The biggest stadium in Scotland. Home to those strange egg chasers. Capacity is 67500. Hearts will play their European games in this stadium next season as their main stand will be getting rebuilt for a 26000 capacity at Tynecastle -


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Murrayfield_Stadium_2005-05-13.jpg

http://img76.imageshack.us/img76/5445/untitled99dv.jpg

http://www.stadionwelt.de/stadionwelt_stadien/templates/stadionlisten/schottland/murrayfield/130.jpg

http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/9020/un3lz.jpg

http://www.genesisdreams.com/pics/Murrayfield.JPG

http://www.forwardevents.co.uk/stand%20info/Resources/murrayfieldfaded.jpeg

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/5016/untitled30ug.jpg

http://img79.imageshack.us/img79/9651/untitled8il.jpg

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/4623/untitled964dm.jpg

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/1452/untitled328px.jpg

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/9324/untitle3vn.jpg

http://img79.imageshack.us/img79/3522/unti2ea.jpg

http://img1.travelblog.org/Photos/1564/3112/f/20777-Lovely-day-0.jpg

http://img76.imageshack.us/img76/4108/untitled68pn.jpg

http://www.rampantscotland.com/graphics/murrayfield1841a.jpg

http://img76.imageshack.us/img76/5633/un56fv.jpg

http://www.stadionwelt.de/stadionwelt_stadien/templates/stadionlisten/schottland/murrayfield/100.jpg

http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/3903/untitled1212212vt.jpg

http://www.visitscotland.com/images/201721

http://www.rugbybasel.ch/photos/Summertour13.jpg

http://sacamalix.canalblog.com/Leith_100___Murrayfield.jpg

http://www.essex.ac.uk/ese/icdar2003/photos/murrayfield1.jpg

http://img76.imageshack.us/img76/6259/untitled465ny.jpg

Very nice...IMO best stadium in Scotland and one of the better rugby stadiums in the world.


Just out of curiosity...

Why is one stand different to the rest?

Whats the reason for the running track along the outer sideline?

Different timeline in the reconstruction. The smaller stand was built in 1982, the other 3 were built between 1993-95. The running track is a warm-up facility for players/amatuers. It was a deliberate feature in the stadium design. Don't know how often it gets used though!

I read a while ago that the SRU might be forced to abandon Murrayfield if new flood defences are built by the river, as they would block a lot of the emergency exit routes. Don't know how true this is though.

I do think it would have been a good idea if Hearts had moved there, no matter how great Tynecastle is.
Not ideal in any way, more of a longshot at trying to create a consistent challenge to the old firm, which is surely what scotland is crying out for.

Of course it would be risky and very unpopular but it could still have been interesting to see just what Hearts could have achieved there.
I think Ajax averaged little more than 10,000 when they dreamt up the amsterdam Arena, where they now get close to 50,000 every time.

I remember watching a game being played here...on TV.

Huge firework display at the end....was cool.


Cool stadium...good size.

What is Scottish Rugby doing to improve its teams. They used to be quite good in the amateur era. In the pro era they are on a par with Italy.

it's way too far back from the pitch, it's architecturally inconsistent and totally unimpressive - worst of the six nation stadiums except for lansdowne road (soon to look like a decent 50,000 seater arena) and italy's understandably poor effort.

scotchland, make an effort! hampden is similarly average.

^^^^^^^

Its about 250 % better than ANYTHING in New Zealand.

^ :lol: true about it.

^^^^^^^

Its about 250 % better than ANYTHING in New Zealand.

...which is hardly much of an achievement :)

^^^^^^

Cruel, but fair! :cheers:

I do think it would have been a good idea if Hearts had moved there, no matter how great Tynecastle is.
Not ideal in any way, more of a longshot at trying to create a consistent challenge to the old firm, which is surely what scotland is crying out for.

Of course it would be risky and very unpopular but it could still have been interesting to see just what Hearts could have achieved there.
I think Ajax averaged little more than 10,000 when they dreamt up the amsterdam Arena, where they now get close to 50,000 every time.

You cannot compare Hearts with Ajax imho.

Ajax averaged about 20.000 around 1995, the time the Amsterdam Arena was being build, which was about the capacity of their now former stadium De Meer. They sold out about every game at the time because they were one of the best teams in the world back then. They did average much lower attendences during the 80's. However, Dutch attendence figures were at an all time low at that time. Only PSV Eindhoven had decent averages at the time. Feyenoord had a season where they averaged about 14.000 in a stadium that had a 65.000 capacity at the time with some games only getting about 7.000 visitors.

Ajax is probably the most popular team in the country (and certainly the most hated), something that can hardly be said about Hearts. Furthermore, Ajax is the only professional team in a city significantly larger than Edinburgh.

Last but not least, there is a lot of debate about the current attendences of Ajax. Ajax itself counts all seasontickets plus all the other sold tickets. The Amsterdam Arena counts all persons that actually enter the stadium. Ajax has probably the most unloyal fans in The Netherlands, a lot of seasontickets holders don't bother to show up for the games against minor opposition. This results in quit a large difference in the figures provided by Ajax (48.000 average) and the Amsterdam Arena (about 43.000 average).

The exposed stairwells remind me of some of the stadia being used for the World Cup.

Looks more interesting than the stair cores used at the new Wembley or Emirates Stadium.

I noticed in the top most picture just in front of those people walking their dog, there is a cricket pitch! In Scotland no less.

I noticed in the top most picture just in front of those people walking their dog, there is a cricket pitch! In Scotland no less.

It's not that uncommon in Edinburgh. There is a vibrant cricketing community, and not all are English there. I've played cricket in Edinburgh a few times.

I think the Mighty Oz have played in Edinburgh against Scotlands on a previous Ashes tour (1997 perhaps).

