The Big Queen's Park FC Thread

[Arachnophile]

2 minutes ago, ExiledLichtie said:

I agree with Randomguy, I dont like the precedent it sets.  As he said, next time a wee team draws an SPL team what's to stop them just picking a big ground to play at?  What's to stop teams deciding to play crucial games at other stadiums?  This doesnt seem like sporting integrity.

If they want to play at Hampden, that's fine, if they want to play at Lesser that's also fine.  But they shouldnt be able to switch just based on how they are feeling that week.

Oh, and if Lesser isnt "safe", which Ive seen a few people say, then they shouldnt be allowed to use it in the championship either.

I think the potential safety issue that has been raised is not that lesser isn't safe but there is a danger of significant number of Old Firm fans hanging about on the hill behind trying to get a view because they can't get into the ground. 

I have no idea how much of an issue that would be or how the polis would view it..

[RandomGuy.]

46 minutes ago, Tattie36 said:

Aberdeen are genuinely talking about making their new stadium hold about 15k!! How the hell are they going to compete long term with such a small minded attitude.

Think they claimed the difference between a 15k stadium and 20k stadium is about £10m.

So their logic is spend the £10m on the team, and try and get a successful team on the park in a sold out stadium, then use that atmosphere to attract enough numbers that you can expand the stadium. They think thats better than having a poor side playing in a half empty stadium.

[G_&_T]

5 minutes ago, ExiledLichtie said:

I agree with Randomguy, I dont like the precedent it sets.  As he said, next time a wee team draws an SPL team what's to stop them just picking a big ground to play at?  What's to stop teams deciding to play crucial games at other stadiums?  This doesnt seem like sporting integrity.

If they want to play at Hampden, that's fine, if they want to play at Lesser that's also fine.  But they shouldnt be able to switch just based on how they are feeling that week.

Oh, and if Lesser isnt "safe", which Ive seen a few people say, then they shouldnt be allowed to use it in the championship either.

It might not be considered safe for certain fixtures, which are likely to draw big crowds. It is an unusual ground in that folk can watch from outside of the stadium's perimeter.

[Anonymous Spider]

Some of my worst experiences watching QP were the The Rangers games in that post-liquidation season. Regardless of income it was absolutely toxic and I can't imagine taking my kids to them if/when it comes to it. 

The irony of getting humped out of Hampden, touring round the country for 3 years, being unable to add to the supporter base while we've been doing well, to end up back at Hampden... yep, it's a new and exciting model alright... 

[ExiledLichtie]

37 minutes ago, G_&_T said:

It might not be considered safe for certain fixtures, which are likely to draw big crowds. It is an unusual ground in that folk can watch from outside of the stadium's perimeter.

"Unusual stadium"?  You're one step away from being mocked by Edinburgh City and Cowdenbeath fans!

[G_&_T]

1 minute ago, Anonymous Spider said:

Some of my worst experiences watching QP were the The Rangers games in that post-liquidation season. Regardless of income it was absolutely toxic and I can't imagine taking my kids to them if/when it comes to it. 

The irony of getting humped out of Hampden, touring round the country for 3 years, being unable to add to the supporter base while we've been doing well, to end up back at Hampden... yep, it's a new and exciting model alright... 

To be absolutely fair to the club, Lesser Hampden was never likely to accommodate a 6,000 seated capacity stadium - and that's before the Royal Box debacle. I simply don't think the plot of land was big enough, unless everything was levelled and the club started again from the very beginning. The east side is tiny and, unless a two-tier structure was planned, was never going to accommodate more than the current stand's capacity. Even without the Royal Box, a 4,000 capacity seated stadium would have been about the upper limit, unless they built a Motherwell style structure behind the north stand, which would cost millions!

The club's ambition was to be a third-tier club, but they have vastly exceeded anyone's expectations. 

I think the only option for the club is to build terracing on the remaining sides; huge terrace at the north end might bring the capacity up to 5,000. 

If only there was a suitable stadium in the local area, which could host the matches...then these problems would be resolved. 

[Bring Your Own Socks]

4 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:

Theyd make more than that. Most clubs charge £28+ and Celtic/Rangers always sell out their away allocation as their fans want "points" so they can get tickets for away games against each other.

 Its not as simple as all the ticket money going straight in your pocket though, the policing costs are extortionate and youve always got stadium repairs to do after they visit, plus sometimes compensation. We regularly get destroyed toilets needing rebuilt and had a teenage kiosk operator have a smoke bomb thrown at them.

As i say, clubs can do what they want to make money, but it sets a precedent i wouldnt like to see.

Theres next to no chance Queens Park can use Lesser Hampden in the top flight next season, so this whole thing is moot. Theyll either be playing at Hampden or a different stadium. No issue if they use that next season until Lesser is rebuilt to a bigger size (...) or for the full season. I just dont like the idea clubs can take home games away if the support is big, if their home ground could cope (again, Lesser isnt close to being fit for purpose for the top flight).

