Hampden upgrade will cost £250m says Mulraney

Aye, imagine the uproar over tickets when we play a final at Tynecastle.

Your scenario would only benefit two clubs, why would the rest of Scotland agree to be at a disadvantage?
A final at Tynecastle but only two clubs benefit...Hearts and who?

So you think squandering £250m benefits Scottish football?
 
a was the opposite .
a was behind the goals about a dozen rows from the front.
because theres a big area behind the goals for rugby players kicking over the bar. a felt miles away from the play and had a pretty poor view of the game.
*I
 
If the option is between a neutral Hampden for an Old Firm final or the Piggery, it's Hampden every time.
The next final would then be at Ibrox between the OF.
Id rather £250m was invested in the whole of Scottish football and not one stadium that is used a handful of times a season.
The fascination with a national stadium for football and rugby is just mental and backwards looking
 
A quarter of a billion pounds to bring two ends closer to the pitch

Someone is making up numbers and talking pish

What's your figure then?

It's not just as easy as "bringing two ends in"

Always have a laugh at people who just immediately criticise any number that's suggested with literally no thought as to how it came about or basis for it themselves.
 
A final at Tynecastle but only two clubs benefit...Hearts and who?

So you think squandering £250m benefits Scottish football?
It benefits Scottish football in a way that every footballing organisation in the world spending loads on a new stadium benefits them I suppose. I thought there was meant to be funding in place because of the Euro's.

Finals involving us or the bheasts won't ever be at stadiums bar ours or theirs under your proposal. That would never get voted through by other clubs instead of hampden and why should it?
 
What's your figure then?

It's not just as easy as "bringing two ends in"

Always have a laugh at people who just immediately criticise any number that's suggested with literally no thought as to how it came about or basis for it themselves.
Laugh away mate

But no way is it 250 million just to bring the two ends in
 
Mike Mulraney seems to have a lot to say over the last few days. That's the chairman of Alloa, running the National game. The chairman of Alloa.

Just another blazer with his own self-interests at heart. There's aphrase overused on here by many to describe every single aspect of Rangers, but in this case, its apt.

The SFA are a shambles.

There is no self-interest with that wee ball of filth.

He's there to do Liewell's bidding. No more no less.

Anyway, back in the early 90s, it was obvious the running track should have been removed and bigger stands close up to the pitch was the way to go.

An 80k stadium, which would have sold out for Rangers and the filth in cup finals and for Scotland, when the absurd notion that a resurgance was happening.
 
As others have said, we are being primed to accept that the stadium will cost too much to redevelop, so it 'makes sense' to just use the money earmarked, to redevelop Parkheads main stand and use there as the new national stadium.
You can see it coming from a mile off.

Getting the piggery tarted up at tax payers expense for the commonwealth games was an exercise in testing the waters for what comes next.
 
Hampden is a significant place in world, European and Scottish football, and is the second most important site in our history. Calls for it to be bulldozed always strike me as misjudged and slightly sad. Why would anyone want to see the site of the Laudrup final, Lovenkrands' SC winner or Cooper's thunderbolt reduced to rubble?

As ever, the calls for Murrayfield to be used instead are absolutely mental. The vast majority of games that take place at Hampden involve either us or Celtic, two teams based in Glasgow. Can you imagine the transport links for a Scottish Cup final on the east coast involving two teams that draw the vast majority of their support from the west coast? An insane suggestion.

Anyway, it will never happen. Hampden occupies too important a place for it to be permanently demolished.

Given Hampden is owned (I'm sure) by the yahoo, Haughey, I wouldn't get too over confident.
 
Laugh away mate

But no way is it 250 million just to bring the two ends in

How could you possibly know?

What are you basing it not being that on?

It cost Man City £50m to add 6000 seats to their South Stand a decade ago.

Anfield's single end upgrade of an additional 7000 seasts is costing £90m just now.

It's entirely plausible that two end stands at Hampden, with all the work required to modify the North and South Stand roofs associated with it would cost £250m.
 
How much do you think, out of curiousity, it would cost to knock it down?
25 years ago the Wales National stadium got demolished and rebuilt at £120m cost
So the costs will either be included in the rebuild or sold to land developers to be used as finance for a new site development.
So whatever £120m is in today's money plus the War/COVID knock on to costs and logistics is your answer?
I.e %^*& knows :))
 
There is no self-interest with that wee ball of filth.

He's there to do Liewell's bidding. No more no less.

Anyway, back in the early 90s, it was obvious the running track should have been removed and bigger stands close up to the pitch was the way to go.

An 80k stadium, which would have sold out for Rangers and the filth in cup finals and for Scotland, when the absurd notion that a resurgance was happening.
Scotland have been utter humpty for years and years and have struggled until recently to sell out the current capacity. Can you imagine the state of the place with an 80k stadium for any games Internationally or domestically that didn't involve us v them? It would be completely pointless to have a stadium larger than 60,000.
 
It benefits Scottish football in a way that every footballing organisation in the world spending loads on a new stadium benefits them I suppose. I thought there was meant to be funding in place because of the Euro's.

Finals involving us or the bheasts won't ever be at stadiums bar ours or theirs under your proposal. That would never get voted through by other clubs instead of hampden and why should it?
What sate is Scottish Football in because we have used the same our of date model? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result.
Why shouldn't alternatives be looked at? The whole , that's they way we've always done it argument is for those stuck in the past with no imagination.
 
Scotland have been utter humpty for years and years and have struggled until recently to sell out the current capacity. Can you imagine the state of the place with an 80k stadium for any games Internationally or domestically that didn't involve us v them? It would be completely pointless to have a stadium larger than 60,000.
Hence why you would take games to smaller stadiums to get a capacity crowd and give another area than Glasgow the benefit to businesses etc
 
Murrayfield needs redeveloped and talks have already started over how best to do it. The SFA should be on the phone saying they’ll sell Hampden and use the proceeds to joint fund Murrayfield being made into a modern duel purpose sports stadium.
 
What sate is Scottish Football in because we have used the same our of date model? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result.
Why shouldn't alternatives be looked at? The whole , that's they way we've always done it argument is for those stuck in the past with no imagination.
You think Scottish Football would be in a better state if we moved from hampden and played Semis and Finals at two over grounds?

Alternatives should be looked at, I would build a new football stadium in Stirling if it was me. 60,000 capacity, get it used for live events every summer and sell the stadium sponsorship rights to a major company to provide additional funds.
 
The next final would then be at Ibrox between the OF.
Id rather £250m was invested in the whole of Scottish football and not one stadium that is used a handful of times a season.
The fascination with a national stadium for football and rugby is just mental and backwards looking

Nah, can't see it happening. It gives one of each team in the final a massive advantage that might not always be immediately returned - the gap between the last two Old Firm finals was 22 years.

I don't see why it's backwards looking at all - Hampden is an important footballing site, older than most stadiums in the world, never mind Scotland, and most countries in the world have a national stadium for football.
 
Hence why you would take games to smaller stadiums to get a capacity crowd and give another area than Glasgow the benefit to businesses etc
Scotland's average crowds over the past 20 years has been between 30 and 45,000 supporters. Where do we find a stadium to fit in 25,000 to 40,000?
 
Murrayfield needs redeveloped and talks have already started over how best to do it. The SFA should be on the phone saying they’ll sell Hampden and use the proceeds to joint fund Murrayfield being made into a modern duel purpose sports stadium.

Why? Many of the issues that people have in Hampden are worse at Murrayfield.
 
Scotland have been utter humpty for years and years and have struggled until recently to sell out the current capacity. Can you imagine the state of the place with an 80k stadium for any games Internationally or domestically that didn't involve us v them? It would be completely pointless to have a stadium larger than 60,000.

Any final involving us or that lot will get the 80k or thereabouts. Semis, would get a crowd depending on the opposition and the priceof tickets.

I'm really not interested in the national side. However the bottom line is, the chance to make significant change was the early 90s. Nothing will change now. That's not a ship that's sailed, that's the Titanic.
 
Can you imagine the state of paranoia on here if we did rotate between Ibrox and the Piggery and it turns out the first couple of Semi Finals and Finals between the two clubs are scheduled for when they host the games?
 
Any final involving us or that lot will get the 80k or thereabouts. Semis, would get a crowd depending on the opposition and the priceof tickets.

I'm really not interested in the national side. However the bottom line is, the chance to make significant change was the early 90s. Nothing will change now. That's not a ship that's sailed, that's the Titanic.
That's only one game in the whole of Scottish Football including national team games. Why on Earth would they build that size of a capacity stadium for one game?
 
Just think with a competent government, the land could have been sold for a fair bob or two and then for the price of just two rusting ferries we could have had a national stadium to rival the best in the world built somewhere between Glasgow and Edinburgh with decent transport links.
A competent government wouldn’t have sent 400 odd million back to the EU.

There’s your Hampden regeneration money right there.
 
Fair enough mate :)

And aye, pipe dream, status quo will be in place until the end of time.

Up until 1973, it was was capable of hosting 134,000.

Given us and them have bigger average home attendances than back then, there is justification for the argument of Hampden having a bigger capacity than it presently does.

But as we've agreed, it won't be happening.

What we should be looking out for is what Haughey's next move will be.
 
You think Scottish Football would be in a better state if we moved from hampden and played Semis and Finals at two over grounds?

Alternatives should be looked at, I would build a new football stadium in Stirling if it was me. 60,000 capacity, get it used for live events every summer and sell the stadium sponsorship rights to a major company to provide additional funds.
Id agree if you raised the capacity and included rugby
 
I have a lot of time for Hampden, historically at least, and in an ideal world we’d upgrade it into a stadium we could all be genuinely proud of, but the tones from this Uncle Fester goon Mulraney smacks of the sort of stubbornness and arrogance that’s riddled the SFA for years.

Essentially it’s, “This is as good as it’s going to get and you should all be thankful you have a national stadium.”

One day it really won’t be fit for purpose anymore at all, and judging by the state of it that doesn’t look very far away, so what’s this slaphead and his fellow SFA goons going to do then?
 
Murrayfield needs redeveloped and talks have already started over how best to do it. The SFA should be on the phone saying they’ll sell Hampden and use the proceeds to joint fund Murrayfield being made into a modern duel purpose sports stadium.
Murrayfield is clearly a far superior stadium, but the home of Scottish football has always been in Glasgow and always should be, IMO.
 
Yahoo received pay rise

Yahoo praises the appointment of the new Yahoo head of referees

Yahoo makes an appearance from nowhere and is in the media almost daily

Yahoo makes statements about hampden Needing multi millions spent on it

Yahoo main stand needs major upgrades including the hospitality suites

Let’s be honest here The Alloa chairman and the Chapel reading RC school teacher are only in their positions in our game for reasons other than football

( as Keevins once said if Lennon wasn’t to win an award )

David Blunkett can see what’s coming ….
 
Last edited:
Should have done it right years ago and definitely the most recent time.
They done it on the cheap, just a cosmetic tarting up to 3 existing parts of the ground, which they did first.

The South Stand is actually quite impressive, but here's the thing.

If they'd built that first, the obvious next steps would have been pulling in the West and East areas to make a modern football arena, but this would have entailed re-builds and they weren't prepared to do that because of the costs.

So we end up with what we've got now and that's as good as it gets.
 
The stadium is a shocker, either 1) build a new one (not financially possible), 2) fix the ends and bring them closer, or 3) do nothing and continue pissing every fan off that has to visit it.

I am going for 3.
 
Murrayfield is bigger, in a better location and there is no need for two national stadiums.

It's not in a better location at all for two reasons: it's in a built up residential area, and it's in Edinburgh. In any given year, both us and Celtic will appear in the majority of semi-finals and finals. Where's the sense in moving a stadium to the east, when either team draw the majority of their support from the west?

Most countries have national stadiums for different sports.
 
What’s wrong with Hamdung, is it not a fantastic place to view ankles and shins.
All joking aside some people had their noses in the trough when refurbished before. The Cardiff stadium, all seated with retractable roof was something like
ten, twelve million more than that shithole.

That's the problem when you have to conserve a listed building (the south stand) in your new building. Cheaper to knock it all down and start from scratch.
 
Back
Top