What is Scottish Rugby doing to improve its teams. They used to be quite good in the amateur era. In the pro era they are on a par with Italy.

They are being complete id!ots with the usual lack of a sense of reality prevalent in scottish sport.

rugby isnt big in scotland at all but it has a good amateur structure with several divisions, perhaps 50 teams averaging crowds of perhaps 1,000 or something.

In the pro era, scotland have set up 2 or 3 pro teams to compete in various competitions, and they get basically no crowds and never have, and probably never will.

They have to be fully-funded by the scottish RU, which I think is already in debt following the rebuilding of Murrayfield, another unneccessary expense.

If they had any brains, they would get rid of the pro clubs and use all that money to develop talent and then just send the talent off to play in England or France. Perhaps they wouldnt be a joke then.

But no, Scotland must copy England. Must have their own pro clubs and must have their own cheap versions of Wembley and Twickenham.

Murrayfield is actually on very expensive land and I think there were speculations they could sell and move out of town.
If football could also get rid of their Hampden fiasco, then they could share a super Wembley style stadium between Glasgow and Edinburg and perhaps even make a profit

But no, Scotland must copy England. Must have their own pro clubs and must have their own cheap versions of Wembley and Twickenham.


:hahaha: :laugh: :hilarious :D

^^^^^^^

They need to get it into the schools. Scotland is wasting its time with soccer. They need to concentrate on a sport which they can become better at. Rugby is more achievable.

They are being complete id!ots with the usual lack of a sense of reality prevalent in scottish sport.

rugby isnt big in scotland at all but it has a good amateur structure with several divisions, perhaps 50 teams averaging crowds of perhaps 1,000 or something.

In the pro era, scotland have set up 2 or 3 pro teams to compete in various competitions, and they get basically no crowds and never have, and probably never will.

They have to be fully-funded by the scottish RU, which I think is already in debt following the rebuilding of Murrayfield, another unneccessary expense.

If they had any brains, they would get rid of the pro clubs and use all that money to develop talent and then just send the talent off to play in England or France. Perhaps they wouldnt be a joke then.

But no, Scotland must copy England. Must have their own pro clubs and must have their own cheap versions of Wembley and Twickenham.

Murrayfield is actually on very expensive land and I think there were speculations they could sell and move out of town.
If football could also get rid of their Hampden fiasco, then they could share a super Wembley style stadium between Glasgow and Edinburg and perhaps even make a profit


Why do you hate Scotland? and I know for a fact you are not Danish.

You do not understand Scottish culture. Hampden is one of the most famous stadiums in the world. It had to be rebuilt. Scottish footballs home is Glasgow, nowhere else. Nearly every cup final features Rangers or Celtic, so of course the stadium is going to be in Glasgow. Ibrox/Parkhead cannot be used as Scotland fans would not accept Scotland games being played at Rangers or Celtics stadiums.

Hampden had been a huge success. It might not be a great stadium (although it is a UEFA 5 star stadium, along with Ibrox), but it has been a massive success. Scotland averaged the 4th highest crowds in Europe for the qualifying rounds of the 2006 World Cup. Hampden has had a Champions League final that was a huge success and has a UEFA Cup final next year. Do you have any idea how many European/UEFA Cup finals have been played at Hampden over the years? A huge amount. No Scottish football fans wants to travel to Edinburgh to watch football. We have watched Scotland at Hampden for 100+ years, it's where we play football. My grandad and father went to Hampden, as do I. It is very easy to get to as the central belt (Glasgow and its surrounding areas) has 2.5 million people, 50% of Scotlands population. Build a super stadium in Livingston and it's game over. I won't go to Scotland games and neither will a huge amount of people. We go to Hampden, nowhere else. The stadium only cost £65million, and is now sold out for every Scotland game and every cup final. No problems.

Same goes for rugby. No rugby fan wants to watch Scotland in Livingston, they have a day out at Haymarket which is the home of Scottish Rugby, always has been, always will be. They know the pubs in the area as they have been going there for decades.

Unless you are Scottish, you cannot understand our history and culture. Glasgow is football, Edinburgh is rugby. It's all about tradition. You go to the Horseshoe bar in Glasgow for drinks or various other pubs, then you walk from the city to Hampden. It's been like that for 100+ years. It's the way it is. Think of American College traditions, it is very similar to that. The idea of Football and Rugby sharing homes is ridiculous, nobody wants it.

I can tell you have never been to a Scotland game or a Scotland rugby game. You have to go to understand. Hampden is football, Murrayfield is rugby. It's as simple as that. It's the way it is.

^^^^^^^

They need to get it into the schools. Scotland is wasting its time with soccer. They need to concentrate on a sport which they can become better at. Rugby is more achievable.


Absolute nonsense. Football is by far the most popular sport in Scotland. We have went through our worst patch in our history be we still managed to finish 3rd in our qualifying group. All countries go through bad patches. Not too long ago England failed to qualify for World Cups. We will bounce back, and under Walter Smith you will see a much better Scotland team.

When England failed to qualify for USA 94, or Argentina 78 or Germany 74, were you all saying England should give up trying to play football?

What about all the countries who failed to qualify for Germany 2006, should they just give up and try another sport. If that was the case, Australia would have never kicked a ball for the last 100 years!!

What about Wales? Finished 2nd bottom in their group and haven't qualified for a tournament for about 70 years!! Should they give up?

Why do you hate Scotland? and I know for a fact you are not Danish.

You do not understand Scottish culture. Hampden is one of the most famous stadiums in the world. It had to be rebuilt. Scottish footballs home is Glasgow, nowhere else. Nearly every cup final features Rangers or Celtic, so of course the stadium is going to be in Glasgow. Ibrox/Parkhead cannot be used as Scotland fans would not accept Scotland games being played at Rangers or Celtics stadiums.