As for the extra money, itll become irrelevant once they experience a few Hampden games v the OF. Genuinely think people under estimate how brutal it is and most of the "smaller" 6 clubs in the top flight have less fans at these games than season ticket holders, with almost no kids going. Your speaking like the chairman of certain clubs (my own) who think turning away 1000 of your own fans is worth it if you're making money of Celtic/Rangers games. It works the opposite way which is why we've broken records for lowest ever home attendances against them this season. 

I don’t doubt any of that, although the awaydays mentality probably makes it worse. Not such a journey to Hampden but I remember well when we had Rangers in L2 and despite having about 80% of the ground available there were still some bams who insisted in sitting amongst the QP fans. 

it’s no defence but when we voted to go professional, nobody at the club was even considering this scenario. Even a year ago right now, we had scraped into the top four but I doubt if anyone at the club, certainly not fans, believed we would get promoted never mind dreaming of top tier.

So I suppose it’s all Owen Coyle’s fault. If only we’d kept Laurie Ellis.

Edited March 30 by Bring Your Own Socks

[RandomGuy.]

7 minutes ago, Bring Your Own Socks said:

I don’t doubt any of that, although the awaydays mentality probably makes it worse. Not such a journey to Hampden but I remember well when we had Rangers in L2 and despite having about 80% of the ground available there were still some bams who insisted in sitting amongst the QP fans. 

it’s no defence but when we voted to go professional, nobody at the club was even considering this scenario. Even a year ago right now, we had scraped into the top four but I doubt if anyone at the club, certainly not fans, believed we would get promoted never mind dreaming of top tier.

If the expected capacity i can gind of Lesser is true (~1600) i dont think fit for even the Championship, but i imagine thats a discussion thats been done to death in here.

 

[G_&_T]

4 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

If the expected capacity i can gind of Lesser is true (~1600) i dont think fit for even the Championship, but i imagine thats a discussion thats been done to death in here.

 

1,600 is just about adequate for the Championship, though it would inevitably mean limiting away fans and big games involving a ticket scramble. It is woefully inadequate for the Premiership, though.

[RandomGuy.]

1 minute ago, G_&_T said:

1,600 is just about adequate for the Championship, though it would inevitably mean limiting away fans and big games involving a ticket scramble. It is woefully inadequate for the Premiership, though.

Does it not limit home fans to ~900 though?

Cant imagine many, if any, full time clubs survive at this level with home supports at that level?

[GNU_Linux]

Maximum patter is Hampden Park next season then old firm fans having a head gones due to not getting 'their end' of the stadium.

[lubo_blaha]

3 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:

Think they claimed the difference between a 15k stadium and 20k stadium is about £10m.

So their logic is spend the £10m on the team, and try and get a successful team on the park in a sold out stadium, then use that atmosphere to attract enough numbers that you can expand the stadium. They think thats better than having a poor side playing in a half empty stadium.

Do you really think that we have a spare £10million that we would be spending on players instead of the stadium?

Our new ground is looking like it’ll cost £80million which is a huge stretch as it is. The proposed smaller capacity is because we don’t have the money to have a higher capacity, not because we want to invest it in the squad instead.

[Bring Your Own Socks]

1 hour ago, lubo_blaha said:

Do you really think that we have a spare £10million that we would be spending on players instead of the stadium?

Our new ground is looking like it’ll cost £80million which is a huge stretch as it is. The proposed smaller capacity is because we don’t have the money to have a higher capacity, not because we want to invest it in the squad instead.

What was the speculative number wasted on the Kingswells stadium, out of interest?

[lubo_blaha]

1 hour ago, Bring Your Own Socks said:

What was the speculative number wasted on the Kingswells stadium, out of interest?

Not a clue, too much anyway.

[DA Baracus]

7 hours ago, ExiledLichtie said:

I agree with Randomguy, I dont like the precedent it sets.  As he said, next time a wee team draws an SPL team what's to stop them just picking a big ground to play at?  What's to stop teams deciding to play crucial games at other stadiums?  This doesnt seem like sporting integrity.

If they want to play at Hampden, that's fine, if they want to play at Lesser that's also fine.  But they shouldnt be able to switch just based on how they are feeling that week.

Oh, and if Lesser isnt "safe", which Ive seen a few people say, then they shouldnt be allowed to use it in the championship either.

No one ever has to worry about that ever again.

[DA Baracus]

What's to stop the SFA from saying "No" to a request from QP to use Hampden? 

Also, surely they'd charge QP to use it?

The SPFL rules state that a club should be using their nominated home stadium for all games but can apply to move a game, and the SPFL board then have to allow it.

[Zanetti]

15 hours ago, DA Baracus said:

What's to stop the SFA from saying "No" to a request from QP to use Hampden? 

This whole conversation is predicated on the SFA allowing us to use the stadium mate, we weren't planning on just sneaking in and hoping nobody notices.

Edited March 31 by Zanetti

[DA Baracus]

7 minutes ago, Zanetti said:

This whole conversation is predicated the SFA allowing us to use the stadium mate, we weren't planning on just sneaking in and hoping nobody notices.

Why not?

[parsforlife]

Did Queen’s Park not sneakily keep a set of keys after the sale?

[hk blues]

16 hours ago, Arachnophile said:

I have no idea how much of an issue that would be or how the polis would view it..

Presumably the same way as the OF fans?