out of Scottish football plus FIFA would probaly only allow it if Britain only had one national team. While I don't doubt that Celtic/Rangers ownership wouldn't care I doubt some of the more.....ahem......passionate Scots would like it. As for English clubs joining the Scottish League I really don't see the incentives. Either financially or footballwise.


----------



## XCRunner (Nov 19, 2005)

^^That's for sure. Plus why would any of the English teams want to let in the Old Firm? It won't really help them out financially. None of the teams would be for it b/c all it does for the top teams is reduce their chances of playing in Europe, and for teams in The Championship, reduce their cnaces of promotion. I can't see any EPL or Football League teams wanting the Old Firm in the English system.


----------



## ultras67 (Jan 19, 2006)

You know this was quite an interesting thread until craigybhoy and footballaintforbirds got involved and started their bigoted bile.

One of the reasons why I no longer live in Scotland 

Of the two stadiums Ibrox may have a smaller capacity but the quality of the building is far higher and the seating arrangements far less dangerous.

In the top tiers at Parkhead the aisle is level with the TOP of the seat backs and you step down into the row whereas Ibrox and other stadiums the aisle is at the bottom of the seats and you step along the row. All it would take is someone to trip and there is nothing to grab onto before tumbling a large distance down the steps. Not a very safe situation.

A little know fact is Archibald Leitch designed the original ( pictured about 5 pages back ) Parkhead main stand as well as Rangers and many others main stands. His design was replaced in 1978? with the current stand.

On the subject of uefa ratings this is the latest list I have found

5 Star
Camp Nou, Barcelona
San Siro, Milan
Amsterdam Arena, Amsterdam
Stadio Olimpico, Rome
Old Trafford, Manchester
Olympiastadion, Munich
Ibrox Park, Glasgow
de Kuip, Rotterdam
Ernst Happel Stadion, Vienna
Stade de France, Paris
Delle Alpi, Turin
Luzhniki, Moscow
Hampden Park, Glasgow
Arena auf Schalke, Gelsenkirchen
Estadio Sport Lisboa e Benfica, Lisbon
Estadio do Dragao, Porto
Estadio Jose de Alvalade, Lisbon
Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
Stadio Olimpico, Sevilla
Ataturk Olympia Stadi, Istanbul
AOL Arena, Hamburg
Estadio Vicente Calderon, Madrid
Estadi Olimpic de Montjuic, Barcelona
Olympiastadion, Berlin

4-Star Stadiums
Estadio Anoeta, San Sebastian
Anfield Road, Liverpool
Parken, Copenhagen
Gottlieb Daimler Stadion, Stuttgart
Rasunda Stadion, Stockholm
Koning Boudewijn Stadion, Brussels
Stadio San Nicola, Bari
Spyros Louis, Athens
Villa Park, Birmingham
Philips Stadion, Eindhoven
Parc des Princes, Paris
Nya Ullevi Stadion, Goteborg


----------



## footballaintforbirds (Jan 15, 2006)

ultras67 said:


> You know this was quite an interesting thread until craigybhoy and footballaintforbirds got involved and started their bigoted bile.
> 
> One of the reasons why I no longer live in Scotland
> 
> ...


The bigotted bile has only come from one direction.
You will find that I have only posted FACTS about rangers and their supporters which you will find indisputeable.
The Facts are all true as I'm sure you will be uncomfortably aware.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

Yeah, there is no chance of English clubs playing in Scotland or Scottish clubs playing in England. Despite what you may read in the papers, the vast majority of Rangers fans are proud to be Scottish and wouldn't want to play in England, although David Murray (Rangers chairman) might not feel this way.

If Rangers and celtic got in the Premiership, then with the amount of money they would get, they would soon be competing for Champions League spots. No English club would want this as it means 2 less places for English clubs and 2 English clubs getting relegated. I reckon 99% of English club chairmen would vote against it. 

I would like to see the CIS cup and the Carling cup merged into a British cup. I think this is a realistic aim and I don't think many clubs or fans would object to it. It would also bring in more money for whoever sponsors the cup.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

ultras67 said:


> You know this was quite an interesting thread until craigybhoy and footballaintforbirds got involved and started their bigoted bile.
> 
> One of the reasons why I no longer live in Scotland
> 
> ...



Mate, the best bet is to ignore them. I lived in Glasgow all my life and the decent hard-working people in the city just ignore them. You see them stealing, drinking, begging and generally annoying people all the time. They are a real nuisance, but to be honest, they are more to be pitied than anything else.

Both Rangers and celtic have lots of decent fans in their support, but they also have scum in their support, and unfortunately some of the celtic ones have found this board.


----------



## Magic_Zurawski (Jan 15, 2006)

kingdomca said:


> Is anthing being done to expand Ibrox? I have seen plans for another tier to take it to 58,000 but also smaller expansions.
> 
> whats the future for sottish football? would scotland welcome it if the 6 most northern english clubs joined scotland
> 
> Its far-fetched of course, but more realistic than the old firm getting into the english league, and the increasing southern domination of english football could well make the switch a possibility in the future for Newcastle, sunderland, Boro, Darlington, Carlisle, Hartlepool.


Rangers don't have enough fans to go to a 58k stadium, Celtic are the best supported team in Scotland we will have to expand before them and we have 10,000 more seats as it is


----------



## Magic_Zurawski (Jan 15, 2006)

bubomb said:


> Mate, the best bet is to ignore them. I lived in Glasgow all my life and the decent hard-working people in the city just ignore them. You see them stealing, drinking, begging and generally annoying people all the time. They are a real nuisance, but to be honest, they are more to be pitied than anything else.
> 
> Both Rangers and celtic have lots of decent fans in their support, but they also have scum in their support, and unfortunately some of the celtic ones have found this board.


Bubigot you claim to be a 'decent hard-working' person while at the same time advocating slagging a potato famine which killed one million people ? You're hatred is shining through. I keep my abuse to the football, and about the giro cheque thing go ahead because I have never seen one in my life, considerin the fact you are portraying us as the 'poorer' set of supporters ain't it ironic that every fortnight we sell out a much larger stadium or are you too thick to comprehend that


----------



## Magic_Zurawski (Jan 15, 2006)

bubomb said:


> the vast majority of Rangers fans are proud to be Scottish


Then why is do the "Coatbridge Loyal" have an England flag as their banner thing  Idiots one and all


----------



## jmancuso (Jan 9, 2003)

ok...i think we had enough fun for one thread. no?


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)

*Celtic Park Stadium, Home Of Celtic Football Club.*

The Ground Holds Roughly 60,500 spectators

these pictures were taken on 12 december 2005, before a 3-2 home win against hibernian, from my seat in the stadium, in the lisbon lions stand :










































































the next set of pictures, are taken from the celtic park tour, which i took on the 10th january 2006 :


----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)




----------



## CraigyBhoy1888 (Jan 15, 2006)




----------



## 01dc07 (Feb 6, 2006)

bubomb said:


> and our bid failed miserably.
> 
> Ibrox holding a UEFA final would not be biased as it is the only club stadium in Scotland eligible (5 star) to hold a final. The reason it is not put forward by the SFA is because the SFA always put forward Hampden, for obvious reasons (the SFA own it).


I don't hold it against the SFA, they need the money and if it makes use of a stadium that we don't really get any use out of then I'm all for it.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

01dc07 said:


> I don't hold it against the SFA, they need the money and if it makes use of a stadium that we don't really get any use out of then I'm all for it.


I don't hold it against them either. If I owned a stadium I would put forward my own stadium before somebody else's.


----------



## kingdomca (Apr 14, 2004)

01dc07 said:


> Well I think that was what was proposed, though maybe they didn't include Murrayfield as it isn't a football stadium. It makes sense to have the 3 Glasgow stadiums, you have to play to your strengths and those 3 are the best football stadiums in Scotland. Of course, Hampden is the national stadium and must be included, and you cannot choose a stadium out of the other 2 because the other set of fans would complain. That is why Ibrox will not hold a UEFA final, it would come accross as bias on the part of the SFA.
> 
> I think the bid was supposed to also include Pittodrie, Tannadice and maybe Rugby Park.


Murrayfield was included, as for the rest, well scotland wouldnt bid without Dundee and Aberdeen, it would be absolutely ridiculous as it would completly unneccessary elevate their weakness to extraordinary levels. all scottish stadiums in 2 cities 40 k apart, hardly. 

They probably could use all 3 glasgow venues but it would have to count as only 2. 
Is it possible to expand easter road? whats behind the old stand?


----------



## gorgu (Mar 16, 2003)

Use all three in Glasgow, Two in Edinburgh (Tynecastle and Murrayfield) a new stadium in Dundee for both the teams there. A new stadium in Aberdeen, one in Kilmarnock that has temporarily expanded stands and one in Inverness with the same.

All are joined by motorways (Inverness excluded) all are near international airports and all have accomodation to cope with the influx of visitors


----------



## gorgu (Mar 16, 2003)

I count nine, altogether!


----------



## Lostboy (Sep 14, 2002)

There's the problem though - if Scotland takes on so many stadia, how can it be spread evenly with Ireland, which UEFA would demand.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

gorgu said:


> Use all three in Glasgow, Two in Edinburgh (Tynecastle and Murrayfield) a new stadium in Dundee for both the teams there. A new stadium in Aberdeen, one in Kilmarnock that has temporarily expanded stands and one in Inverness with the same.
> 
> All are joined by motorways (Inverness excluded) all are near international airports and all have accomodation to cope with the influx of visitors



Inverness's stadium holds 7500 people. It is going to need more than temporary stands to get up to 30000, it would need a new stadium, same goes for Kilmarnock. Kilmarnock average 6664, so a 30000 stadium would be daft. Inverness average 5419, again a 30000 stadium is stupid. Neither of these ground can be made up to 30000 with temporary stands, new stadiums would need to be built. Both these towns are very small, they do not have enough hotels etc to host a stadium for a major tournament.


----------



## Lostboy (Sep 14, 2002)

If Scotland ever did try and host the European Championships again, it would probably need a different partner than the Republic or Wales. It could potentially have half of the stadia avaliable, but the other Celtic Countries could not. I suppose you'd be left to the Scandinavian Countries, perhaps Norway.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

I think the basic answer to this is that Scotland will not be hosting the European Championships. We are simply far too small a country.


----------



## 01dc07 (Feb 6, 2006)

bubomb said:


> I think the basic answer to this is that Scotland will not be hosting the European Championships. We are simply far too small a country.


In a nutshell.


----------



## gorgu (Mar 16, 2003)

Sorry to disagree but rugby park could be converted into a stadium for 30000 temporarily and as for Inverness needing a new stadium totally agree!

Build a stadium for 30000 people that can be converted afterwards into a 20000 all seater stadium, that is covered, use it as a sporting centre of excellence for the highlands that has a multi sports use instead of being solely a football stadium!

If the Sydney Olympic stadium can be converted from 110000 people to 82000 then I am sure that it will be just as easy to do so for a stadium in Inverness.

Be blue sky thinkers, instead of typical dour Scots.

We have Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Dundee, Kilmarnock and Inverness where we could have games the first four could have permanent stadia used with perhaps reductions in capacities for the Aberdeen and Dundee stadia and Kilmarnock and Inverness could have sporting centres of excellence built that are like multipurpose football/rugby/hockey exhibition centres with demountable seats

Inverness and Kilmarnock could both cope with an temporary influx of 30000 people (remember it would only be for three games in the first round) Inverness has Aviemore and the ski resorts around it with ample hotel space and Kilmarnock has Ayr and the golf resorts of Troon and Turnberry which regularly cope with hundreds of thousands of visitors for the Open golf.

The only thing stopping Scotland from hosting a fantastic tournament is all you half glass empty miserable buggers


----------



## Its AlL gUUd (Jan 24, 2006)

bubomb said:


> I think the basic answer to this is that Scotland will not be hosting the European Championships. We are simply far too small a country.


Its not all bad, couple of years down the line Eire or Wales may have the stadia, wales have two now


----------



## kingdomca (Apr 14, 2004)

Its AlL gUUd said:


> Its not all bad, couple of years down the line Eire or Wales may have the stadia, wales have two now


But Wales isnt a neighbouring country and its top teams play in England. This quickly gets "messy" and I just dont think UEFA wants this. Its also not a question whether scotland could host it but also why UEFA should give it to scotland.

Look at eastern europe, poland high economic growth, 40 million people, poor stadiums. If that government decided to throw money at venues to host a EURO, it would surely be something UEFA wants. the same with Russia, perhaps Hungary and the checs, later perhaps Romania, Ukraine.

There arent a lot of benefits by giving it to the scots in some messy arrangement.

Scotland should probably focus on getting euro cup finals rather than tournaments.


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

*The best Scottish stadiums*

I thought I would post some pics of the best Scottish stadiums including some of the lesser known ones. There are lot's more, but I think these are the beat ones. Not bad for a small country of 5 million people. Could jealous porn loving Scandinavians please stay away from this post -


St.Mirren start work on a new 10000 stadium in July. There is also -


Murrayfield (67500) -




















Celtic (60832) -











Hampden (52103) -





























Rangers (50549, upgraded to 53-54000 over the next 18 months) -





























Kilmarnock (18128) -




















Hearts (18008, 1 more stand to rebuild, work starts in July) -











Hibernain (17500, 1 more stand to rebuild) -











Partick Thistle (13079, 1 more stand to build) -











Dunfermline (12558) -




















St. Johnstone (10673) -











Airdrie (10170) -




















Livingstone (10006) -




















Clyde (8029, 1 more stand to build) -











Inverness Caledonian Thistle (7512) - 











Falkirk (6200, 2 more stands to be built) -











Hamilton (5300, 2 more stands to be built) -











Stirling Albion (3808) -











Dumbarton (2050) -











East Fife (2000) -


----------



## Lostboy (Sep 14, 2002)

The more I see Murrayfield the less I like it. Curious that you leave out the Granite City.

With the smaller ones I do like the Edinburgh Clubs Stadia, how big is Hibernians going to end up being, it looks a lot bigger than 17,000 from the two sides in your photo. 

Do you class Sheffield Road as Scottish or not?


----------



## bubomb (Aug 20, 2004)

Lostboy said:


> The more I see Murrayfield the less I like it. Curious that you leave out the Granite City.
> 
> With the smaller ones I do like the Edinburgh Clubs Stadia, how big is Hibernians going to end up being, it looks a lot bigger than 17,000 from the two sides in your photo.
> 
> Do you class Sheffield Road as Scottish or not?



I only included the good one's or one's that will hopefully be finished in the near future. Pittodrie is too run down, they need 3 new stands, so it would probably be a new stadium for them if they were to look at stadium redevelopment.

Sheffield Park is an English stadium, but a Scottish team play in it!!


----------



## Welly (Feb 27, 2006)

> The more I see Murrayfield the less I like it.


It's by far Scotland's best stadium.


----------



## idlewild (Mar 3, 2006)

Isn't the title of this thread an oxymoron??????


----------



## EADGBE (Feb 28, 2006)

My vote goes to Boghead, Dumbarton. The name certinaly conjours up the true essence of the place.


----------



## gorgu (Mar 16, 2003)

He he I used toi live int eh next town,m the thing is Dumbarton have a new stadium now but yes it was a complete shit hole!


----------



## Wezza (Jan 22, 2004)

I like the new stand, the old main stand is completely out of date.


----------



## Codenine (Aug 21, 2007)

Johnny Hooker said:


> If such plans exist, the person who drew them up should be committed. Hearts will never fill a 40,000 seater stadium, FFS, they only fill their present one twice a year against Rangers. They don't even fill it against Celtic, what chance do they have of ever filling a 40,000 capacity stadium? I'll tell you... NONE!


For the record we've sold out every game for the last 2 seasons apart from 2 games............ Gretna at the weekend and I think it was Kilmarnock in the cup. 

Get your facts right !!!


----------



## Codenine (Aug 21, 2007)

NeilF said:


> I'm familiar with the flats, taking a bus straight past them every morning... I'd always wondered as to the reason; I'd guessed it was something to do with those flats, but never quite worked out exactly what. It never seemed like the easiest or most 'traditional' way of dealing with that sort of problem, so I always wondered if there was some other reason as to why. Indeed, I brought up this curiosity in another thread on here.
> 
> You don't, perchance, know the reasons for the upper tiers of the end stands at Easter Road being stepped in, do you? Like here:
> 
> ...


Again if you look at Easter Road on google earth you will see that there are roads behind each of the stands. Both roads kind of cut the corners at the back of the stand thus being the reason they had to slightly cut the funny shape at the back of the stand.


----------



## Johnny Hooker (Aug 19, 2007)

Codenine said:


> For the record we've sold out every game for the last 2 seasons apart from 2 games............ Gretna at the weekend and I think it was Kilmarnock in the cup.
> 
> Get your facts right !!!


----------



## Johnny Hooker (Aug 19, 2007)

Codenine: "We can fill a 40,000 seater stadium"

Nurse: Put him back in his cell


----------



## Mince Tatties (Aug 4, 2007)

Sorry, Johnny, but Hearts have sold out their stadium for the last 2 years as the official attendances shown below highlight. Hearts averaged around 35000 in the 60's so there is no reason why they can't get back to those days. The attendace for their friendly against Barcelona at Murrayfield was over 57000. You sound like a typical daft old firm fan to me - would it not be a much better and more exciting SPL if Hearts had a good team and a big support rather than the same predictable 2 winning the league every year?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/h/heart_of_midlothian/6920774.stm


----------



## canarywondergod (Apr 24, 2006)

sounds like boubomb again


----------



## Scozia9 (Jan 29, 2007)

I live in Fife, and a part from hating the Old Filth I really couldn't be arsed traveling to the West coast to watch a game. But if Hearts were to build bigger so I had a chance of a ticket for big games and stopped arsing about on the field i'd be hapy to watch them instead of the English Premiership on telle. I think many are the same, so yeah 40,000 is easily done, the East coast needs a "big" club!


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

Where in Fife. The shitty side or the Central/East?


----------



## Scozia9 (Jan 29, 2007)

St. Andrews :cheers:


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

Ah, not so bad. :lol:


----------



## Codenine (Aug 21, 2007)

I'm new to this forum but do you always get weirdo's like this Johnny Hooker on ?? Seems a very strange character to me. :nuts:


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

There are a few, yes. 
Just like anywhere, though. I'm sure your stay will be a positive one, though.

Why not head over to the Glasgow Section (also Scotland) of the UK Forum?


----------



## Pronaos (Jul 25, 2007)

NeilF said:


>



This stadium intergrates excellently with the surrounding buildings! I enjoy it when a stadium's architecture blends in nicely with the neighborhood it is in.


----------



## NeilF (Apr 22, 2006)

The building shown there isn't the external facade of the new stand. If you look at this picture, you can see where this new building will be in relation to the new stand:


----------



## Johnny Hooker (Aug 19, 2007)

Mince Tatties said:


> Sorry, Johnny, but Hearts have sold out their stadium for the last 2 years as the official attendances shown below highlight. Hearts averaged around 35000 in the 60's so there is no reason why they can't get back to those days. The attendace for their friendly against Barcelona at Murrayfield was over 57000. You sound like a typical daft old firm fan to me - would it not be a much better and more exciting SPL if Hearts had a good team and a big support rather than the same predictable 2 winning the league every year?


First of all, 57000 people turning out to see what is essentially the biggest game Hearts will have (friendly or not) in each of the present supporters lifetimes, does not mean even half of them would turn out to see the same Lithuanian XI play against Motherwell, Dundee, Flakirk, Gretna or any of the other dross the SPL has to offer. 

To illustrate, consider today's attendance v league leaders Rangers: 15,948 capacity: 17,402. hno: 

This stand will never be built, and even if it was, big stadiums do not necessarily make good teams. Look at Wembley and England fuxake :lol:


----------



## Benjuk (Aug 12, 2006)

Johnny Hooker said:


> First of all, 57000 people turning out to see what is essentially the biggest game Hearts will have (friendly or not) in each of the present supporters lifetimes, does not mean even half of them would turn out to see the same Lithuanian XI play against Motherwell, Dundee, Flakirk, Gretna or any of the other dross the SPL has to offer.
> 
> To illustrate, consider today's attendance v league leaders Rangers: 15,948 capacity: 17,402. hno:
> 
> This stand will never be built, and even if it was, big stadiums do not necessarily make good teams. Look at Wembley and England fuxake :lol:



Sunderland AFC - average attendance in Roker Park, 96/97, EPL, approx 18000.
Sunderland AFC - average attendance in Stadium of Light, 97/98, 1st Div, approx 35000.

You put in extra seats, you make space, you virtually guarentee ticket availability for all games, you allow for 'walk up' business, etc., etc. Attendances can increase dramatically. Any club that is close to capacity on a regular basis is likely to see a jump in attendances once it becomes possible to get more in.


----------



## SACRE BLUE (Sep 14, 2007)

The facts are that this stand WILL be built. Everything is in place and the contracts have been signed, sealed and delivered. Of course, this doesn't guarantee Hearts success (I hope it does as it will help Scottish football become more competitive), but an estimated 36% increase in attendance, as well as a huge increase in turnover because of the retail constructions....well...it's not going to do Hearts any harm!


----------



## Uibhisteach (Sep 5, 2007)

Maybe this will inspire other Scottish clubs to improve their stadiums, some of them are shocking.

Nice design for the new stand, fits in well.


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

They aren't shocking: maybe to similiar and small but not bad (apart from Love Street (getting demolished)) and some lower league teams.


----------



## Uibhisteach (Sep 5, 2007)

^^ 

Ok maybe shocking wasn't the right word to use but there are some which could do with some improvements, better facilities etc.


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

Which? Sticking witht the SPL. Love Street is getting turned into a Tesco and I can't think of any others.


----------



## Uibhisteach (Sep 5, 2007)

cinosanap said:


> Which? Sticking witht the SPL. Love Street is getting turned into a Tesco and I can't think of any others.


In my opinion there are stadiums in the 1st division which are superior to some of the stadiums in the SPL.

For example in the 1st division we have Douglas Park, Dens, Firhill, Almondvale, East end and McDiarmid.

Compare them to Raydale, Caledonian Stadium, Love St and Fir Park, poor show when clubs from a lower division have better facilities then out so-called 'premier league' clubs.


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

But you could say that of Leeds, Nottingham, etc in the English.
Yes, they are pretty good stadiums in 1st compared to the SPL but clubs in Scotland aren't exactly rolling in it to upgrade.

PS: What team do you support? I'm guessing a 1st Div team but who?


----------



## Uibhisteach (Sep 5, 2007)

^^ 
I suppose its the same in every country. Maybe when the madness stops in football Scottish clubs will be under less pressure financially.

As for my team, well its always been Celtic with me. We've had a couple of results go against us but hopefully we can avoid first division football for a while yet.

Is it Rovers for youself?


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

Ofcourse I'm a Rovers man! 

I thought you were a 1st Div team supporter because you said 'we' when referring to grounds in the 1st.


----------



## LandOfGreenGinger (Apr 30, 2006)

*Potential Scotland bid for Euro 2016*

from the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/internationals/7109057.stm


> Salmond in Scots Euro 2016 study
> 
> Salmond recently celebrated the 2014 Commonwealth Games coming to Glasgow
> First Minister Alex Salmond has revealed that a feasibility study will take place regarding the possibility of Scotland hosting Euro 2016.
> ...



Can't help think this may be 1 tournament too early for a Scottish bid given the number of redevelopments that would be needed, would be great hosts though, real passion for the sport. Anyway, any guesses about which grounds may make up such a bid?


----------



## mavn (Nov 17, 2007)

LandOfGreenGinger said:


> from the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/internationals/7109057.stm
> 
> 
> 
> Can't help think this may be 1 tournament too early for a Scottish bid given the number of redevelopments that would be needed, would be great hosts though, real passion for the sport. Anyway, any guesses about which grounds may make up such a bid?


The 2 stadiums for only 1 city rule will cripple them severely. And if the amount of teams will go to 24 it would become even harder.

I would be fine with the Scottish organizing it though. Real passion for the game that few other countries still show nowadays.


----------



## Sagaris (Nov 28, 2006)

Scotland by itself? Scotland is too small in my opinion. Only 5 million people, and only two large enough urban centre. There is little hope for this bid.


----------



## Chimaera (Mar 14, 2007)

mavn said:


> The 2 stadiums for only 1 city rule will cripple them severely. And if the amount of teams will go to 24 it would become even harder.
> 
> I would be fine with the Scottish organizing it though. Real passion for the game that few other countries still show nowadays.


Is it possible to have two cities with two stadiums?

In that case:
Glasgow: 2 of the following: Hampden/Ibrox/Celtic Park (pop. 579,000)
Edinburgh: Murrayfield, Easter Road/Tynecastle (expansion) (pop. 449,000)
(Other cities: Dundee (143,000, stadiums 14,000 and 12,000), Aberdeen (202,000, stadium 22,200), and euhm, what other towns? One or two of the following:
Paisley (74,000, Saint-Mirren 11th in 2006-2007, St Mirren Park 10,800)
Inverness (55,000, stadium 7,500, 8th in 2006-2007) 
Kilmarnock (pop. 44,000, 5th in 2006-2007, Rugby Park, 18,000, built 1995)
(Falkirk (pop. 32,000, 6th in 2006-2007, Community Stadium, 10,000, built 2004))
(Motherwell (pop. 30,000, 10th in 2006-2007, Fir Park, 14,000))

Except for Glasgow, Edinburgh, Dundee and Aberdeen we're talking about small cities/towns, even compared to the Dutch-Belgian bid


----------



## Joop20 (Jun 29, 2004)

Chimaera said:


> Except for Glasgow, Edinburgh, Dundee and Aberdeen we're talking about small cities/towns, even compared to the Dutch-Belgian bid


Yeah, Scotland basically has only 4 cities! Considering the rule that only one city can have 2 stadiums (which would obviously be Glasgow), I don't see how Scotland can make a successful bid unless they hook up with one of the other Celtic Nations. They'd make a great host though!


----------



## Gherkin (May 30, 2005)

Bid with Ireland again! That was a great bid when the two countries tryed to host euro 2008.


----------



## Chimaera (Mar 14, 2007)

Gherkin007 said:


> Bid with Ireland again! That was a great bid when the two countries tryed to host euro 2008.


There were too many stadiums for too little cities back then (and the GAA didn't want Croke Park to be used), and the stadium contribution was far from 50-50 (6 in Scotland, 2 in Ireland).


----------



## Lostboy (Sep 14, 2002)

_Bid with Ireland again! That was a great bid when the two countries tryed to host euro 2008. _

That was the worst bid ever. Ireland came in at the eleventh hour and wasn't able to guarantee a single stadium. A bid with Wales or Norway might be a better option.


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

We might get away with having more than one city with two stadiums since the country is so small. Or is it a set-in-stone rule?

If we did go alone (unlikely and only if it stays 16 teams) then I think:

Hampden
Ibrox
Murreyfield
Pittodrie
Dundee
Inverness
Kilmarnock


----------



## Chimaera (Mar 14, 2007)

cinosanap said:


> We might get away with having more than one city with two stadiums since the country is so small. Or is it a set-in-stone rule?


I wonder if it really is a rule, if so, it must be a recent one. In 2004 two cities had two stadiums (Porto, Lisbon). But that was the only time in EURO history.


----------



## Quintana (Dec 27, 2005)

Portugal used 10 instead of the required 8 stadiums which is why they could use two stadiums in both Lisbon and Porto.


----------



## NeilF (Apr 22, 2006)

At best, Ireland would have one stadium to offer - I can't see three cities being allowed two stadia at any level, so even if the GAA did sanction the use of Croke Park, it renders the use of either Croker or Lansdowne Road redundant. There simply isn't the demand in the local game for larger soccer stadia in places like Cork, Limerick or Galway - given the lack of demand, large stadia would simply be a long-term financial burden to those clubs. 

The GAA grounds take most of their capacity from standing space; that's not to mention the complete lack of facilities in these stadia. I can't see the GAA opening up the use of all GAA stadia, ad infinitum and without the GAA being willing to do that, I can't see the Irish government offering any cash for that sort of redevelopment and if the GAA wished to carry out these redevelopments, it would probably choose to do so itself; certainly, the money recently spent at St Tiernach's Park and the new plans for Casement Park in Belfast suggest that the GAA has the money to redevelop its stadia but is choosing a redevelopment path that, rightly, follows the needs of that sport.

Outside of Dublin, the best stadium in Ireland in 2016 will probably be the redeveloped Thomond Park, which, with a capacity of around 26,000, with only 15,000 seats, is hardly going to make the grade. The suggestion of Ireland coming into a bid really doesn't offer a whole lot and would probably make a Scottish bid weaker, given the lack of facilities Ireland would offer, versus the complications of a joint bid.

Similiarly, beyond the Millennium Stadium, I'm left to wonder if there is any need for European Championship sized stadia - if I'm right, the capacity must be a minimum of 30,000. Even Liberty Stadium comes in a good 10,000 short of that. As much as I would love to see a Scotland / Celtic Nations bid, even if Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland submitted a four-way bid, I still think they'd struggle to have enough stadia, given the restrictions that UEFA impose. That said, I don't think a Scottish bid would be any better off with the inclusion of any other Celtic Nation as, at best, they could really only offer a maximum of two more stadia, one of which could well be unsustainable for the future, yet I also doubt the ability of Scotland to host the competition on its own - when you start looking at the redevelopment of Pittodrie or Tannadice, for example, you have to wonder where the space for such redevelopment is going to come from, given the location of those stadia. With the degree of redevelopment required, we are looking at five new build stadia, all of which would have artificially high capacities for the teams that play there and at least three of which would require new sites. Beyond the sustainibility question, and regardless of Mr Salmond's pontifications to the contrary, I cannot see this happening by any stretch of the imagination. 

Sadly, without a shakeup of UEFA's restrictions, with regards to how many stadia can be in one city, Scotland doesn't have a hope of producing this on its own and can't really rely on great contributions from Wales or either part of Ireland to bolster the bid.

If it did happen, I'd imagine:

Glasgow - Hampden and Ibrox / Park Head
Edinburgh - Murrayfield
Aberdeen - New Build
Dundee - New Build
Inverness - New Build
Falkirk - New Build
and a new build somewhere in the borders.

It doesn't seem feasible to me.


----------



## GlasgowMan (Jan 11, 2006)

I dont think its a good idea.

Glasgow is home to Scotland only three decent football stadiums (Hampden, Celtic Park and Ibrox) and you would probably have to ignore one of the three for the tourliment, unless you are aloud 3 stadiums in the one city? 

To ignore one of Scotland's only good existing stadiums and build a number of new ones that will never fill half there capacity ater 2016 is just madness.

PS, Glasgows population is much higher than the 500,000 quoted above, the real population is around 1.5million with a metro population of 2.7million.


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

I think you guys are forgetting that not all seats need to be permanent.


----------



## NeilF (Apr 22, 2006)

If we are talking about temporary seats then I think we're really only ruling out the sustainability issue for the clubs. If anything, however, temporary seats could stand only to make the potential problems worse - firstly, it means that money needs to be spent on putting seats up and then taking them back down again - unless we are talking about not having roofs on some parts of stadia, which is clearly mental since we're talking about Scotland here, the savings from temporary seating are unlikely to be enough to make it a viable solution. The cost of building a 20,000 seat stadium in the UK and building a 30,000 seat stadium in the UK isn't as huge as one might expect as shown by some recent examples:

KC Stadium, Hull - Capacity; 25,404 - Cost; £44m
St Mary's Stadium, Southampton - Capacity; 32,689 - Cost; £32m
Walkers Stadium, Leicester - Capacity; 32,500 - Cost; £37m
Liberty Stadium, Swansea - Capacity; 20,532 - Cost; £27m

To take this a step further, Nottingham Forest are currently talking about spending £45m - £50m on a stadium with a capacity of between 40,000 and 50,000. Given the times these stadia were built, I'd say we're probably looking at an average of about £1.3m per 1000 seats for a 30,000 seat stadium and about £1.5m per 1000 seats for a 20,000 seat stadium. In terms of 5 new build stadia that meet the minimum requirements and including 10,000 temporary seats for each of the 5 required new build stadia, you're probably looking at a cost of about £30m - £35m per stadium, with a tendancy towards £35m. Given that a 30,000 seat stadium could be built for about £40m, I'm not sure that temporary seats really offers a solution. 

Unless we're talking about only having permanant seating along two sides of the stadium and temporary seating in the crudest possible terms, as shown below, I don't think there would be enough difference in terms of absolute cost, so I still cannot believe that Scotland is a viable host for the Championship, as much as I would love to see them played here.


----------



## legslikeaspider (Nov 9, 2006)

I agree with you Neil, a Scotland-hosted Euro 2016 seems like an unlikely prospect. The likelihood is that one of the big countries like Spain, Italy or Russia are going to bid for this so there's no way we could win against one of them or even a Swedish-Norwegian bid. 

In addition, Hampden is now looking a bit on the small side for a major final - I know its the same size as the Ernst Happel Stadion, but by 2016 we can expect that UEFA will be going down the same path for the Euro Champs as it has done for the champions league final and saying capacity needs to be 70,000 ish. I seem to recall you posting diagrams showing why it would be difficult to dig down at Hampden and expand it that way and I'm reasonably sure there's not enough room behind the north stand to add on an extra tier. Am I correct? Of course, Murrayfield is plenty big enough, but I cant see the SFA or the tartan army being able to swallow their pride and have the final played there.

I think our best hope is to see england miss out on world cup 2018 and go in with them for a joint Euro 2020 bid.


----------



## RobH (Mar 9, 2007)

It depends who England miss out to. If we miss out to a nation outside of Europe I'd hope we'd be back in again for 2022.


----------



## Kobo (Dec 12, 2006)

legslikeaspider said:


> I think our best hope is to see england miss out on world cup 2018 and go in with them for a joint Euro 2020 bid.


Do you not think Scotland could put in a Joint bid with Wales, they could put in 4 or 5 stadiums.

Cardiff. Population: 349,500








Millennium Stadium: 74,500 built 1999.

And if Cardiff was allowed a 2nd stadium then it could be this one.









St Davids Stadium: 30,000 built by 2008

Swansea. Population: 169,880.








Liberty Stadium: 20,000 at moment but could be expanded to 30,000. Built in 2005.

Newport. Population: 140,100.
They have Rodney Parade which is a small ground with 11,700 seats so maybe a new stadium of 30,000 seats that maybe could be reduced after.

Wrexham. Population: 63,084.








Racecourse Ground: 15,891 would need expanding to 30,000 with maybe reduction afterwards.


----------



## NeilF (Apr 22, 2006)

Kobo, the trouble is where to expand Liberty Stadium to? We are talking about an extra 10,000 seats at least - half of the current capacity of the stadium, yet growth would be restricted by a river / river valley on one side and potentially a road on another. An extra 10,000 seats could well make the stadium footprint far too large for the site. On top of that, niether Swansea City or Ospreys really need the extra capacity - average attendances for Swansea City come in at around 12,000 - 14,000 over the last couple of season and for the Ospreys about 6,000 - 10,000. With the stadium being council owned, this is probably less of a problem than it could be for a privately owned stadium but I still don't see it as viable. The same goes for The Racecourse Ground - there's not a lot of room to redevelop and, given the age and facilities of the stadium, it would become practically a new build anyway. 

With a united Scotland / Wales bid, we're looking at having 8 stadia: if we take this as four from each country, Scotland requires one new build stadium and Wales would probably require three new build stadia, which really doesn't improve the situation a great deal - four new build stadia in two countries against five new build stadia in one country. The only way I could see that being more popular would be if the new stadia were exchequer funded and I can't see that happening. 

I really don't mean to keep forcing the point - I'd love to see a major championships come to Scotland, at least in part, but I think we have to be realistic here and look at the degree of planning, the infrastructure improvements and the sheer scale and cost of developing stadia in Scotland / Scotland and Wales / Wales to the required level. 

legslikeaspider, I don't remember doing any drawings - perhaps another member here? - but there are certainly problems with digging down at Hampden, mostly stemming from the fact that the stadium is already fairly dug down on three sides - you can see in this picture by comparing the depth of the stands that you can see with the height of the external walls of the stadium:










You're already looking at entrances that enter the stadium about two thirds of the way up the bowl. Therefore, digging down further could well cause egress problems and whatnot. I think there also could well be problems with the differing rake of the stands - I'm not sure of the specifics but the stands that run along side the pitch have a slightly steeper rake than those at the end.

I think you can also see from the above picture that there's a road that would restrict growth on the North Side of the stadium but there is plenty of room for an increased upper tier on the South Side as well as on the East and West sides, as shown here:










The trouble is about whether or not the foundations would be strong enough for a new tier on the East and West sides or a larger upper tier on the South. If not then the room for expansion could be fairly incidental.


----------



## Joop20 (Jun 29, 2004)

I've just been looking at the Scottish stadiums on worldstadiums.com, and I must say that besides the stadiums in Glasgow, they all look like a dump. Isn't there a need for new stadiums in Edinburgh, Dundee and Aberdeen regardless of a Euro 2016 bid? 

And could Murrayfield possibly be used as one of the two Glasgow venues? Or won't the rugby union allow that?


----------



## NeilF (Apr 22, 2006)

Murrayfield is in Edinburgh and the SRU are perfectly happy to let it be used for football; Hearts played their 2006 champions league qualifiers at Murrayfield and also played Barcelona there in a pre-season friendly. SRU also offered Murrayfield for use by the SFA as an alternative to Hampden for a Scottish Cup semi-final between Hearts and Hibs because of road-works on the major routes between Edinburgh and Glasgow at that time. Murrayfield would definately be a part of any bid.

And yes, places like Dundee and Aberdeen do need new stadia but Aberdeen FC have a current capacity of around 22,000 but only average about 15,000 spectators. Dundee play at Dens Park, with a capacity of around 12,000 but average about 7,000 spectators while Dundee United play at Tannadice which has a capacity of around 14,000 and average attendances of around 8,000. New stadia probably are needed in these places but not 30,000 capacity UEFA championship standard stadia.


----------



## Joop20 (Jun 29, 2004)

NeilF said:


> Murrayfield is in Edinburgh


I've obviously been spending too much time in front of the PC today, I knew Murrayfield is in Edinburgh :nuts: Nevermind my previous post.


----------



## legslikeaspider (Nov 9, 2006)

NeilF said:


> legslikeaspider, I don't remember doing any drawings - perhaps another member here? - but there are certainly problems with digging down at Hampden, mostly stemming from the fact that the stadium is already fairly dug down on three sides - you can see in this picture by comparing the depth of the stands that you can see with the height of the external walls of the stadium:
> 
> You're already looking at entrances that enter the stadium about two thirds of the way up the bowl. Therefore, digging down further could well cause egress problems and whatnot. I think there also could well be problems with the differing rake of the stands - I'm not sure of the specifics but the stands that run along side the pitch have a slightly steeper rake than those at the end.
> 
> ...


That's a very informed and informative reply Neil - thanks. 

I'm fairly certain that I read somewhere that the angle of the E,W & N stands is such that if further digging occurred then the people at the back of these stands wouldn't be able to see the far side of the pitch. Plonking a new tier on top the North stand might be possible, depending on the strength of the foundations, but there are the issues of integrating it well with the two curved stands at the ends of the ground and the troublesome issue of light to the flats located behind the stadium. 

Perhaps the most feasible way to increase the stadium's capacity would be to completely remodel it and turn the pitch through 90 degrees - there's plenty of room at the site, especially if Lesser Hampden was bulldozed, but the space is in all the wrong locations. That way, you could get rid of the much maligned running track and possibly build a stadium sufficiently architecturally adventurous to merit the title 'National Stadium'. However, with the Commonwealth games athletics due to be held there, that's not going to happen before 2014.


----------



## eomer (Nov 15, 2003)

If UK got Euro 2016 after OG 2012 (London), Rugby WC 2015 (Scotland) and Comonwealt Games 2016 (Cardiff), England won't get WC 2018.
So, I think that:
- Scotland should host Rugby World Cup 2015
- Spain should host Euro 2016 and WC 2026
- England should host WC 2018.


----------



## Joop20 (Jun 29, 2004)

eomer said:


> If UK got Euro 2016 after OG 2012 (London), Rugby WC 2015 (Scotland) and Comonwealt Games 2016 (Cardiff), England won't get WC 2018.
> So, I think that:
> - Scotland should host Rugby World Cup 2015
> - Spain should host Euro 2016 and WC 2026
> - England should host WC 2018.


Dude, another ill-informed post of yours. There are no commonwealth games in 2016, and Cardiff certainly won't host them. Glasgow will host the 2014 commonwealth games, and they really don't have anything to do with UEFA or FIFA. 

I don't know where you got the idea that Scotland will host the Rugby WC in 2015, but they are far from capable of hosting a rugby wc. As far as I know, they haven't even shown interest in hosting it.

Facts are that the 2012 olympics will be in London, and that the 2014 commonwealth games will be in Glasgow. Besides that, everything is open. And Fifa and Uefa don't give a rat's ass where the commonwealth games or rugby world cup are.


----------



## eomer (Nov 15, 2003)

Joop20 said:


> Dude, another ill-informed post of yours. There are no commonwealth games in 2016, and Cardiff certainly won't host them. Glasgow will host the 2014 commonwealth games, and they really don't have anything to do with UEFA or FIFA.


Thanks for your correction...but it's even worst for Scotish bid to host Euro 2016 !!!



Joop20 said:


> I don't know where you got the idea that Scotland will host the Rugby WC in 2015, but they are far from capable of hosting a rugby wc. As far as I know, they haven't even shown interest in hosting it.


Just from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Rugby_World_Cup
If England doesn't send any bid, Scotland could get it.



Joop20 said:


> Facts are that the 2012 olympics will be in London, and that the 2014 commonwealth games will be in Glasgow. Besides that, everything is open.


Hosting the 3 most important sport events in the same country within 6 years could be difficult even for UK that got a very high sport tradition. But if you add CG 2014 and Euro 2016, it becomes crazy...
3 majors event for Scotland between 2014 and 2016...hum, hum.



Joop20 said:


> And Fifa and Uefa don't give a rat's ass where the commonwealth games or rugby world cup are.


You are wrong: Spain lost Euro 2004 because several sport events occur in the country during the past. WC 1982, OG1992, Athletics Worldchampionship in Sevilla...


----------



## NeilF (Apr 22, 2006)

Eomer - you must remember that most of the stadium infrastructure for the Glasgow Commonwealth Games is already in place - 7 or 8 of the 11 venues already exist and require, at most, some temporary modification. Beyond the long-overdue extension of Glasgow's underground into the eastern side of the city, there is nothing with the 2014 Commonwealth games that will stretch available investment. By 2020 at worst, I'm sure this update of the Subway in Glasgow would have happened anyway, so it really doesn't have much, if any, bearing on the ability of Scotland to hold a European Championships. 

You must also remember that, in terms of stadia, a rugby world cup requires little to no investment - certainly, the games in France used unmodified, existing stadia. Especially with nations within UK and Ireland, a Rugby World cup is only indicative of where the final will be played and nothing more - the last UK-based Rugby World Cup was in 1999 when Wales hosted it and that used a plethora of stadia in England, Northern Ireland, Republic of Ireland, Scotland and Wales with the final being played at the Millennium Stadium. Were Scotland to hold a rugby world cup in 2015, you'd see the final held at Murrayfield and other games held at a few other selected stadia in the country, like Hampden and possible smaller games at Scottish club rugby grounds like Netherdale in Galashiels or Hughenden in Glasgow. Assuming that Scotland were to hold the 2015 rugby world cup, it would place little to no financial strain on Scotland or the UK and Ireland as hosts.

I don't think Scotland or a Celtic Nations bid for the European Championships would be viable, simply because these nations do not need the required amount of large stadia in the long term - I think, between Northern Ireland, Republic of Ireland, Scotland and Wales, there is a need for no more than ten stadia with 30,000+ seats:

Northern Ireland - New Build National Stadium (wherever it be)
Republic of Ireland - Croke Park, Lansdowne Road
Scotland - Celtic Park, Hampden Park, Ibrox Park, Murrayfield, Tynecastle (redevelopment)
Wales - Millennium Stadium, New Build Stadium in Cardiff

The trouble is that this is across four nations; the best any two nations could produce would be seven stadia in only three cities, which would not work on any level. I don't think the other events being hosted around the UK and others that could be hosted around the UK around the same time would have any effect.


----------



## Codenine (Aug 21, 2007)

Johnny Hooker said:


> For the record though, I do like the renders for that new stand thats being proposed, however I seriously doubt that will ever be built either.


http://www.heartsfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/TyneCastle/0,,10289~1216407,00.html 

Stage 2 in place Johnny.

What negetive spin are you going to put on it this time ??


----------



## SpicyMcHaggis (Oct 7, 2008)

I was watching Hibs - Hearts earlier and i've noticed that east stand is missing on Easter Road... do you guys have some renders of the new stand?


----------



## gavstar00 (Apr 26, 2009)

SpicyMcHaggis said:


> I was watching Hibs - Hearts earlier and i've noticed that east stand is missing on Easter Road... do you guys have some renders of the new stand?


----------



## Marin Mostar (Jan 3, 2009)

To bad! It would look much better if the stands were same as other three. Is there a reason for this one to be diferent/lower/shorter?


----------



## JYDA (Jul 14, 2008)

I would guess cost. Simpler means cheaper and Hibs is not flush with cash


----------



## clyde built (Jun 20, 2006)

It was decided to make it a one tier stand after consultation with the fans as they think it will increase the atmosphere at easter road. I however agree it would have been better to have four stands that are 2 tiers as oppose to an odd on out like the new one.


----------



## GunnerJacket (Jan 25, 2008)

Wow. Shocked I missed that news. I recall a few years ago when it seemed Hearts would be the first of the two to renovate their fourth side. Still curious about the viability for either one to do this, however, given their avg. gates remain below capacity. Surely they'll fill for Old Firm matches but even some derbies don't sell out. Hmmmmm.

SPL needs fairer distribution of funds. Would help for the country to absorb another 1,000,000 people or so, too!


----------



## GunnerJacket (Jan 25, 2008)

lwa said:


> Did I hear on the news last night that the East Stand at Easter Road was open for the Europa League game last night?


Game report lists Easter Road as the venue, but the attendance was only 12k+, so whether or not it was open I can't say.


> Also, does anyone on here have pictures of the proposed redevelopment at Firhill


All I've seen are the old concept sketches for the site as a whole, and nothing about the actual venue. I imagine that was on hold until the residential portion became committed since PTFC needed that incoming cash to launch the improvements to the stadium.


----------



## lwa (Aug 2, 2010)

GunnerJacket said:


> All I've seen are the old concept sketches for the site as a whole, and nothing about the actual venue. I imagine that was on hold until the residential portion became committed since PTFC needed that incoming cash to launch the improvements to the stadium.


the concept sketches from several years ago, as part of the wider Firhill Basin redevelopment?

They have revised their plans again since then, and have apparently applied for planning permission to build a new housing/comercial development on the old city terrace, with a new stand with 300 seats (4 rows) infront of it! (I know it will look seriously stupid next to the JH, especially when they do the same (but only 1 row of seats) on the main stand side, but would like to see some picutres to confirm that)


----------



## GunnerJacket (Jan 25, 2008)

lwa said:


> They have revised their plans again since then, and have apparently applied for planning permission to build a new housing/comercial development on the old city terrace, with a new stand with 300 seats (4 rows) infront of it!


4 rows?!!! What's the point? Seriously, at that I imagine they're not providing concessions or utilities for such a small populace, meaning the value of the seats is minimized. I'd rather see the/a club leave the one side as an appealing wall and then do the remaining 3 sides correctly. 

Not a graceful dilemma, but hopefully they'll do right by their fans.


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

Partick are a mess. The board are slowly destroying the club and the stadium.


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

http://www.afc.co.uk/articles/20100812/AFC-lodge-arena-planning-application_2275060_2118783


----------



## GunnerJacket (Jan 25, 2008)

Still too suburban for my taste, but if it benefits the community and club overall then I'm all for it.


----------



## gorgu (Mar 16, 2003)

Its never gonna happen, the club are FLAT Broke!

Even if they did sell the Pittodrie site for 25m, they are ten mill in debt and would need to find another 25 mill to get this built, the council are bankrupt and the managing director would rather shoot his own children than spend any money on Aberdeen, even though he is Britain's tenth richest club owner.


----------



## gorgu (Mar 16, 2003)

Drum Roll Please................


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

*East Fife plan new stadium complex*
East Fife hope to move away from their New Bayview home

By Jim Spence

East Fife have announced ambitious plans to move to a new state-of-the-art stadium at a cost of almost £5m.

The Second Division side want to relocate from New Bayview to a 3,000-capacity ground one mile away from their present location.

The proposal will include a hotel and supermarket complex and is set to go before planners in the next few days.

"At a time of doom and gloom this is a good news story for Scottish football," said chairman Sid Columbine.

A fourth generation artificial surface would be laid and there would be a similar synthetic training pitch, as well as a grass training pitch.

The facilities would be available for community use.

There are also plans to include a 'college-type' facility at the new development, which Columbine hopes will be ready in two years.

"The ground is there and we are ready to start right away if we get planning permission," he added. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/e/east_fife/8926227.stm


----------



## lwa (Aug 2, 2010)

The new East Stand at Easter Road opens tomorrow with the visit of the Champions:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/scotland/8933064.stm



cinosanap said:


> Partick are a mess. The board are slowly destroying the club and the stadium.


that could be any club in Scotland you are describing though...


----------



## cinosanap (Aug 10, 2004)

Not really. Most clubs in Scotland turned a corner a short time ago and are trying to turn their clubs around by looking at the long term. The Thistle board really is killing the club.


----------



## sticky91 (Oct 31, 2010)

If Scotland are thinking about a bid for Euro 2020 we would be better making it a joint Scotland-Northern Ireland bid instead of using Wales. UEFA will be more accepting of this because the 2 countries are just across the water from each other whereas England is between Scotland and Wales. In football terms we are all different countries so if Scotland and Wales can bid together it would be like Portugal and Belgium bidding together. We would need 9 stadiums so the problem would be that Northern Ireland would probably only be able to provide 1 stadium and Scotland would have the other 8. I'm not sure what UEFA's rules are about the number of stadiums per country but surely they would have to be flexible and accept this. The stadiums we could use are:

New national stadium in Belfast - 40000
Hampden - 50000
Ibrox - 50000/Celtic Park - 60000
Murrayfield - 67000
Expanded Tynecastle/Easter Road - 30000
New Aberdeen stadium - 30000
New Dundee stadium - 30000*
New Inverness stadium - 30000*
New Kilmarnock stadium - 30000*

*these would only be 30000 for the tournament and then reduced to a more sensible size.


