AT last somebody with a bit of sense has stood up to the Scottish Football Association and told them some home truths about their plan to move Scotland internationals and cup finals to Murrayfield.
Thank goodness for the City of Glasgow Council which has told the SFA exactly what it thinks of the proposal that would effectively make Murrayfield the home of Scottish football, as well as Scottish rugby.
I am not just saying this because Glasgow is now SNP-controlled and I am a party member, I think the council has just demolished the SFA’s whole farrago of nonsense.
READ MORE: 'Nobody can tell me there's no atmosphere inside Hampden Park - that's just nonsense'
Let’s go through council leader Susan Aitken’s letter to the SFA bit by bit, because it sums up the case against leaving Hampden.
She wrote to SFA president Alan McRae and Hampden Park managing director Peter Dallas on Friday and she did not miss the SFA and hit the wall.
Aitken wrote: “To abandon those communities would be devastating, both to them and the wider area.
“Any decision which resulted in the loss of Hampden’s role as the home for the Scottish national team and major domestic cup games would be devastating for that community and its economy.”
Absolutely correct. For well over a century the people around Hampden have put up with a great deal of inconvenience perhaps a dozen times a year, and the only gratitude they get is a boost to local businesses which will suffer if the SFA moves.
She added: “To do so immediately after the last Uefa Euro 2020 match would be a tragic irony, creating a historic stain on Scottish football I believe would be impossible to erase.”
Again that is utterly right. To just walk away after hosting part of the European Championships – gained largely because it is historic Hampden that is the attraction to Uefa – would stick in the craw of European football.
She added: “The local community have also made clear that they see Hampden as a crucial partner for development in the area.”
There’s something to ponder on – a positive role for Hampden in the growth of the south side of Glasgow? I wonder why the SFA kept quiet about that?
Aitken goes a bit awry here: “The SFA have a clear moral responsibility to Mount Florida and King’s Park, built up over decades.”
Morality in football, especially Scottish football? I’m sorry, Susan, but that bit made me laugh. The SFA have over many decades proved to be the most Spineless, Farcical, Atrocious organisation in Scottish sport, and that’s saying something.
Nevertheless they do have a moral responsibility to Scotland and our football history – Hampden Park is the world’s oldest international football ground still hosting matches, holds all sorts of records, and is one of only five venues to have hosted the European Cup final three times or more.
Hampden’s history is Scottish history. That should be a clinching argument but won’t be since the SFA are always more worried about money than principles.
I found this plan in Aitken’s letter quite brilliant: “One of the most significant developments in fan experience in recent years has been pioneered in Glasgow, with Celtic Park successfully operating a safe-standing area for the past two seasons.
“Were an application for a standing area at Hampden submitted to Glasgow City Council, providing it met all the relevant safety, stewarding and accessibility criteria, there would be no obvious barriers to the bid being approved by the authority.”
Wow. In one fell swoop Susan Aitken sorts out all that nonsense about Hampden’s lack of atmosphere. It would have to be an area used only for domestic matches as Uefa requires seating for its Grade 1 stadia, but it’s surely not beyond the wit of even the SFA to devise an area with replaceable seating.
READ MORE: Hampden chief warns SFA that Murrayfield move would lead to fixture chaos for Scotland
Better still, do what every sensible fans wants and reconfigure the interior of Hampden to bring the West and East Stands closer to the pitch. We’ll never need Hampden for an athletics stadium again, so make the changes and improve things.
I am reliably informed that the Scottish Government is watching the situation closely and is not best pleased. If the SFA wants to make enemies of its local authority and the Government, it is going the right way about it.
Furthermore I have yet to hear one single sensible argument as to why handing millions of pounds to another sport makes sense for Scottish football. Oh, and next week I will present my arguments as to why Scottish rugby as a whole should reject the use of Murrayfield for SFA football.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel