Home› Sport

Hampden Park embarrassing stadium for Scotland

linkinpark875linkinpark875 Posts: 29,699
Forum Member
✭✭✭
in Sport #1
It really is a terrible stadium. I notice they couldn't even replace the faded red seats despite the fancy running track it's still an eye store of a stadium.
«1

Comments

  • jenziejenzie Posts: 20,821
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #2
    it's an old style stadium
    gies peace!
  • MadsocksMadsocks Posts: 3,368
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #3
    Whine whine whine....
  • CentaurionCentaurion Posts: 2,060
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #4
    Have to agree, using existing stadiums is a cheapo strategy that fools no-one. an opportunity missed for Scotland to build a 21st Century National Stadium worth the name.

    Glasgow is over populated with fine indoor concert and sport venues but Hampden and Celtic Park are prime early 20th Century dumps tarted up to look modern.
  • cantoscantos Posts: 7,368
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #5
    I think Scotland have done the right thing to not go overboard on expenditure.

    The bottom line is whether the sport facilities are good enough, not how pretty the stadiums are.
  • geemonkeegeemonkee Posts: 2,720
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #6
    'Embarrassing' is a bit strong - it has been deemed by UEFA to be good enough for finals.
    Admittedly, during the redevelopment years ago, the reduction in capacity was a mistake.
  • LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,647
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #7
    Centaurion wrote: »
    Have to agree, using existing stadiums is a cheapo strategy that fools no-one. an opportunity missed for Scotland to build a 21st Century National Stadium worth the name. .

    Probably hard to justify the cost when Glasgow already has 4 large stadia.
  • degsyhufcdegsyhufc Posts: 59,251
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #8
    cantos wrote: »
    I think Scotland have done the right thing to not go overboard on expenditure.

    The bottom line is whether the sport facilities are good enough, not how pretty the stadiums are.
    LostFool wrote: »
    Probably hard to justify the cost when Glasgow already has 4 large stadia.
    I agree. I saw the vid of it being transformed into an althetics stadium and it was very impressive.
  • Evo102Evo102 Posts: 13,630
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #9
    degsyhufc wrote: »
    I agree. I saw the vid of it being transformed into an althetics stadium and it was very impressive.

    And as has been pointed out, the relatively small cost (£20m) of converting a football only ground into a track and field venue fit for a world or regional championships means that many more cities / countries may in the future bid for major events.
  • CLL DodgeCLL Dodge Posts: 115,784
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    #10
    It's only the Commonwealth games. Cheap and cheerful is fine.
  • degsyhufcdegsyhufc Posts: 59,251
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #11
    A couple of time lapse vids of Hampden
    http://www.itv.com/news/2014-03-12/time-lapse-video-shows-hampden-parks-transformation-ahead-of-2014-glasgow-commonwealth-games/

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/commonwealth-games/video-hampden-park-transformation-complete-3644413
  • walterwhitewalterwhite Posts: 56,806
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #12
    Centaurion wrote: »
    Have to agree, using existing stadiums is a cheapo strategy that fools no-one. an opportunity missed for Scotland to build a 21st Century National Stadium worth the name.

    Glasgow is over populated with fine indoor concert and sport venues but Hampden and Celtic Park are prime early 20th Century dumps tarted up to look modern.

    I wouldn't call £500m or so to build a stadium plus millions in running costs each year an opportunity myself.
  • howard hhoward h Posts: 23,367
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #13
    Centaurion wrote: »
    Have to agree, using existing stadiums is a cheapo strategy that fools no-one. an opportunity missed for Scotland to build a 21st Century National Stadium worth the name.

    Glasgow is over populated with fine indoor concert and sport venues but Hampden and Celtic Park are prime early 20th Century dumps tarted up to look modern.
    The bottom line is how often the national stadium gets used and who by. Not entirely convinced you would get Rangers and Celtic to use it as a joint *home* ground, so a completely new stadium would be used by Scotland (and even then they like to get around the country), a few concerts and what else....?