Hampden had been a huge success. It might not be a great stadium (although it is a UEFA 5 star stadium, along with Ibrox), but it has been a massive success. Scotland averaged the 4th highest crowds in Europe for the qualifying rounds of the 2006 World Cup. Hampden has had a Champions League final that was a huge success and has a UEFA Cup final next year. Do you have any idea how many European/UEFA Cup finals have been played at Hampden over the years? A huge amount. No Scottish football fans wants to travel to Edinburgh to watch football. We have watched Scotland at Hampden for 100+ years, it's where we play football. My grandad and father went to Hampden, as do I. It is very easy to get to as the central belt (Glasgow and its surrounding areas) has 2.5 million people, 50% of Scotlands population. Build a super stadium in Livingston and it's game over. I won't go to Scotland games and neither will a huge amount of people. We go to Hampden, nowhere else. The stadium only cost £65million, and is now sold out for every Scotland game and every cup final. No problems.

Same goes for rugby. No rugby fan wants to watch Scotland in Livingston, they have a day out at Haymarket which is the home of Scottish Rugby, always has been, always will be. They know the pubs in the area as they have been going there for decades.

Unless you are Scottish, you cannot understand our history and culture. Glasgow is football, Edinburgh is rugby. It's all about tradition. You go to the Horseshoe bar in Glasgow for drinks or various other pubs, then you walk from the city to Hampden. It's been like that for 100+ years. It's the way it is. Think of American College traditions, it is very similar to that. The idea of Football and Rugby sharing homes is ridiculous, nobody wants it.

I can tell you have never been to a Scotland game or a Scotland rugby game. You have to go to understand. Hampden is football, Murrayfield is rugby. It's as simple as that. It's the way it is.

About my nationality, I can only say, who cares!
(Hvis du ikke tror på jeg er dansk, ja så er det sådan set dit problem. Det er jo også ret ligegyldigt!)

None of your points are new. Its just typical scottish conservatism in a country crying out for a new approach.

Hampden may be 5-star but that doesnt say anything relevant for fans. Its tecnhnical criteria of interest mainly to UEFA.
Its a poor stadium now and in 10 years time it will be something of a joke. Far from the pitch, low elevation, poor views etc.
What should scotland then do in 10 years? Are you suggesting throwing hundreds of millions into massive renovations?
or go on with a very poor venue, only 3rd best in its own city?
I am well aware of Hampden´s history. so much more reason to not waste money on building cheap crap, which insults the Old Hampden.


You say football only in Glasgow as your reason but scotland do actually play around the country, at least when they dont feel they can fill Hampden.

The SRU is simply bankrupt. Its the SRU themselves who are considering leaving Murrayfield.not me. Fewer and fewer games fill Murrayfield and the SRU are also beginning to stage games away from Edinburgh.
Scottish rugby is dying because the SRU have completly wasted their money. I predict Murrayfield will simply be sold in a few years time.

As a scot, I am surprised you consider Edinburgh to be about rugby. Surely its about football just like Glasgow. Rugby is very small in scotland and only really big in near villages.

I dont hate Scotland. If I did I would never have taken an interest in these issues or write lenghty posts. I do pity all those sad scots who now only revel in England defeats, though.
I just think its so sad that Scotland cant wake up. Its a small country with an amazing support for football. It could be so much better. It could be a really strong league. Now Hearts have joined Celtic and Rangers in capacity crowds. Certainly both Hibs, Aberdeen and Dundee U have potential as well if they could find capital to invest in their venues.

imagine Hampden never having been rebuilt (perhaps a section of the old terrace could have been kept) and parts of that funding had gone to pushing Celtic Park up to 80,000 and Ibrox to 65,000 or whatever is possible and Hearts new stand as well and perhaps developments in Dundee and Aberdeen too. Of course this would be a difficult balance between public and private money but really, look at scotlands Stadium situation. Its a joke, and this from a country that depends on it the most due to very limited tv-income.

The limited capacities at Ibrox, celtic Park and Tynecastle is holding back scottish football. Meanwhile Hampden and Murrayfiled are perhaps the 2 least used stadiums in all of europe built at collossal cost.
Stupid league rules has forced a club like Raith Rovers to build 10,000 seats they will never use. ridiculous waste. just as many other stands are built for small clubs. Clyde up to 8,000 now is it? great, indeed!
Scotland so waste their potential.

Why cant scotland use their potential. There is a support that could make scotland the leaders and show all of europe that there is a way for small countries.
Of course that would demand enlightened leadership and that is just about the last thing scotland seems to have.

Who is "you all" ? I think its only bobdabuilder suggesting scotland should give up on football, which is obviously ridiculous.
I see huge potential for scottish football despite a low population.

Scottish rugby is limited and should be about developing talent which then play pro in England and internationals for Scotland. That could place rugby as a good viable second sport in scotland.

About my nationality, I can only say, who cares!
(Hvis du ikke tror på jeg er dansk, ja så er det sådan set dit problem. Det er jo også ret ligegyldigt!)

None of your points are new. Its just typical scottish conservatism in a country crying out for a new approach.

Hampden may be 5-star but that doesnt say anything relevant for fans. Its tecnhnical criteria of interest mainly to UEFA.
Its a poor stadium now and in 10 years time it will be something of a joke. Far from the pitch, low elevation, poor views etc.
What should scotland then do in 10 years? Are you suggesting throwing hundreds of millions into massive renovations?
or go on with a very poor venue, only 3rd best in its own city?
I am well aware of Hampden´s history. so much more reason to not waste money on building cheap crap, which insults the Old Hampden.


