Stuntiethumper Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 7 minutes ago, The Tiel Burn said: Thank you wasn't trying to stir the pot it just strikes me as odd. Oh you are not the only one buddy. Trust me. Most of us feel exactly the same. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider1975 Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 9 minutes ago, The Tiel Burn said: Thank you wasn't trying to stir the pot it just strikes me as odd. Fella, wasn't taken as such, consider my reply a personal cathartic rant. We're as bemused as anyone is with the situation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zanetti Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 1 hour ago, The Tiel Burn said: Tracked back a few pages so apologies, I know this is an often asked question. How can Queens effectively use the 2 grounds? Always confused how a smaller club uses its own ground for an OF cup tie when Queens have the access to Hampden and best or probably worst of both. The official answer is we're not. The club doesn't get to decide which ground we're using at any given time, our registered ground this season (just like it was last season) is Hampden. The reason our League Cup games both years, along with the first league game, got moved to Lesser is that Hampden wasn't ready yet and Lesser was just a temporary change in venue. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QP MAD Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 Does anyone know yet if there is going to be another supporters bus for the Aberdeen game ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EaglesandSpiders Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 2 hours ago, Spider1975 said: I don't think, for the foreseeable future at least, QP do have access to Hampden. QP owned Hampden, but sold it to the SFA and used the proceeds to develop Lesser Hampden into a more suitable home for the team. During the very long, drawn out construction process there were issues with the contractor and most notably, design changes which provided the team with a top class gym/physio/changing room facility attached to a not-so-state-of-the-art 900 seater 'ground'. Unfortunately during the construction process the actual team were doing not too shabbily and ended up getting back to back promotions from L2 to the Championship, rendering Lesser Hampden effectively unfit for purpose; since when QP have by all accounts rented Hampden for their home games, with the SFA using, in return, Lesser for SMNT training. Despite being a perfect ground for QP Women, QPB etc, they have been denied the use of Lesser, unlike Celtic Under-whatever, who used Lesser last year for their European games. The powers that be have decided this year that Rangers' needs outstrip QP's and have superseeded QP in renting Hampden for the foreseeable future, QP Men are now playing home games back at Lesser, (with the resultant restrictions to away and non-season ticket holding home supporters), while the Women have been shunted to Ochilview for their home games in their debut season in the SWPL. I have no idea what the SFA/Celtic pay to use Lesser, (but we do seem to be able to pick up loanees from Celtic when required). I have no idea how much QP were paying the SFA to use Hampden last year I have no idea how much QP are paying Stenhousmuir to use Ochilview this year. I have no idea what, if any financial deal exists between the SFA, Rangers and QP, (though a couple of tents behind each goal in a few weeks time might be a giveaway) I have some idea who makes the decisions, although to who's benefit seems anyones guess. It all seems highly political and very, very ineffective. It's a mess. I'm sure others can correct any factual errors/add more detail if needbe. Can we pin this post on top of this thread? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Soo-sider Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 4 hours ago, The Tiel Burn said: Thank you wasn't trying to stir the pot it just strikes me as odd. We know! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider1975 Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 Well, if the significant step up from SWPL2 to the SWPL wasn't evident already it was made quite clear today with Hearts running out 11-1 against QP Women in their SWPL debut at Ochilview. Despite the result QP never gave up and it was good to see a decent turnout for the match. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arachnophile Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 14 minutes ago, Spider1975 said: Well, if the significant step up from SWPL2 to the SWPL wasn't evident already it was made quite clear today with Hearts running out 11-1 against QP Women in their SWPL debut at Ochilview. Despite the result QP never gave up and it was good to see a decent turnout for the match. I agree with this. It may seem bizarre to find any positives in such a comprehensive defeat but our battle this season is not with Hearts or any of the other full time clubs. Unfortunately, our next opponents are Rangers ( the Hunnies, surely?) 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie Perrin Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 52 minutes ago, Arachnophile said: I agree with this. It may seem bizarre to find any positives in such a comprehensive defeat but our battle this season is not with Hearts or any of the other full time clubs. Unfortunately, our next opponents are Rangers ( the Hunnies, surely?) Green dot for Hunnies. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider1975 Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 1 hour ago, Arachnophile said: I agree with this. It may seem bizarre to find any positives in such a comprehensive defeat but our battle this season is not with Hearts or any of the other full time clubs. Bang on. Without being wishing to be too pessimistic in assuming the pro-teams will occupy the top 6 spots, the season will probably start for real after the split. With three teams being relegated this year back to the SWPL2 it'll be potentially rather nail-biting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 16 hours ago, Zanetti said: The official answer is we're not. The club doesn't get to decide which ground we're using at any given time, our registered ground this season (just like it was last season) is Hampden. The reason our League Cup games both years, along with the first league game, got moved to Lesser is that Hampden wasn't ready yet and Lesser was just a temporary change in venue. What exactly is the issue with Lesser not being fit for purpose? Seems mental that ground isn't ready for football by now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zanetti Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 (edited) 31 minutes ago, The Moonster said: What exactly is the issue with Lesser not being fit for purpose? Seems mental that ground isn't ready for football by now. Depends on how you define fit for purpose. Technically, it's absolutely fine and ticks all the boxes for football at any level in Scotland since the requirements aren't that strict any more; in reality, playing at a ground that holds 950 odd would be both insane and embarrassing for a club playing Championship football that allegedly wants to become more self sufficient and grow our fanbse. If you're asking why that's all they built, you won't get a good answer, but I suspect it's a combination of the fact that our club has been run by people who are utterly hopeless for a number of years now, and that they were always banking on sorting out something with the SFA to get back into Hampden. Edited August 12 by Zanetti 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 43 minutes ago, Zanetti said: Depends on how you define fit for purpose. Technically, it's absolutely fine and ticks all the boxes for football at any level in Scotland since the requirements aren't that strict any more; in reality, playing at a ground that holds 950 odd would be both insane and embarrassing for a club playing Championship football that allegedly wants to become more self sufficient and grow our fanbse. If you're asking why that's all they built, you won't get a good answer, but I suspect it's a combination of the fact that our club has been run by people who are utterly hopeless for a number of years now, and that they were always banking on sorting out something with the SFA to get back into Hampden. I didn't realise that was the capacity. Fairly baffling situation, the money was clearly there to build a ground fit for purpose. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuntiethumper Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 (edited) If this press report suggesting Glasgow will step in to host the 2026 Commonwealth Games is true does that not put us playing at Hampden in further doubt? Or can somewhere like Scotstoun Stadium be repurposed for a slimmed down Commonwealth games? https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/reports-suggest-glasgow-could-host-33441799 Edited August 12 by Stuntiethumper 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dti Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 Back page of Herald 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starshot131 Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 20 minutes ago, Dti said: Back page of Herald Pretty bleak when you summarise it like that eh He's absolutely right though 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moodster Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 Well I never, the Herald have summed it all up rather well! Will it make any difference? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmonigatti Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 With any joy the article will force the club to at least acknowledge the problem. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arachnophile Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 5 minutes ago, pmonigatti said: With any joy the article will force the club to at least acknowledge the problem. I am holding my breath 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spidersmad Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 (edited) He's bang on the money with his description of the Royal Box: "we are the people who run this club and therefore deserve a higher footing than you plebs who pay to come (to) watch." There's one howler at the bottom of the first column: "They are no longer full-time." I presume he meant to write "They are no longer amateur" but it's always possible that the hierarchy have kept another sensational development from the supporters. 2 hours ago, Arachnophile said: I am holding my breath Oh well, it's been nice reading your contributions! I guess the committee will confine themselves to muttering about Pie & Bovril providing a platform for supporters to air their views and for these views to eventually be written up in a Herald article. The article itself is a reasonable outline of where the club is at present but there are details available about the sale of Hampden and the initial plan for Lesser Hampden which could have provided more background to the story. He's right to point out the secretiveness of the hierarchy and their awful lack of engagement with the supporters though. Edited August 12 by Spidersmad 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.