    It's Hampden, it's neutral and it's Scotland's heritage. And, do you ken, it's NOT Wembley. As it always should be.
  • JCRJCR Posts: 24,060
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #14
    I would suspect most of the journos etc who praise it always sit in the centre of the south stand, not seeming to appreciate the views of the other end of the pitch in most of the East/West stand seats are abysmal; it's impossible to judge perspective of where the ball is if it's at the other end.

    It pains me to say this, but Ibrox is a better ground.
  • *Sparkle**Sparkle* Posts: 10,957
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #15
    It's not the best stadium in the world, but it serves its purpose, and the conversion was incredibly sensible, and has allowed the money to be spent on more useful stuff.

    At some point in the future it would be nice to get a new national stadium, and you could argue that the Commonwealth Games was the time to do it, but a new stadium should be properly planned, and a rush job for the Commonwealth Games would cut too many corners.
  • Armagideon TimeArmagideon Time Posts: 2,412
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #16
    LostFool wrote: »
    Probably hard to justify the cost when Glasgow already has 4 large stadia.

    Hampden, Ibrox, Celtic Park; where's the other one?
  • geemonkeegeemonkee Posts: 2,720
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #17
    Armagideon Time wrote: »
    Hampden, Ibrox, Celtic Park; where's the other one?

    Firhill :p
  • Armagideon TimeArmagideon Time Posts: 2,412
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #18
    geemonkee wrote: »
    Firhill :p

    Cheers! But what's the capacity of that?
  • Evo102Evo102 Posts: 13,630
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #19
    Armagideon Time wrote: »
    Cheers! But what's the capacity of that?

    Just over 10,000, not much bigger than Scotstoun.
  • timboytimboy Posts: 30,094
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #20
    Centaurion wrote: »
    Glasgow is over populated with fine indoor concert and sport venues but Hampden and Celtic Park are prime early 20th Century dumps tarted up to look modern.

    That'll be the Celtic Park where 3/4 of the stadium has been built from scratch in the last 20 years?

    http://www.thecelticwiki.com/page/Celtic+Park+-+Construction+pics
  • drillbitdrillbit Posts: 1,687
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #21
    thought hampden looked fab

    even season pro's like michael johnson and colin jackson were singing its praises
  • TiwttmosTiwttmos Posts: 2,573
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #22
    I look at the Millennium stadium in Cardiff with envy. The Millennium Project was a great chance to build a world class indoor stadium, especially with our weather. A great opportunity missed. The £85m forth and clyde millennium link we built is boring.
  • bluesdiamondbluesdiamond Posts: 11,360
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #23
    Evo102 wrote: »
    Just over 10,000, not much bigger than Scotstoun.

    Never knew of Scotstoun,
    Although I love that GB has the London Athletics Grand Prix, and the British Grand Prix (Birmingham), with a potential expansion of up to 15,00 capacity, would it be a legacy to have a regular athletics event in Glasgow?

    British Grand Prix or British Trials.

    Of course I appreciate it is something that cannot really be answered until late September.
  • walterwhitewalterwhite Posts: 56,806
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #24
    Tiwttmos wrote: »
    I look at the Millennium stadium in Cardiff with envy. The Millennium Project was a great chance to build a world class indoor stadium, especially with our weather. A great opportunity missed. The £85m forth and clyde millennium link we built is boring.

    I think a world class stadium would have cost a lot more than £85m though.
  • bluesdiamondbluesdiamond Posts: 11,360
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #25
    walterwhite wrote: »
    I think a world class stadium would have cost a lot more than £85m though.

    Also I don't think the Millenium Stadium has a running track.
  • walterwhitewalterwhite Posts: 56,806
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #26
    bluesdiamond wrote: »
    Also I don't think the Millenium Stadium has a running track.

    It cost £121m 15 years ago as well. Steel prices have gone up over 50% since.
Sign In or Register to comment.