----------



## gorgu (Mar 16, 2003)

sticky91 said:


> If Scotland are thinking about a bid for Euro 2020 we would be better making it a joint Scotland-Northern Ireland bid instead of using Wales. UEFA will be more accepting of this because the 2 countries are just across the water from each other whereas England is between Scotland and Wales. In football terms we are all different countries so if Scotland and Wales can bid together it would be like Portugal and Belgium bidding together. We would need 9 stadiums so the problem would be that Northern Ireland would probably only be able to provide 1 stadium and Scotland would have the other 8. I'm not sure what UEFA's rules are about the number of stadiums per country but surely they would have to be flexible and accept this. The stadiums we could use are:
> 
> New national stadium in Belfast - 40000
> Hampden - 50000
> ...


Screw Northern Ireland and screw Scotland, if bloody Qatar can host the world cup then I think Glasgow should bid for the championship alone!


----------



## Bobby3 (Jun 26, 2007)

That's the problem though, NI can only offer one venue. I can't possibly see Coleraine playing in a 30,000 seater.

Wales, on the other hand, can offer four. Cardiff, Swansea, Wrexham and Newport/Llanelli. Five if you want to double-up Cardiff.

Ireland is out of the question with their budget hell.


----------



## sticky91 (Oct 31, 2010)

On wikipedia it says that the proposed bids so far for Euro 2020 are:

Romania and Hungary
Czech Republic and Slovakia
Slovenia, Italy and Croatia
Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_European_Football_Championship#Bids_for_future_tournaments

Looking at what our competition would be makes me think that this would be a great opportunity for us to bid. I can't see UEFA giving it to a 3 country bid and eastern Europe already has Euro 2012 and the 2018 World Cup so UEFA might not want to give it to Romania-Hungary or Czech Republic-Slovakia. I really hope that Scotland make a serious bid for this tournament along with Wales or Northern Ireland. Or maybe we could even do a solo bid if we were allowed to use all 3 Glasgow stadiums.


----------



## alabro (Mar 3, 2010)

sticky91 said:


> On wikipedia it says that the proposed bids so far for Euro 2020 are:
> 
> Romania and Hungary
> Czech Republic and Slovakia
> ...


Tell me that Slovenia, Italy and Croatia are 3 solo bids, and not 1 combined bid!! Please! Out of all that i'd really hope it would be held in Italy.


----------



## netgear67 (Oct 28, 2010)

Im sure its a mistake. Slovenia does not have stadiums for hosting EURO.


----------



## Cubo99 (Jan 30, 2009)

Slovakia haven't stadiums or money for EURO ... i think on wikipedia are very old informations...


----------



## R.K.Teck (Oct 1, 2010)

sticky91 said:


> If Scotland are thinking about a bid for Euro 2020 we would be better making it a joint Scotland-Northern Ireland bid instead of using Wales. UEFA will be more accepting of this because the 2 countries are just across the water from each other whereas England is between Scotland and Wales. In football terms we are all different countries so if Scotland and Wales can bid together it would be like Portugal and Belgium bidding together. We would need 9 stadiums so the problem would be that Northern Ireland would probably only be able to provide 1 stadium and Scotland would have the other 8. I'm not sure what UEFA's rules are about the number of stadiums per country but surely they would have to be flexible and accept this. The stadiums we could use are:
> 
> New national stadium in Belfast - 40000
> Hampden - 50000
> ...


A combined Dundee Stadium? There is the serious chance that their may only be one Dundee clun by 2011, never mind 2020, so it would be a new Dundee United Stadium, I do not like the idea of a cookie cutter bowl stadium, of 30,000 which will be reduced by taking off the top tier after the championships. I guess I speak the opinion of many of United fans but we want to stay at Tannadice Park, just do up the Shed End, and rebuild the Jerry Kerr!

Also SFA, get the finger out and complete the upper tier at Hampden so it wraps round the whole stadium, at 70,000 seats, you could really milk revenue from the great demand there is to see Scotland international football matches.

Also SRU, get the finger out and even out the one stand at Murrayfield that is not identical to the others, it looks wrong, and once done would take the capacity up to 70,000-75,000!!


----------



## JYDA (Jul 14, 2008)

Qatar's win could possibly aid Scotland in its bid for the euro. The precedent of one city hosting an entire world cup should be enough to shame UEFA into showing some compassion and let Scotland use all three glasgow venues. Those and murrayfield is a good start.


----------



## alabro (Mar 3, 2010)

I'd be furious to see us bid for anything like this instead of putting serious money into the infrastructure of our game. Far too many of our players, even the young ones coming through, are so lacking in things you should take for granted that a professional football player should be able to do.

Honestly, it would show how out of touch the priorities of our ruling bodies (thats 2 national governments and 3 football ruling bodies!!!) are with what our game needs.


----------



## lwa (Aug 2, 2010)

sticky91 said:


> If Scotland are thinking about a bid for Euro 2020 we would be better making it a joint Scotland-Northern Ireland bid instead of using Wales. UEFA will be more accepting of this because the 2 countries are just across the water from each other whereas England is between Scotland and Wales. In football terms we are all different countries so if Scotland and Wales can bid together it would be like Portugal and Belgium bidding together. We would need 9 stadiums so the problem would be that Northern Ireland would probably only be able to provide 1 stadium and Scotland would have the other 8. I'm not sure what UEFA's rules are about the number of stadiums per country but surely they would have to be flexible and accept this. The stadiums we could use are:
> 
> New national stadium in Belfast - 40000
> Hampden - 50000
> ...


For a joint bid to work, NI would need to provide AT LEAST a second ground. If they only provide one, it begs the question of "why don't Scotland just go it alone"



gorgu said:


> Screw Northern Ireland and screw Scotland, if bloody Qatar can host the world cup then I think Glasgow should bid for the championship alone!


Glasgow may struggle, but Strathclyde sounds like a good 'un! 



R.K.Teck said:


> A combined Dundee Stadium? There is the serious chance that their may only be one Dundee clun by 2011, never mind 2020, so it would be a new Dundee United Stadium, I do not like the idea of a cookie cutter bowl stadium, of 30,000 which will be reduced by taking off the top tier after the championships. I guess I speak the opinion of many of United fans but we want to stay at Tannadice Park, just do up the Shed End, and rebuild the Jerry Kerr!
> 
> Also SFA, get the finger out and complete the upper tier at Hampden so it wraps round the whole stadium, at 70,000 seats, you could really milk revenue from the great demand there is to see Scotland international football matches.
> 
> Also SRU, get the finger out and even out the one stand at Murrayfield that is not identical to the others, it looks wrong, and once done would take the capacity up to 70,000-75,000!!


I will be amazed if there is only 1 Dundee club in 2020 - may not be the same ones as present (probably not actually) but I am sure something will rise from the ashes.

Hampden would need to be totally re-done, and Murrayfield is fine as it is!


----------



## JohnnyFive (Jul 28, 2008)

JYDA said:


> Qatar's win could possibly aid Scotland in its bid for the euro. The precedent of one city hosting an entire world cup should be enough to shame UEFA into showing some compassion and let Scotland use all three glasgow venues. Those and murrayfield is a good start.


Too right, a world Cup in Qatar sets the precedent.

How about this for a Euro Championship in 2020?

Hampden 55k - Closing Match
Ibrox 52k - 
Parkhead 67K

Murrayfield 67K - Opening Match
Tynecastle - 30K expanded
Easter Road - 30K expanded

Aberdeen - The new 30K stadium

Dundee Stadium - New 30K

Kilmarnock - 30K with temp seating

Inverness - New 30 K 

That's 10 stadiums, granted there are 3x in both Glasgow and Edinburgh. It is not as by the time the Champoinship comes round Glasgow would not already have experience of hosting the Commonwealth Games. In addition, the Edinburgh Festival is a massive event every year which Edinburgh is able to host.

There is also the option of removing either East road or Tynecastle and replaced with McDiarmid Park in Perth with additional temporary seating.

I don't see how Scotland could not hold it alone and would certainly be a favourable solo bid if the other rumoured joint bids are real.

:cheers2:


----------



## Red85 (Jan 23, 2007)

JohnnyFive said:


> Too right, a world Cup in Qatar sets the precedent.
> 
> How about this for a Euro Championship in 2020?
> 
> ...


Why not the final in the biggest ground? Rugby and stuff? That shouldnt be a problem for once?


----------



## R.K.Teck (Oct 1, 2010)

JohnnyFive said:


> Too right, a world Cup in Qatar sets the precedent.
> 
> How about this for a Euro Championship in 2020?
> 
> ...


I do not think a bid for Scotland could have Murrayfield and Tynecastle - the stadiums are only 0.4 miles apart. The SFA would have to choose, and simple economics, coupled with previous allowance from the SFA would suggest they will choose the 67,000 seater Murrayfield Stadium. This stadium can be expanded by rebuilding the smallest (East) Stand to match the other stands - there is space around the stadium, and a capacity of at least 75,000 would be reached.









Murrayfield Stadium, 67000: Credit "poity_uk" from flickr

Hampden Stadium is a former Uefa 5 star stadium, and as a result has become an Elite stadium, one of only two in Scotland. The current capacity is 52,000 but it will be getting reduced for the Commonwealth games to 46,000 in order to accomadate a 400m athletics track. The capacity will have to be increased to 70,000 in order to become eligable as a 'final' venue for UEFA Championships ( seem criteria for hosting Champions League finals). The SFA have previously expressed interest in making Hampden a 70,000 venue. They also wanted to make sure that the stands behind the goals were brought closer to the goals. However any expansion of this kind would require a (very costly) total rebuild. I cannot see this happening any time soon, given Hamden is barely 15 years old. However a more reasonable expansion which has the potential of making Hampden 75,000+ is the complation of the upper tier ( currently on one side) all around the stadium. A new roof would be required, and the new upper tier would have to cantiliever over the lower tier so the back rows of the lower tier could still see the game! :lol:









Hampden Park, 52000: Credit 'BBC Sport'

Ibrox is a 52,000 Uefa Elite stadium and in it's current state would be suitable for hosting matches at the European Championships, up until the semi final stage. No work is needed to be honest.









Ibrox Stadium, 52000: Credit Rangers1

Celtic Park is a great size, the biggest football ground in Scotland. However it has the problem of restricted view seating in both upper corner sections because of the old stand blocking sightlines. There has been talk in the past of rebuilding the old stand to match the rest of the stadium, and the chances are this alteration would make Celtic Park an elite stadium with a 70,000 capacity. Alternatively, a new roof on the old stand would relieve the stadium of restricted views, whilst keeping the current 60,000 capacity.









Celtic Park, 60000: Credit Duncan Adams from Scottish Grounds.

It is well publicised that Aberdeen *want* a new stadium. They have released the designs and it will be located away from their current Pittodrie beach site. The internal design of this stadium is the cookie cutter bowl design, which suggests a permanent tier of 20,000 could be constructed with a long term legacy of hosting Aberdeen FC matchs, and a temporary upper tier of 10-15,000 which would be taken away after the UEFA CHAMPIONSHIPS.









Proposed New Aberdeen Stadium: Credit 'BBC Sport.'

Kilmarnock currently have an 18,000 seater ground, 3 stands were built in the early 90's, and there is an older stand with steel columns holding up the roof running along one side of the pitch. The ideal solution for Kilmarnock would be to knock down the Old Stand, and replace it with one with corporate boxes - something Rugby Park currently lacks, and also have a tempory upper tier. You would also want to raise the roofs of the two stands behind the goals, and put temparory upper tiers their in order to maximise the capacity. Because of the close proximity of housing, it would not be possible to do anything with the stand opposite the old stand.









Rugby Park, 18000: Credit Teamtalk.com

Now for the controversial Dundee Proposal which has been discussed previously, sees both Dundee clubs, SPL side Dundee United and first division Dundee moving to a new stadium in the city to groundshare. In the process both clubs lose 100 years of history that goes with their respective home grounds, Tannadice and Dens Park. It would be impossible to expand either of these stadiums because they are located (100 yards apart) in the inner city ring of Dundee in amongst Tennemant style housing. 

The proposal would see a new stadium built next to the Kingsway Bypass at Caird Park, and would be called Caird Park Stadium. It would most likely be a generic bowl stadium, as seen with many English Championship sides. A temporary top tier would lift the capacity to 35,000 which would likely be removed leaving a 20,000 bottom tier which United could only fill against the Old Firm and Aberdeen, and the capacity would likely never be filled by lower league side Dundee. Dundee are heading towards liquidation so it would end up becoming Dundee United stadium only - and the majority of fans would rather stay at Tannadice and improve that to the clubs own needs rather than create a white elephant in the city of Dundee.