You say football only in Glasgow as your reason but scotland do actually play around the country, at least when they dont feel they can fill Hampden.

The SRU is simply bankrupt. Its the SRU themselves who are considering leaving Murrayfield.not me. Fewer and fewer games fill Murrayfield and the SRU are also beginning to stage games away from Edinburgh.
Scottish rugby is dying because the SRU have completly wasted their money. I predict Murrayfield will simply be sold in a few years time.

As a scot, I am surprised you consider Edinburgh to be about rugby. Surely its about football just like Glasgow. Rugby is very small in scotland and only really big in near villages.

I dont hate Scotland. If I did I would never have taken an interest in these issues or write lenghty posts. I do pity all those sad scots who now only revel in England defeats, though.
I just think its so sad that Scotland cant wake up. Its a small country with an amazing support for football. It could be so much better. It could be a really strong league. Now Hearts have joined Celtic and Rangers in capacity crowds. Certainly both Hibs, Aberdeen and Dundee U have potential as well if they could find capital to invest in their venues.

imagine Hampden never having been rebuilt (perhaps a section of the old terrace could have been kept) and parts of that funding had gone to pushing Celtic Park up to 80,000 and Ibrox to 65,000 or whatever is possible and Hearts new stand as well and perhaps developments in Dundee and Aberdeen too. Of course this would be a difficult balance between public and private money but really, look at scotlands Stadium situation. Its a joke, and this from a country that depends on it the most due to very limited tv-income.

The limited capacities at Ibrox, celtic Park and Tynecastle is holding back scottish football. Meanwhile Hampden and Murrayfiled are perhaps the 2 least used stadiums in all of europe built at collossal cost.
Stupid league rules has forced a club like Raith Rovers to build 10,000 seats they will never use. ridiculous waste. just as many other stands are built for small clubs. Clyde up to 8,000 now is it? great, indeed!
Scotland so waste their potential.

Why cant scotland use their potential. There is a support that could make scotland the leaders and show all of europe that there is a way for small countries.
Of course that would demand enlightened leadership and that is just about the last thing scotland seems to have.

You simply don't understand Scottish Football. Hampden is our home, just like Wembley is the home of English football. The way the re-development of Hampden happened was a shame as the SFA only had £12 million to spend and the stadium had to be all seated for FIFA games. So £12 million was spent on upgrading half the stadium for a 33000 capacity and it had to be quite basic as there was only £12 million. Then they surprisingly got £50 million to upgrade the other half (the main stand at Hampden is an amazing stand, some of the most advanced facilities in Europe) and so the 18500 main stand became one of the most advanced in Europe due to the huge amount of money spent on it. If the SFA knew they were going to get the extra £50 million from the start, then the stadium would of been built in a totally different manner from the start.

The 10000 seater rule was daft and has been removed.

As for our stadiums being a joke??? No country in the world with 5 million people has stadiums the quality Scotland has (2 in the UEFA 5 star listings). We have 3 stadiums over 50000 in one city alone and another at 67500. Hearts will soon have a 26000 stadium. For a population of 5 million people, our stadiums are amazing. Hibs only have one more stand to build for a modern 23000 stadium.

As for the SFA giving Rangers/Celtic money to upgrade their stadiums. That would be illegal. The SFA is nothing to do with Rangers or Celtic. If you want your stadium upgraded, you pay for it yourself. No public money is allowed. The idea of Dundee United playing in a 25000 stadium is stupid. They average 9041.

Our league is the 10th strongest in Europe. The nearest country with a similar population is Israel in 18th, and even they have more than 20% more people than us. Show me a country with roughly 5 million people that has stadiums like Scotland? There isn't any.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~kassiesa/bert/uefa/data/method3/crank2006.html

As for Hampden, it's not great, but the main stand is superb and there are no restricted views in the stadium at all. You are not that far away (far less than an athletics track and only the 2 stands behind the goals are far away) and the atmosphere is superb. Nearly everybody who goes to a Scotland game enjoys the game and the stadium. Not a great stadium, but it's our home, and that is all that counts.

I would rather watch Scotland play in a Hampden with no roof or seats or toilets, than move to different stadium. You can only understand this if you are Scottish. It might seam daft to non-Scots, but it's the way it is. It's all about tradition. Is that a crime?

Put it this way - Denmark has 5 million people and it has one stadium worth bothering about (42000) and it's league is 23rd strongest in Europe. Scotland has a 67500, 60832, 52103 and a 50549 stadium and it's league is 10th strongest in Europe. Yet you say Scottish stadiums are a joke!!!! What the hell does that make Danish stadiums!!! For 5 million people, Scottish stadiums are out of this world, as is our league. It's the 10th best in Europe. No league in Europe with 5 million people or less is higher than us. Not one!!

You misunderstood what I meant by "a joke"
Scottish stadiums are a joke in the sense that what do they get from them and which are how big etc.

Stadiums are either way too big or too small or barely used.

I am well aware that the sfa couldnt just give money to the old firm. But they could start using the brain.
Perhaps they could have put the Hampden money into a trust if the government would match it for which clubs could apply or whatever. I dont know. lots of possibilities. I assume they have full time paid people supposedly looking out for scottish football


So Dundee average 9,000. Looking it up, Celtic averaged 22,000 before they got their new ground. ajax averaged less than 20,000 a few years before moving.
I am not saying Dundee United would just triple their crowds in a new stadium, but why not try it? Perhaps they could even consider a merger with Dundee, (or Dundee could just sink.) There is a sizeable population in and around Dundee. There could be a potential for a much finer club. Aberdeen is even bigger.
Look how Hearts´crowds just shut up when they suddenly challenge

Build a high quality 20,000 venue designed to double in capacity one stand at a time if needed.
I think they actually wanted that in Dundee but cant afford it. thats the joke. they should have the 2 stands that shot up at raith rovers. And how do clyde expand their ground? can they really afford that themselves. I suspect public money is involved and how great would it be if the SFA woke up.
Took leadership, tried to set goals and divert whatever money is available to be used for what could benefit everyone.
Raith and Clyde is waste.

I would say these 6 clubs could get higher/far higher crowds with better facilities and a better league.

Rangers
Celtic
Hearts
Hibs
Aberdeen
Dundee U

Imagine these clubs in an 8-team league, which is big enough, better facilities and a more competitive league. Look at Hearts, surely crowds would go way up, revenue way up, better football, more tv money, not least from abroad. It could be a really strong league.
scottish clubs can win the champions league.

anyway does anyone think hearts will fill Murrayfield next year?

An 8 team league is far too small. It's bad enough playing the same team 4 times a year (sometimes 6 if you include Cups), let alone 6/7 times a year (possibly 9 if you include Cups). We need a bigger league, not a smaller league. Dundee and Dundee United merging is less likely than Jesus doing a dance down Sauchiehall Street this Saturday. They hate each other and would rather go bust than merge. Clyde paid for their stadium.

Hearts won't fill Murrayfield, although they will get quite a few 40000+ for Hibs, Rangers, Celtic and European games.

well isnt Dundee going bust already..

Of course playing 4 times isnt ideal, but are Hearts games not more interesting now than a few years ago. Good standards are more important but it should only be an 8-team league if it was far more competitive than now, basically more clubs should reach Hearts´level, better stadiums for the right clubs.
perhaps a new cup comp. for smaller nations, scotland,holland,portugal. Could be good, I think, but only as a cup. not the atlantic league nonsense.

To just block everything, referring to tradition is pointless and at one point someone actually had to create these traditions.

Will be interesting to see hearts crowds. especially if they do well.

but Hearts are only competing because they got a rich Lithuanian sugar daddy. Without him there would be no new stand or big spending on players. Clubs like Dundee or Dundee United will never go bust because they have been around for too long and the fans/city wouldn't allow it. Dundee are now out of administration and have no debt. Despite all the fears of a huge number of clubs going to the wall, only one club went bust (Clydebank) and that was because they only had about 200 fans and had only been formed in the late 60's.

Clydebank were reformed and now play in the Junior league and now get bigger crowds than when they played in the professional league.

but Hearts are only competing because they got a rich Lithuanian sugar daddy. Without him there would be no new stand or big spending on players. Clubs like Dundee or Dundee United will never go bust because they have been around for too long and the fans/city wouldn't allow it. Dundee are now out of administration and have no debt. Despite all the fears of a huge number of clubs going to the wall, only one club went bust (Clydebank) and that was because they only had about 200 fans and had only been formed in the late 60's.

Clydebank were reformed and now play in the Junior league and now get bigger crowds than when they played in the professional league.

remains to be seen whether he is a sugardaddy or just someone who believes more in scottish football than scots do and is willing to risk his capital more than scottish clubs/banks. Perhaps his example is needed for others to get their heads out of the sand.
Extra millions are already pouring in through gate increases and surely various commercial income will do the same. Hearts may get a shot at the champions league leading to further millions.

Aberdeen, Dundee U, Hibs could well do the same if they could get their hands on some risk-willing capital, which is what scottish football should try to provide for the right projects for the right clubs

The Scots turned over the Froggies. Well done.

Scotland is too small a country to be trying its hand at soccer, rugby etc.. They should go full boar into one or the other like you get with a New Zealand in rugby or Lithuania in basketball.

Scottish rugby should look to stage one of the 6 nations matches in Glasgow each year. Maybe at Parkhead as Hampden is too narrow. Get more interest across the country in the code rather than just have Edinburgh hogging all the matches.

pretty big

The Scots turned over the Froggies. Well done.

Scotland is too small a country to be trying its hand at soccer, rugby etc.. They should go full boar into one or the other like you get with a New Zealand in rugby or Lithuania in basketball.

Scottish rugby should look to stage one of the 6 nations matches in Glasgow each year. Maybe at Parkhead as Hampden is too narrow. Get more interest across the country in the code rather than just have Edinburgh hogging all the matches.


You don't seem to understand, Scotland does go full boar into football. It is the national game and is on a far greater scale in Scotland than any other sport. Hence the 3, 50k + stadiums in a country of this size.

Do not be fooled by Dundee Utd, they are not a big club. In terms of fanbase, their local rivals Dundee are larger, not to mention a few other clubs.

Do not be fooled by Dundee Utd, they are not a big club. In terms of fanbase, their local rivals Dundee are larger, not to mention a few other clubs.

Do you know Dundee United are the only UK club ever to have beaten Barcelona home and away in a European tie?

Anyway, the evidence would suggest Dundee United are the slightly bigger club -

http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2005/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2004/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2003/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2002/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2001/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2000/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/archive/avesco.htm

and in the last 25 years Dundee United have won the top league, the Scottish Cup and got to a UEFA cup final. Dundee have done nothing. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind Dundee, but in my lifetime Dundee United have always been classed as the bigger club with more famous players, bigger crowds and more trophies.

Dundee united also have the better stadium.

Do you know Dundee United are the only UK club ever to have beaten Barcelona home and away in a European tie?

Anyway, the evidence would suggest Dundee United are the slightly bigger club -

http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2005/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2004/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2003/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2002/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2001/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/2000/avesco.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/archive/avesco.htm

and in the last 25 years Dundee United have won the top league, the Scottish Cup and got to a UEFA cup final. Dundee have done nothing. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind Dundee, but in my lifetime Dundee United have always been classed as the bigger club with more famous players, bigger crowds and more trophies.