>>Just noticed I commented on this same topic very recently, and sort of said the same things about Dundee stadium twice :lol:


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

*KILMARNOCK - Rugby Park (18,128)*









*KILMARNOCK FC*
EST 1869
Scotland's Oldest Professional Football Club

1x Scottish League Champions:
1965

3x Scottish Cup Winners:
1920, 1929, 1997​

*RUGBY PARK*
Opened: 1899
Renovated:	1946, 1961, 1994-95

1955









1993









1995


----------



## R.K.Teck (Oct 1, 2010)

It seems so odd that the original design for Rugby Park was an oval, the terraces behind each goal were miles away, even though there was no athletics track. :nuts:

I have only been in the most modern rendition of Rugby Park, and I must admit it hasn't been a happy hunting ground for me as a Dundee United fan. 

The 3 modern stands are very steep which is a plus, although there is little/no leg room between seats. I belive this is the only stadium in the SPL (outwith the Old Firm) which has 2 scoreboards.

Also, Rugby Park has been used as the set for a football film called _____?


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

R.K.Teck said:


> Also, Rugby Park has been used as the set for a football film called _____?


A Shot At Glory. Awful awful film. I think it was called something like Premier Park in the movie. Hosted the Kilnockie vs Kilmarnock semi-final. Ally McCoist was playing for us while the movie was being filmed and Marvin Andrews played in that on-screen fictional Kilmarnock team. The film also featured the worst Scottish accent ever, played by Robert Duvall.

http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi3451126041/


----------



## lwa (Aug 2, 2010)

R.K.Teck said:


> I belive this is the only stadium in the SPL (outwith the Old Firm) which has 2 scoreboards.


Extend that to Scotland, and I believe the only ground that can be added is Hampden (not counting Murrayfield)

Infact, I believe they are the only grounds that have even 1 electronic scoreboard in Scotland? (Firhill also has one, but it isn't used by Partick Thistle so doesn't count)


----------



## R.K.Teck (Oct 1, 2010)

Hampden, National Stadium has 2
Celtic Park has 2
Ibrox (Rangers) has 2
Rugby Park (Kilmarnock) has 2

Fir Park (Motherwell) has 1
Mcdiarmud (St Johnstone) has 1
Easter Road (Hibernian) has 1

That is all I know in the SPL (plus Hampden)


----------



## Harry1990 (Feb 5, 2010)

i hope scotland does host a tournament one day be it a Euros i think they would be best of dual hosting with Ireland, even though imo Scotland could host a Euros themshelves if Fifa use there common sense for once a give 3 venues to glasgow, 2 edinburgh, and then other big cities 1 stadium each like aberdeen, dundee etc. you only need about 9 venues.

i have a feeling that the Fa and SFA may look to bid for the Centenary World Cup in 2030 anyway, which i think would stand a high chance of winning, taking the world cup to the 2 countries that effectivly invented the game, us the rules, you the art of the passing game.

Wembley-
Twickenham-
Old Trafford-
Anfield or Stanley Park-
Elland Road-
Villa Park-
portsmouth or southampton/plymouth-
Ipswich or Norwich-

Hampden
Murrifield
Celtic Park 
Ibrox
Aberdeen 

seems are pretty fair spread to me, or do you not think that ground apart from the big 4 in scotland could ever expand to over 40 k


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

Harry1990 said:


> I have a feeling that the Fa and SFA may look to bid for the Centenary World Cup in 2030 anyway, which i think would stand a high chance of winning, taking the world cup to the 2 countries that effectivly invented the game, us the rules, you the art of the passing game.


Uruguay are already preparing a joint bid with Argentina. I think that stands more of a chance than us TBH. But yeah It'd be a great bid. I reckon by then that Ibrox and Hampden will have had renovations.


----------



## GideaParkHammer (Mar 7, 2010)

Harry1990 said:


> i hope scotland does host a tournament one day be it a Euros i think they would be best of dual hosting with Ireland, even though imo Scotland could host a Euros themshelves if Fifa use there common sense for once a give 3 venues to glasgow, 2 edinburgh, and then other big cities 1 stadium each like aberdeen, dundee etc. you only need about 9 venues.
> 
> i have a feeling that the Fa and SFA may look to bid for the Centenary World Cup in 2030 anyway, which i think would stand a high chance of winning, taking the world cup to the 2 countries that effectivly invented the game, us the rules, you the art of the passing game.
> 
> ...



I really like the idea, but FIFA will probably celebrate 100 years of World Cup football by awarding it to the Gilbert Islands


----------



## R.K.Teck (Oct 1, 2010)

This thread would be a much better 'SCOTLAND STADIUM DEVELOPMENT THREAD' if the first 8 or 9 pages were deleted because they ae jut filed with petty and offensive digs between Old Firm supporters, the las 1 or so pages are proper discussion of Stadium development in Scotland however. 

Hopefully a mod can look into this. :cheers:


----------



## alabro (Mar 3, 2010)

Shame there is little chance of any real stadium development work being done in Scotland any time soon! Wish we could contribute more to this section of the forum, jealous of the boom in Poland and other places!


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

alabro said:


> Shame there is little chance of any real stadium development work being done in Scotland any time soon! Wish we could contribute more to this section of the forum, jealous of the boom in Poland and other places!


Don't speak too soon...

*New Aberdeen FC stadium recommended for approval*

Planners have recommended approval for Aberdeen Football Club's new stadium on the outskirts of the city.

The Dons hope to build the stadium, capable of holding about 21,000 fans, at a cost of up to £40m, at Loirston Loch in the south of Aberdeen.

However, there have been more than 100 letters of objection.

The council meets on Wednesday 23 February, with potential economic benefits among the reasons for the recommendation for approval.

AFC is seeking permission for the "iconic" stadium which would include a gym, a club shop, museum and cafe.

The plan is for the whole facility to be lit at night by a red glow.

The application follows a public consultation.

Scottish ministers will have the final say.


BBC NEWS


----------



## alabro (Mar 3, 2010)

Not like those teauchters from Aberdeen to complain about progress! Just look at the opposition to the Donald Trump investment and development! Convinced they would be happy still to live in stone cottages with straw roofs!

Would love to see some new grounds of a good standard built, and see the back of places like Tannadice (toilet of a ground), Fir Park (Motherwell are my most local senior side, would like to see them do well and get a new purpose built ground) and even see Hearts get their new main stand.

Of course, the stadium works i'm most interested in seeing are comparitively modest, I just want to see some money spent on getting Ibrox back up to the standard expected, as it's starting to age just a little, and needs a good couple of million spent giving it a bit of tlc!


----------



## GunnerJacket (Jan 25, 2008)

Over 100 letters of objection?! Really? The site doesn't appear to be interfering with any noteworthy adjoining uses, or displacing bunches of people, threatening resources, etc. So, what are they opposing?


----------



## Scot87 (Feb 19, 2011)

alabro said:


> Not like those teauchters from Aberdeen to complain about progress! Just look at the opposition to the Donald Trump investment and development! Convinced they would be happy still to live in stone cottages with straw roofs!


It's 'teuchters' and 100 letters out of a city population of about 215,000 hardly represents a complaint against progress. It is the usual nimbys worried about losing a few acres of grass in a country which is nothing but fields of grass.

I'm not going to get into the Trump debate, but once again that was a couple of people desperate for their '15 minutes' who objected to it, which they have every right to in the democratic process.


----------



## JYDA (Jul 14, 2008)

Looks like Livingston's Almondvale Stadium could soon be demolished. it's fairly new. Only 16 years old 












http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/13007258.stm

Livingston poised for switch to a new stadium
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
Page last updated at 18:11 GMT, Thursday, 7 April 2011 19:11 UK
By Jim Spence

BBC Scotland

Livingston have been at Almondvale since they formed in 1974 Livingston could be in a new stadium for the start of season 2012/2013.

A deal to sell their current home, Almondvale, and move to a new stadium around one mile away could be imminent, BBC Scotland has learned.

The new stadium would have a capacity of more than 6000 and would be fully Scottish Premier League compliant.

State of the art training facilities, including a full-size indoor pitch, will be included in the development along with a youth football academy.

The deal hinges on West Lothian Council, the owner of Almondvale Stadium and the land surrounding it, concluding a deal with a supermarket for the sale of the current stadium and land. 

It is understood that the negotiations for the deal are at a very advanced stage with the prospective retailers.

Livingston began life as the Ferranti Thistle works team in 1943 and renamed Meadowbank Thistle when admitted to the Scottish Football League in 1974.

They initially played their matches at Meadowbank Stadium in Edinburgh but were renamed when they relocated to their present 10,000-seat stadium in Livingston in 1995.

The club rose to Scotland's top flight in 2001 but were relegated in 2004 amid financial problems that led to liquidation proceedings beginning and their relegation to Division Three five years later.

Livingston presently lead Division Two by 18 points and are poised to win the title and a return to the First Division.

They will secure the one automatic promotion slot if they win on Saturday away to Stenhousemuir while Brechin City fail to beat East Fife, or if they draw and Brechin lose.

Almondvale's current official name is the Braidwood Motor Company Stadium because of a three-year naming rights sponsorship deal.


----------



## adeaide (Sep 16, 2008)

*New Aberdeen Stadium , 21k*


----------



## Suburbanist (Dec 25, 2009)

I have a question: what are the chances of all football within United Kingdom being unified in British-wide competitions? That would bring Premier league to Glasgow and Edinburgh (likely) and boost the stadia profile in Scotland with tons on new money.


----------



## Andy-i (Nov 25, 2009)

Suburbanist said:


> I have a question: what are the chances of all football within United Kingdom being unified in British-wide competitions? That would bring Premier league to Glasgow and Edinburgh (likely) and boost the stadia profile in Scotland with tons on new money.


ABSOLUTELY NON EXISTENT!! hno:


----------



## R.K.Teck (Oct 1, 2010)

Heart of Midlothian scrapping this idea: £15m construction of a 2 tier stand with hospitality between tiers...









http://www.scotsman.com/webimage/27..._gen/derivatives/landscape_595/1881975972.jpg

...For this, council backed multi use stadium, for the football, rugby and athletics:








http://www.scotsman.com/webimage/19..._gen/derivatives/landscape_595/3605759854.jpg


----------



## JYDA (Jul 14, 2008)

R.K.Teck said:


> Heart of Midlothian scrapping this idea: £15m construction of a 2 tier stand with hospitality between tiers...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ugh!! Awful


----------



## hitmanhart (May 20, 2011)

^^
I would be amazed if that new proposal went ahead. Seriously there's no need for a multi-use stadium in Edinburgh. As it is Murrayfield caters for rugby while i'd imagine the old commonwealth stadium is sufficient for athletics.What is required is that Edinburgh rugby get a new small stadium that fits into the back pitches of Murrayfield ala Cardiff.

I was at tynecastle over the summer and i think a redeveloped main stand would serve the best interests of Hearts and Edinburgh as a whole. A small increase in capacity with better premium seats should be the goal here.Hearts wouldn't fill a 25k stadium regularly.


----------



## GunnerJacket (Jan 25, 2008)

R.K.Teck said:


> Heart of Midlothian scrapping this idea: £15m construction of a 2 tier stand with hospitality between tiers...
> 
> ...For this, council backed multi use stadium, for the football, rugby and athletics:


Where did you hear this? I can't find any news links confirming that second option is what's preferred, only that the club now considers Tynecastle no longer viable for the long-term. Last I heard the City wasn't going to overinvest in an athletics stadium like that, anyway, since it wasn't worth the money. So if this idea has been resurrected and pushed by the club, that's news to me.


----------



## gorgu (Mar 16, 2003)

I think there should be a multi purpose stadium in Edinburgh for Hearts, Edinburgh Rugby and Athletics, the difference between the stadium that should be delivered and the pic below is that it should be a smaller version of the Stade de France, where the seats are retractable over the athletics track and for all other games of football and rugby the capacity is higher and the track is covered.

I think if that was the spec I would have no problem is both public, and private money being used for a facility like this. Rugby got the bum deal having to pay for their stadium on their own when football got Hampden mostly funded by government. It is time to redress the balance


----------



## R.K.Teck (Oct 1, 2010)

GunnerJacket said:


> Where did you hear this? I can't find any news links confirming that second option is what's preferred, only that the club now considers Tynecastle no longer viable for the long-term. Last I heard the City wasn't going to overinvest in an athletics stadium like that, anyway, since it wasn't worth the money. So if this idea has been resurrected and pushed by the club, that's news to me.


Perhaps _preferred _is the wrong word, but the majority of fans in the supporter's survey 'would welcome a move away from Tynecastle' and the Hearts board, as you point out, are saying 'a future at Tynecastle is not vialble.'

Maybe 'more likely' is a better phrase, logically speaking it would financially make most sense to build a new out of town stadium that the community can use, and that Hearts can use for better facilities and better match day money generating hospitality seating. With the council part funding it as a rugby (Edinburgh need a ~20,000 seater rather than 70,000 Murrayfield)/athletics/concert venue.