Dundee united also have the better stadium.


Believe me, I know everything about Dundee Utd, what they have achieved and how good their stadium is. But, despite what they have achieved I feel they are a club that has delusions of grandeur. No wonder their managers can't please them with the expectations they have. I'd like to see what would happen if they were relegated. I bet they wouldn't pull in the same size crowd as Dundee.

Believe me, I know everything about Dundee Utd, what they have achieved and how good their stadium is. But, despite what they have achieved I feel they are a club that has delusions of grandeur. No wonder their managers can't please them with the expectations they have. I'd like to see what would happen if they were relegated. I bet they wouldn't pull in the same size crowd as Dundee.

by any chance are you a Dundee fan?

We had better stick to the topic as the admin have posted a warning on the main front page. We should stick to Murrayfield.

by any chance are you a Dundee fan?

We had better stick to the topic as the admin have posted a warning on the main front page. We should stick to Murrayfield.

No, I am not a Dundee fan, I have no love for either. In fact, if I had to choose between them I would prefer Utd.

Anyway, Murrayfield. Best stadium in Scotland and should Hibs and Hearts reach the SC final it should be staged there. Makes sense to me.

duplicate post

No, I am not a Dundee fan, I have no love for either. In fact, if I had to choose between them I would prefer Utd.

Anyway, Murrayfield. Best stadium in Scotland and should Hibs and Hearts reach the SC final it should be staged there. Makes sense to me.

Does make sense and it should be held there as you would get 67500 sell out. Won't happen though >(

Does make sense and it should be held there as you would get 67500 sell out. Won't happen though >(

The police might have something to say about it though. Imagine them coming over and going back on the same trains, buses etc. What will it be like in Queen Street Station on the day of the final?

The police might have something to say about it though. Imagine them coming over and going back on the same trains, buses etc. What will it be like in Queen Street Station on the day of the final?

It will be like a very busy train station!!

I hope it is switched, but it is also unlikely to be a Hibs/Hearts final anyway. One or both could get knocked out or they could meet each other in the semis.

They are being complete id!ots with the usual lack of a sense of reality prevalent in scottish sport.

rugby isnt big in scotland at all but it has a good amateur structure with several divisions, perhaps 50 teams averaging crowds of perhaps 1,000 or something.

In the pro era, scotland have set up 2 or 3 pro teams to compete in various competitions, and they get basically no crowds and never have, and probably never will.

They have to be fully-funded by the scottish RU, which I think is already in debt following the rebuilding of Murrayfield, another unneccessary expense.

If they had any brains, they would get rid of the pro clubs and use all that money to develop talent and then just send the talent off to play in England or France. Perhaps they wouldnt be a joke then.

But no, Scotland must copy England. Must have their own pro clubs and must have their own cheap versions of Wembley and Twickenham.

Murrayfield is actually on very expensive land and I think there were speculations they could sell and move out of town.
If football could also get rid of their Hampden fiasco, then they could share a super Wembley style stadium between Glasgow and Edinburg and perhaps even make a profit

'Lord Nelson! Lord Beaverbrook! Sir Winston Churchill! Sir Anthony Eden! Clement Attlee! Henry Cooper! Lady Diana! Maggie Thatcher! Kingdomca - can you hear me, Kingdomca! Your boys took one hell of a beating! Your boys took one hell of a beating!'

http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Pointe/2515/thatcher.rm

GET IT RIGHT UP YAAAHHHH!!

Suddenly bubomb is a rugby fan. What a surprise. :)

Well done. It's great to see a minor nation take down a thoroughbred now and again.

Suddenly bubomb is a rugby fan. What a surprise. :)

Well done. It's great to see a minor nation take down a thoroughbred now and again.

GET IT RIGHT UP YAAAHHHH!!

'Lord Nelson! Lord Beaverbrook! Sir Winston Churchill! Sir Anthony Eden! Clement Attlee! Henry Cooper! Lady Diana! Maggie Thatcher! Kingdomca! Iain1974! - CAN YOU HEAR ME, IAIN1974! Your boys took one hell of a beating! YOUR BOYS TOOK ONE HELL OF A BEATING!'

http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Pointe/2515/thatcher.rm

good

F**king Cohen with his butter fingers infront of the line!

Oh well we're still world champions try become that SCOTLAND ha ha but they beat us and like ours their defence was superb I had the feeling that it would be a draw in the end it was unfair on either side to lose but Scotland did win in the end *cry*

I suppose, Scotland are going to self-proclaim themselves world champions now in true 1967 style.

Egg chasing not so bad, eh bubomb?

GET IT RIGHT UP YAAAHHHH!!

'Lord Nelson! Lord Beaverbrook! Sir Winston Churchill! Sir Anthony Eden! Clement Attlee! Henry Cooper! Lady Diana! Maggie Thatcher! Kingdomca! Iain1974! - CAN YOU HEAR ME, IAIN1974! Your boys took one hell of a beating! YOUR BOYS TOOK ONE HELL OF A BEATING!'

http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Pointe/2515/thatcher.rm

Well that is shocking.. Scotland beating both France and England now. shock!

Great for scotland and rugby as well, and about time, would be amazing if they could win the whole thing.

I guess your quote is fitting but Scotland beating England ought not be a similar earthshattering event as Norway doing it back then

Dear old England, how the mighty have fallen.

Cheers Scotland! :cheers:

Dear old England, how the mighty have fallen.

Cheers Scotland! :cheers:

how the mighty have fallen? australia's rugby union team only just recently ended their worst losing streak for more than three decades (seven matches). england are still leading the six nations table. i ask you again, how the mighty have fallen?

the real question is why do aussies such as yourself continuously jizz your pants whenever england lose? afterall i, and pretty much every other englishman, couldn't care less if australia lost to, say, south africa. it's a strange condition. i hope you lot get through the group stages in the world cup and make waves whereas you, i'm sure you desperately hope we crash and burn.

i'm not having it anymore, it's anglophobia - plain and simple. certain aussies (certain because i've met a fair few really good aussie lads) need to grow up and realise that there's banter and there's xenophobia.

well played scotland, though. totally deserved the win.

^^^^^^^^^

I think you flatter yourself and your nation that we bother to care that much. As for our record, you should look in your own backyard first as we play a great majority of our season against South Africa and New Zealand. Not Italy, Ireland, Scotland and Wales who are generally 2nd tier nations.

This year's Six Nations is very tight - eight of the nine games have been won by the home team, the only side beating this trend being England in Rome :)

how the mighty have fallen? australia's rugby union team only just recently ended their worst losing streak for more than three decades (seven matches). england are still leading the six nations table. i ask you again, how the mighty have fallen?

the real question is why do aussies such as yourself continuously jizz your pants whenever england lose? afterall i, and pretty much every other englishman, couldn't care less if australia lost to, say, south africa. it's a strange condition. i hope you lot get through the group stages in the world cup and make waves whereas you, i'm sure you desperately hope we crash and burn.

i'm not having it anymore, it's anglophobia - plain and simple. certain aussies (certain because i've met a fair few really good aussie lads) need to grow up and realise that there's banter and there's xenophobia.

well played scotland, though. totally deserved the win.

Dont go down this route, its nonsense really.

Most australians like the UK way more than they want to admit to.
Australians obsess about England but it has to come across as stick like a rebellious child to its parents.
Take it as a compliment because its essentially what it is.

so what attendances could hearts be looking at if they make it to the champions league group stage realisticily?

35000 I think

I agree King Aussies actually have more or a chip on their shoulder when it comes to England than us Scots do, I am constantly shocked by the Anglophobia I encounter ona day to day basis in Sydney

For home games in the Champions League, I would say up to 50000 depending on the away team. They got over 30000 for UEFA cup games at Murrayfield, so glamourous Champions League games would get far more.

Hearts v Barcelona would get 50000 at least, and any game against an English team would be a 67500 sell-out!!

I was feeling arty!!


http://img421.imageshack.us/img421/4416/br30uz.jpg

Cringe...............

All that needs to be said really!

The topic 'Murrayfield' didn't last long in here eh?

No wish some scots would just remove the chip from their shoulder!!

No wish some scots would just remove the chip from their shoulder!!

So we shouldn't celebrate a great win over England in the rugby? Grow up!!

Enjoying a famous victory over your biggest and oldest rivals does not mean you have a 'chip on your shoulder'!!

You must be the only Scotsman who didn't enjoy the rugby victory!! Stop acting like a gaylord and show some Scottish spirit!!!


Scotsman -

http://www.rugbyheaven.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/02/26/scotlandwin_rugbyheaven__350x234.jpg


Gorgu -

http://www.celticdream.art.pl/1024x768/o.nas/o.nas.2.jpg

Mate, there's just no need for the homophobia.

Mate, there's just no need for the homophobia.

How can I be homophobic? I'm gay!! I love men's bums!!

There's a big difference between being 'gay' and being a 'gaylord'!!

There's a big difference between being 'gay' and being a 'gaylord'!!
And yet you seem to be demonstrating both qualities very admirably there BuBomb! :laugh:

So, who's up for the football World Cup then eh? Those friendlies last night got me back into the international football spirit!! Good God we've got a great team!

Australia, you ready for the World Cup?

England, you ready for the World Cup?

Scotl....

France, you ready for the World Cup?

:cheers:

Ugly-looking stadium. I suppose it's one of those old-fashioned "modern" places done on the cheap. It suits what they serve up there i suppose ie: crap.

:cheers:

Out of Murrayfield, Ibrox and Celtic Park, I'm not sure which is the worst stadium to be perfectly honest. None of them look at all aesthetically pleasing, but I supppose Murrayfield might...might...be just above the others...not sure really.

:cheers:

Out of Murrayfield, Ibrox and Celtic Park, I'm not sure which is the worst stadium to be perfectly honest. None of them look at all aesthetically pleasing, but I supppose Murrayfield might...might...be just above the others...not sure really.

:cheers:

Ibrox not aesthetically pleasing???? You've got bad taste mate, just look at these pics -


http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=326241

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=210325&page=9&pp=20

^^ Sorry bubomb but i kinda have to agree with him, why are all the stadia either unfinished or with an odd angle here or a cut corner there, i like Ibrox but i wouldn't call it great,

^^ Sorry bubomb but i kinda have to agree with him, why are all the stadia either unfinished or with an odd angle here or a cut corner there, i like Ibrox but i wouldn't call it great,

Fair enough, but I can't see anything unfinished or odd about Ibrox. It's about as complete a stadium as you can find the UK. All 4 stands are not the same, but they are very balanced and the main stand gives the stadium huge character instead of these boring stadiums where all the stands are the same. Just my opinion of course. Even if I was a celtic fan, I would still love the design of Ibrox.

Fair enough, but I can't see anything unfinished or odd about Ibrox. It's about as complete a stadium as you can find the UK. All 4 stands are not the same, but they are very balanced and the main stand gives the stadium huge character instead of these boring stadiums where all the stands are the same. Just my opinion of course. Even if I was a celtic fan, I would still love the design of Ibrox.

I dont think many celtic fans would say that, from what i've seen they think parkhead is better. I like the main stand at ibrox though, it does give a stadium huge character, other examples would be Old Trafford and Goodison.

I dont think many celtic fans would say that, from what i've seen they think parkhead is better. I like the main stand at ibrox though, it does give a stadium huge character, other examples would be Old Trafford and Goodison.