----------



## GunnerJacket (Jan 25, 2008)

R.K.Teck said:


> Perhaps _preferred _is the wrong word, but the majority of fans in the supporter's survey 'would welcome a move away from Tynecastle' and the Hearts board, as you point out, are saying 'a future at Tynecastle is not vialble.'
> 
> Maybe 'more likely' is a better phrase, logically speaking it would financially make most sense to build a new out of town stadium that the community can use, and that Hearts can use for better facilities and better match day money generating hospitality seating. With the council part funding it as a rugby (Edinburgh need a ~20,000 seater rather than 70,000 Murrayfield)/athletics/concert venue.


All well and good, in which case make a stadium that's suitable for football and rugby, but for goodness sake leave the track out of the picture. At least the team sports have the potential for occassional events drawing sizable crowds, but not so general athletics. Plus the national events can be held in Hampden, anyway.

Hearts would be foolish to abandon Tynecastle only to move into a new venue with an athletics track.


----------



## Jolly Boy (Oct 25, 2011)

GunnerJacket said:


> Hearts would be foolish to abandon Tynecastle only to move into a new venue with an athletics track.


"A new stadium must be self-sustainable and commercially viable and Hearts acknowledge that the stadium facility would also be capable of hosting other top class sports, corporate, arts and entertainment events *although the club has categorically excluded the option of an athletics track in the stadium*." - http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/articles/20111025/stadium-update_2241384_2493727


----------



## lwa (Aug 2, 2010)

R.K.Teck said:


> ...For this, council backed multi use stadium, for the football, rugby and athletics:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Where is that??




And speaking of multi-purpose grounds, Glasgow Warriors have recently announced they are leaving Firhill for Scotstoun Stadium as of the start of next season, and have plans in place to raise the capacity to 12,000 with temporary stands behind each end.

Also been reported that the Scottish leg of the IRB 7's World Series (currently held at Murrayfield) will be moving there as of this season, with the Commonwealth 7's to follow in 2014, but as yet there has been no announcement on that.


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

Scotstoun is a cracking wee ground. Played my 5's & 7's football at the sports center beside it while it was being redeveloped.

I'd like to think that the 7's Rugby will stay at Ibrox though. Hopefully there will be a crowd to justify it.


----------



## Darloeye (Jun 15, 2010)

Stadiums with running tracks around them are just awfull !


----------



## Jolly Boy (Oct 25, 2011)

Council’s economic leader rules out funding new Hearts ground - Edinburgh Evening News


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

The closing date has arrived for bids to buy Aberdeen Football Club's home - Pittodrie Stadium.

The club put the 107-year-old ground on the market earlier this year after securing outline planning permission for 350 homes on the site.










The club says the sale of the 13.7-acre Pittodrie site is key to securing the £38m needed to build a new stadium, capable of holding about 21,000 fans.

This would be at Loirston Loch on the southern outskirts of the city.

Barr Construction - which has built many stadiums - has been named as the preferred contractor.

It is hoped the stadium - which is planned to be an iconic landmark - could be ready for the 2013/14 season.

In March, Scottish ministers decided against calling in the proposals.

The new stadium project was subject to 140 objections from local communities and groups concerned about the environmental impact.


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

:cheers:



> SPL Statement: Rule Changes
> 
> At today’s SPL General Meeting, clubs approved changes to SPL rules on safe standing and Unacceptable Conduct.
> 
> ...


http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s2&newsid=10907


----------



## GunnerJacket (Jan 25, 2008)

Enlightenment!?! Yay!!


----------



## IanCleverly (Nov 24, 2010)

(Indoor Arena for Glasgow's hosting of the 2014 Commonwealth Games)

(From Here)

According to the blurb over at Glasgow Life, this will end up being a multi-use sports facility, with a:-

7,000 seat indoor arena
2,000 seat Velodrome/extreme wheeled sports centre
3 sports halls/1500 capacity event area
Dance Studio
Glasgow Club Gym (55 equipment stations)
4 outdoor 5-a-side pitches
Conditioning Suite
Café
Conference facilities

Spa facilities (including beauty treatment​)


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

*Stadiums Of Scotland*

Here is a small selection of my photos from around Scotland, following the national team and my local club Aberdeen.
I will start with Pittodrie first.

ABERDEEN FC


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

HIBERNIAN FC 
EASTER ROAD STADIUM - EDINBURGH


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

IBROX STADIUM
GLASGOW 

RANGERS FC


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

Hampden PARK 
GLASGOW
SCOTLANDS NATIONAL STADIUM


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

More of Hampden (Glasgow)


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

RUGBY PARK - KILMARNOCK
KILMARNOCK FC


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

This is the smallest ground in my collection of photos

FORFAR ATHLETIC FC
STATION PARK


----------



## sgroutage (Feb 25, 2011)

del


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

Scotland has a population of 5.2 million
England has a population of 55.2million

Scotland has 6 cities
England has 50 cities

Could this perhaps be the difference between the standards of football in both countries. And don't forget that the premiership is backed by Rich foreign billionaires. If you take the money out of the premier league and the foreign players plying their trade in England I don't think it would be such an attractive league. And yes Scottish football is dire and miserable but this is probably because most kids either support the old firm (Rangers + Celtic) rather than their local clubs hno:
Plus there is no real competitiveness in Scotland. The best that other clubs can hope for is the Domestic cups, because they aren't really going to win the league.


----------



## RobH (Mar 9, 2007)

I see a merge a'coming!

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=443643&page=22


----------



## flierfy (Mar 4, 2008)

sgroutage said:


> What a miserable and pointless thread!
> 
> Scottish football is a joke and a national embarrassment.
> 
> ...


What a miserable and pointless post. Scottish football grounds have more class and deserve their own thread more than most stadiums in this forum.


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

Aberdeen again


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

TYNECASTLE STADIUM
EDINBURGH -
HEARTS FC 




























Obviously the last one is older!!!


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

The Hearts photos came from LONDONHEARTS.COM

I have run out of my personal photos, but I will add others from various websites.

Here is Dundee
Dens Park - Dundee Fc
Tannadice Park - Dundee utd FC


----------



## Zeno2 (Jan 22, 2006)

I especially like both Edinburgh stadiums. They are simply perfect in their imperfection. Great atmosphere as well.


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

I love Rugby Park. Can't put my finger on why.


----------



## krnboy1009 (Aug 9, 2011)

Scottish League sucks, aside from Celtic and Ranger, and both of em arent that good in Europe overall. 

Time to combine em with the English Premiere League?


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

No. It's a different country.


----------



## sgroutage (Feb 25, 2011)

del


----------



## JohnnyFive (Jul 28, 2008)

sgroutage said:


> Tosh...
> 
> United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland


Which will come to end in Autumn 2014 when the country of Scotland regains independence.

:cheers2:


----------



## james brownlie (Jun 2, 2012)

If Rangers + Celtic were to move into English Football surely they would have to start in the conference leagues. That would surely take them about 6-10 seasons and millions of pounds to get into the championship/premier leauge. 
How would Rangers and/or Celtic cope without winning silverware every season and having such an absence from European football and the money that it generates?

Don't get me wrong, I would like them to give it a try because with their fan base they wouldn't have a problem competing in the championship and maybe even the premier league.


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

Celtic and Rangers (if they exist) can move to England. The rest of us will be poorer, but at least they'll be gone.


----------



## krnboy1009 (Aug 9, 2011)

MartinLeRoy said:


> No. It's a different country.


Cardiff City plays in english system. Just sayin.


----------



## Bobby3 (Jun 26, 2007)

Does the English league want them? They bring a lot of baggage with them and Rangers are broke.


----------



## Rev Stickleback (Jun 23, 2009)

Bobby3 said:


> Does the English league want them? They bring a lot of baggage with them and Rangers are broke.


you get a few fans who'd like to see them there, but most are dead against it, especially the idea that they could just parachute in at the top or thereabouts.


----------



## JimB (Apr 7, 2005)

MartinLeRoy said:


> *Celtic and Rangers (if they exist) can move to England*. The rest of us will be poorer, but at least they'll be gone.


No they fucking well can't!

We don't want them!


----------



## JimB (Apr 7, 2005)

krnboy1009 said:


> Cardiff City plays in english system. Just sayin.


Completely different. Cardiff have always played in the English leagues.


----------



## JimB (Apr 7, 2005)

Have to say my favourite Scottish stadium, even though I've never seen a game there, is Inverness Caledonian Thistle's.

Can there be a more fantastically located stadium in Britain?

I just love the view of it, and the Moray Firth beyond, whenever I drive past on the A9 and over the Kessock Bridge to or from the Black Isle.


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

JimB said:


> Can there be a more fantastically located stadium in Britain?


Bayview - East Fife?


----------



## The Sloth (Nov 4, 2011)

james brownlie said:


> If Rangers + Celtic were to move into English Football surely they would have to start in the conference leagues. That would surely take them about 6-10 seasons and millions of pounds to get into the championship/premier leauge.
> How would Rangers and/or Celtic cope without winning silverware every season and having such an absence from European football and the money that it generates?
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I would like them to give it a try because with their fan base they wouldn't have a problem competing in the championship and maybe even the premier league.


I think the whole premise of the Old Firm joining the Premiership is disgusting. The English League system is already bottlenecked.

England definitely does not need 2 more large teams from another country, be it Scotland or anywhere else. We need to make sure potential big English clubs like Nottingham Forest; Leeds; Plymouth; Brighton; Southampton; Sheffield Wednesday (etc) can grow and reach some of their potential. Surely it's wrong for them to be stifled by 2 clubs whose supporters despise England & the English and have no history here. There are enough big teams already here, not enough glory to go around as it is.

This is an bsolutely awful idea that'll only benefit the Old Firm & Scotland! As for anyone English supporting this whole Old Firm joining the Premiership, what the heck are you thinking? They didn't want to know us when their league was peachy, now it's not as rich, they want in on the Premiersh*t (as Celtic fans keep calling it).

Scotland should work on making their own league stronger and good luck to them. But this idea that Celtic & Rangers should try and win the English league, whilst the Scottish League can then grow stronger is unfair.

Scotland may get 3 Champions League places in future. Imagine if in England Celtic came 3rd and Rangers 4th. You could effectively have 5 Scots teams in the Champions League, and only 2 English teams. That's just immoral even making that a potential possibility.

Imagine if Carlisle United had won trophies, thus building a big following as have the Old Firm. Then Carlisle expressed interest in joining the Scots Premier, for their own benefit, so they could get in the Champions League at the expense of a Scots team? I reckon that'd go down like a bag of sh*t! 

Also, Berwick are irrelevant, they're no threat and everyone knows it. Welsh teams playing in England accepted to join the English league years ago, and if the English league was crap, would be stuck with it. The Scots declined, so they should accept their decision.


----------



## matthemod (Apr 8, 2008)

So if the old firm ever did join the English leagues (that itself will most likely never happen IMO) it would be financial suicide on their behalf. 

As it stands, both Celtic and Rangers are big fishes in a relatively small pond and are more or less assured European championship places playing in their current status, moving to the English league system (btw, I don't believe they would be able to just join the Premiership without any sort of hindrance) would do nothing but reduce both sides to, at best, mid-table mediocrity. I can't see a way in which either Rangers or Celtic would really be able to compete with any of the biggest spending teams in England, Man Utd, Man City et al in terms of financial clout and ability to buy their way up the table. If they were to somehow join the Premiership, I'd imagine that they would most likely end up with the likes of Newcastle Utd, Spurs, Everton etc, fighting out for 5th placed at best.

Disclaimer: I'm not posting this to hate on the status of Scottish football or to over-inflate the reputation of the English Premiership (After all I do support a crap League 2 team), but just to re-iterate how foolish it would be for the Old Firm to consider joining the English pyramid.


----------



## MS20 (Apr 12, 2009)

^Except that what you are describing is exactly what the Old Firm would want in joining the English pyramid. 

You're painting some negative picture for them, when all I'm reading are positives for both clubs. At this point, I don't think either club care about European competition. They just want a stable league, with large TV income, and weekly games against clubs of equivalent stature. 

Too much is made of the fact that they may sacrifice European competition. Spending a whole season in Scotland to play 3 home matches in the CL and make a few extra quid.


----------



## Bobby3 (Jun 26, 2007)

If they join the English league they should be forced to start in the Northern Alliance, not the Football League. AFCW and FCUM had to start on that tier. Something tells me that's not an attractive prospect.

I don't see Celtic caring anyway, I expect them to distance themselves from Rangers in the coming weeks, they're under pressure from fans to throw their weight around and move against readmission.


----------



## GunnerJacket (Jan 25, 2008)

The Sloth said:


> Scotland may get 3 Champions League places in future. Imagine if in England Celtic came 3rd and Rangers 4th. You could effectively have 5 Scots teams in the Champions League, and only 2 English teams. That's just immoral even making that a potential possibility.


I logged in simply because I saw this and had to stop the insanity. Not only would this not happen based on your thinking, UEFA has also already indicated that in the event of such league moves a team's UEFA credits are awarded to their host league. Should we ever see Celtic claim 3rd in the Premiership they'd be taking a spot from England's allotment, which is one reason why the English clubs are adamantly opposed to the move idea.