Ibrox could be a 100000 stadium made of diamond and have internet access at every seat, and 99.99% of celtic fans would still say Parkhead was better than Ibrox. Very few football fans have the ability to be objective, especially celtic fans. Before Parkhead was redeveloped in the late 90's, it was basically a hole in the ground, and celtic fans still claimed it was better than than Ibrox!!

I like Ibrox's external facade, it has a classic, old-skool look to it, but the stadium as a whole really doesn't do anything for me....and I'm not even gonna comment on whether it is better then Celtic Park, cus I'd get Rangers and Celtic fans having a go at me from all angles!

:cheers:

Ibrox could be a 100000 stadium made of diamond and have internet access at every seat, and 99.99% of celtic fans would still say Parkhead was better than Ibrox. Very few football fans have the ability to be objective, especially celtic fans. Before Parkhead was redeveloped in the late 90's, it was basically a hole in the ground, and celtic fans still claimed it was better than than Ibrox!!

Exactly, thats wot i was trying to say. your the one who said even if you were a celtic fan you would like Ibrox.

Exactly, thats wot i was trying to say. your the one who said even if you were a celtic fan you would like Ibrox.

That's because i'm objective. I don't like Parkhead that much, but it's not because i'm a Rangers fan, it's because it's crap!

^^ No im sure half of it is due to you being a rangers fan but i have to say parkhead is a bit rough(put kindly)

[QUOTE=bubomb]So we shouldn't celebrate a great win over England in the rugby? Grow up!!

Enjoying a famous victory over your biggest and oldest rivals does not mean you have a 'chip on your shoulder'!!

You must be the only Scotsman who didn't enjoy the rugby victory!! Stop acting like a gaylord and show some Scottish spirit!!!


Scotsman -

http://www.rugbyheaven.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/02/26/scotlandwin_rugbyheaven__350x234.jpg


Sorry had to get rid of that picture reminded me of me too much ;)

I did enjoy the game, infact I stayed up until four o'clock in the morning in a dingy irish pub in Sydney to watch it and sund if you hate the &uck*%$ English clap your hands.

There were more scots in the pub than English i went hoarse and then at the end of it all went and shook the hands of the opposition, and had a beer with them!

They obviously saw we were joking with the chanting and had a laugh with us. I just haven't bleeted about it for so long and produced tacky images to rub it in.

The most satisfying thing about winning is being magnanimus in victory!

Just wish we could be magnanimus more often! :)

you and me both mate

Celtic Park's a lot better than Ibrox.

Obviously Rangers fans will disagree.

it isn't actually Ibrox is built to a much higher spec, Parkhead just has more seats!

it isn't actually Ibrox is built to a much higher spec, Parkhead just has more seats!

correct.

correct.

Don’t get too carried away as a sheep shagger I still hate you blue noses the most

Ha ha!

The Murrayfield Stadium has a 100-metre running track beside the main stand. It apparently looked like a portion of a full 400-metre athletics track, which Murrayfield can't easily fit. Why does it even have that running track anyway?

Is it worth noting that the capacity of Murrayfield has been reduced by 700 seats in order to incorporate a new Large Video Screen - the largest permanent screen in the country ( not sure whether it's Scotland or UK but it's a big TV).

They should take the running track out and move the pitch a few metres to the side so that it is in the centre of the stands. Then maybe they could dig down to reduce the gap between the stands and pitch and let the national football team use it. It's crazy that the stadium with the highest capacity in the country is being wasted on rugby - a sport that very few Scots care about.

They should take the running track out and move the pitch a few metres to the side so that it is in the centre of the stands. Then maybe they could dig down to reduce the gap between the stands and pitch and let the national football team use it. It's crazy that the stadium with the highest capacity in the country is being wasted on rugby - a sport that very few Scots care about.

Thing is, the capacity is not wasted. In competative rugby (6Nations) Scotland can guarentee that the stadium WILL be filled. Demand for tickets is extremely high for all games, even those against Italy. Rugby tickets are very expensive but that does not put Scotland spectators off.

The running track is a warm up track and I beleive that it was included in the design brief of Murrayfield as something the tennants wanted - so it was built for them. :lol:

With high demand, any future expansion will probably see, as you suggest, the removal of the track, and shifting of the playing surface towards the biggest stand (West) , and a rebuild of the smaller East stand to match the rest of the stadium. Expected capacity would be between 75000 and 80000.

There are currently no plans to rebuild the East Stand.

Edinburgh Rugby have committed to playing at Murrayfield for another five years.

Crucially, though, they want to switch all seated spectators to the East Stand (the one closest to the pitch), and allow fans to stand on the running track, to make for a much better atmosphere.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/my_club/edinburgh/9426356.stm

In lieu of those comments and reviewing the picture below, it makes me think they should look to redo the lower stand to the left of the picture, moving it closer to the pitch and perhaps even acting like an extension of the upper tier. Then they could place some suites and premium seating in place of the upper tier on the other side. That would get people closer to the pitch and perhaps shave a little on the capacity, which sounds like a goal of theirs.
http://www.essex.ac.uk/ese/icdar2003/photos/murrayfield1.jpg

Naming rights talk:

RUGBY bosses are considering selling off the naming rights for Murrayfield Stadium in an attempt to plug a multi-million-pound hole in their finances.

The Evening News can reveal that the SRU will attempt to raise a seven-figure sum from allowing private firms to bid to have their name added to the national stadium.

Negotiations with commercial parties are already under way as the governing body seeks to pay off a £13m debt.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/rugby/top-rugby-stories/sru-chiefs-seek-murrayfield-stadium-name-change-sponsor-to-help-pay-off-debts-1-2604968