> England definitely does not need 2 more large teams from another country, be it Scotland or anywhere else. We need to make sure potential big English clubs like Nottingham Forest; Leeds; Plymouth; Brighton; Southampton; Sheffield Wednesday (etc) can grow and reach some of their potential.


Which is all well and good but for most of those clubs to evolve will take either a groundswell of unbridled support that doesn't care about actual success or another sugar daddy who can circumvent Financial Fair Play rules. Otherwise they lack the volume of support to drive revenues anywhere close to what the Old Firm could produce in the Premiership.


----------



## The Sloth (Nov 4, 2011)

GunnerJacket said:


> Which is all well and good but for most of those clubs to evolve will take either a groundswell of unbridled support that doesn't care about actual success or another sugar daddy who can circumvent Financial Fair Play rules. Otherwise they lack the volume of support to drive revenues anywhere close to what the Old Firm could produce in the Premiership.


Rubbish, absolute crap! Plenty of English clubs could be huge, Leeds, Nottingham Forest, Southampton, etc...

Celtic & Rangers are so overrated in terms of support it's farcical! On a Worldwide level, you're absolutely nothing. 

You talk as though your fans are there regardless of success, what a crass statement considering the stash of silverware they've shared over the years, plus the guarantee of European football. Without that, who can say what the fanbase would be like? Maybe you've already peaked. 

With English money, you could grow huge? So could anyone! That privilege should be saved for the teams that are already there, teams that have supported this league for well over 100 years, through thick and thin, hoping one day their chance will come.

You'd bring nothing to the league that's not already there. All this crap about your super fanbase that'll appear from your glory supporting fans if you're allowed to worm your way into the English league is a joke. Why aren't they already there if they're so die-hard?

You talk as if we're struggling and we need the Old Firm to bail us out. What a joke. English teams are well supported right the way down the leagues, not just for the 2 top clubs! 

The Championship (English 2nd tier) had the 4th highest total attendance for any soccer league in the World for the 2011-12 season, that's impressive support!


----------



## GunnerJacket (Jan 25, 2008)

a) I'm a Gooner
b) Where did I say the EPL needed the Old Firm to "bail it out?" I didn't. I know full well the EPL/Championship don't need anyone, and that other clubs have the potential to grow.
c) While Celtic and Rangers are fading brands they both ranked among the top 20 in revenues as recently as 2009, despite having only SPL money. They need the EPL if they're to keep that perch but they're still among the established global brands. When Celtic played ManU in the CL not too long ago it was the lead story on US soccer sites and channels. They both have past European success and their rivalry is known around the world.

Conversely, even avid footie fans outside England are barely knowledgable about clubs like Plymouth, Brighton and Preston North End which you mentioned. And while the likes of Sunderland and Leeds have great potential, you need only see the struggles of Villa and Pompey to understand how tough it is for clubs to compete with the upper caste of English football, even with EPL money.

I could care less about the Old Firm playing in English leagues and hope some of those other clubs we've mentioned do indeed find a way to step up, but as a business fact I can't abide the notion that adding the Old Firm would do nothing for the EPL. They're not needed, may not bring much and I certainly understand why the English clubs don't want the added compeition, but games with Celtic and/or Rangers would lure more interests internationally than names like Stoke, Reading, Hull or West Brom. If you don't feel the same we'll simply have to agree to disagree.

Cheers.


----------



## The Sloth (Nov 4, 2011)

GunnerJacket said:


> Where did I say the EPL needed the Old Firm to "bail it out?" I didn't. ...footie fans outside England are barely knowledgable about clubs like Plymouth, Brighton and Preston North End which you mentioned..


Yes, I'm not talking as if you're the sole spokesman for the Old Firm, I used 'you & they' when referencing the Old Firm duopoly. The indeed have this general attitude that Rangers & Celtic are needed by us, when in truth the only people to gain anything are the Old Firm & Scottish football...

Nobody outside of England has heard of Plymouth, Preston, etc... Well why on Earth would they have? But they should be allowed to grow without further compeition, not pushed to one side for 2 teams who hate us. The Old Firm may well have peaked in popularity, stuff letting them have a share of our league so they can grab potential fans of English clubs. What total madness!?

On my travels around the World, I've seen a fair few Celtic shirts from the pro-Irish bandwagon, barely any Rangers shirts except for ex-pats.

In Asia & the Middle East the number of Man U, Arsenal & Liverpool shirts I've seen is utterly staggering.

They hate us, we owe them nothing. If any future growth is to be made from Premiership exposure, it should be reserved for English clubs, and certainly not for 2 teams whose fans openly despise us.

The Celtic fans were delighted at 'Manure' going out in the Europa League, delighted at saying how overrated the Premiersh*t was, their message boards were alight. Rangers fans were hoping to screw over Bury, to grab a slot in England? Fu*k them both!


----------



## RobH (Mar 9, 2007)

An odd discussion considering the state 50% of the Old Firm is currently in. Seems Rangers aren't actually welcome in their own Premier League at the moment.


----------



## merope (Jun 8, 2008)

The Sloth said:


> You'd bring nothing to the league that's not already there. All this crap about your super fanbase that'll appear from your glory supporting fans if you're allowed to worm your way into the English league is a joke. Why aren't they already there if they're so die-hard?


What? They are there. Celtic and The Club Formerly Known As Rangers draw more each week than all but a few English clubs. Celtic was the seventh highest avg in Europe last season.

What the Old Firm (or what's left of it) want is TV money. Getting fans through the turnstiles is not a problem for them.



The Sloth said:


> They hate us, we owe them nothing.


You said that more than once, but many OF firms support EPL teams. I'm a Celtic fan, and while I don't support any EPL team, I certainly don't hate them. Usually mildly cheering for them in Europe.

No one said you owe us anything, or believes it. If it were to happen it would be a business decision based on the size of the two clubs. Whether you like it or not, they are bigger than mid-tier English teams.

All that said, I wouldn't get my knickers in a twist if I were you. I think it's about as likely as a British win at Wimbledon.

I would have no interest in us joining the EPL by the way. I value the rivalries we have with other Scottish teams. I suspect what's left of Rangers would be interested, though, and to be fair so would plenty of Celtic fans. I just happen not to be one of them.

If we *had* to move, my preference would be for an Atlantic League of Scottish, Dutch, Belgian, Portuguese and some Scandinavian teams.




RobH said:


> An odd discussion considering the state 50% of the Old Firm is currently in. Seems Rangers aren't actually welcome in their own Premier League at the moment.


Well, that's because they don't technically exist any longer.


----------



## 1772 (Aug 18, 2009)

I'm not saying I'm for it; but if Celtic would to join the EPL; where do you think they'd end up? 10th-13th?


----------



## Harry1990 (Feb 5, 2010)

Current celtic squad would be championship team look at the players they buy usually from championship/ league 1 level but obviously hypothetically celtic move to england they would probably attract better players you would imagine


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

> _*Marie Macklin - *‏@MarieMacklin_
> 
> @halokilmarnock Masterplan completed today Thank U all who have contributed this far We are extremely pleased with the results it's amazing


This is the CEO of the KLIN Group talking about a redevelopment of the former Johnnie Walker plant in Kilmarnock called The Halo.

Part of this redevelopment is a 8000 seater stadium with a retractable roof. The stadium will hold concerts and will also have the ability to host football matches although, as it stands, Kilmarnock FC will not be moving here.

Now the plans are final, I expect to see some more details in the next few weeks, most likely on the project's twitter.

@halokilmarnock


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

The Hydro:


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

> Stirling is set to become the home of Scottish cricket with the construction of a "world class" new facility.
> 
> The proposed move, agreed between Stirling Council and Cricket Scotland, would see the sporting body relocate from Edinburgh to New Williamfield.
> 
> ...


https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&r...hu2OPJsvH7glnWYhHVj563Q&bvm=bv.68911936,d.ZWU


----------



## Kobo (Dec 12, 2006)

RMB2007 said:


> The Hydro:


This is going to look great for the Commonwealth Games. According to Wikipedia Gymnastics and Netball shall take place in the Hydro.


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

> Aberdeen chairman Stewart Milne hopes to announce details of a new training facility in the next few months.
> 
> He also aims to have the Dons playing in a new stadium by 2017, assuring fans work is ongoing behind the scenes to eliminate the club's debt.
> 
> ...


https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&r..._oDwDQ&usg=AFQjCNH7kSdlCwC5x0Hsa1SBc1HQiRZohg


----------



## MartinLeRoy (Mar 23, 2009)

Rugby Park, home of the mighty Kilmarnock FOOTBALL Club will play host to the Scotland vs Tonga RUGBY international in November. It will be the first time a match featuring a tier 1 union side will be played on a fully artificial pitch.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/28708890


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

> *Heriot-Watt University has awarded Bowmer & Kirkland the job to build Scotland’s new National Performance Centre for Sport.
> 
> The £30m multi-sport facility is being constructed to help Scotland’s athletes excel at international level and will be built in the parkland setting of the University’s campus.*
> 
> ...


http://www.constructionenquirer.com/2014/08/29/bk-wins-30m-scottish-elite-sports-centre-job/


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

> *Dumbarton Football Club have revealed a plan for a new, 4,000-capacity stadium to the west of the town.*
> 
> The Scottish Championship club only moved to their present stadium in 2000.
> 
> ...


www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29218641



> The Club's plans for a new stadium comprise:
> 
> • 4,000 capacity football stadium comprising 3,000 seats and 1,000 terracing that can be delivered in separate phases;
> 
> ...


www.dumbartonfootballclub.com/news/?mode=view&id=1514


----------



## Gadiri (Oct 30, 2009)




----------



## alexandru.mircea (May 18, 2011)

Stephen Thompson plans to make Dundee United the first top-flight club in Scotland to introduce a safe standing area


----------



## darrenstrutt (Apr 1, 2014)

Celtic have confirmed that they have been given approval to become the first club in British football to install a safe standing area. Expected to be in place for the start of the 2016/2017 season, the area is expected to provide standing places for 2,600 supporters.

bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33061483

Can't post the link properly as I'm under 10 posts.


----------



## Riise (Nov 12, 2006)

Celtic To Introduce Safe Standing Area With Rail Seating


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

> The £33m multi-sport Centre is designed to provide Scotland’s top sportsmen and women with the facilities, programmes and services for them to excel on an international stage, but will also be open to the wider public, inspiring future generations of Scots to aim for sporting excellence.
> 
> It will include a full-sized indoor pitch with seating for 500, top-level grass and synthetic outdoor pitches, a high performance strength and conditioning centre, a high performance medical centre and hydrotherapy pool, fitness centres and studios and support services.
> 
> ...


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

*Livingston*



> LIVINGSTON fans will have their heads in their hands after the revelation that their home ground is now called the Tony Macaroni Arena.


www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/scottish-football-now-home-most-6486236


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

> The £33m multi-sport Centre is designed to provide Scotland’s top sportsmen and women with the facilities, programmes and services for them to excel on an international stage, but will also be open to the wider public, inspiring future generations of Scots to aim for sporting excellence.
> 
> It will include a full-sized indoor pitch with seating for 500, top-level grass and synthetic outdoor pitches, a high performance strength and conditioning centre, a high performance medical centre and hydrotherapy pool, fitness centres and studios and support services.
> 
> ...












https://twitter.com/Oriamscotland


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

https://twitter.com/Oriamscotland


----------



## RMB2007 (Apr 1, 2007)

> *Hearts to stay at Tynecastle and build new Main Stand*
> 
> Hearts today confirmed at their AGM that they will be remaining at Tynecastle and intend to unveil plans for a new main stand in the near future that would take the capacity to more than 20,000.
> 
> ...


www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/hearts-to-stay-at-tynecastle-and-build-new-main-stand-1-3965639


----------



## Jim856796 (Jun 1, 2006)

*A Brand-New National Stadium Between Glasgow and Edinburgh?*

Both Hampden Park (in Glasgow) and Murrayfield (in Edinburgh) are ageing and a groundshare between rugby and association football may be the answer. But where should a brand-new national stadium be developed? Perhaps between Glasgow and Edinburgh?

According to Paul Bush of EventScotland, the suggestion is a 60,000+-capacity stadium with a retractable roof along the M8 highway between Glasgow and Edinburgh. It would be reachable for residents of both cities, making it a great location for both sporting and entertainment events. Mr. Bush pointed out that certain events such as the Champions League final, world title boxing fights and motor racing events could not be held in Scotland because existing stadia were either not big enough or did not have the right facilities.

Source: Scotsman.com.


----------



## gazzaa2 (Mar 22, 2014)

60,000+ is far too much unless it's Rangers against Celtic. Then you've got to police 60,000 Rangers and Celtic fans traveling there. 

50,000 is fine for the national team.


----------



## Laurence2011 (Mar 4, 2011)

retractable pitch would be good as well imo


----------

