Scottish Rugby Open Talks To Introduce a pro team for Aberdeen

[iINDOMINUSxx]

definitely heading the right way for scottish rugby information found here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26959943

 

[Amiga500]

The Scots need a third team, but they need the numbers to add up.

Currently, I'm not sure if Edinburgh could exist without significant support from the SRU.

Getting into a smaller stadium than Murrayfield should be a priority to add some atmosphere and entice more to the games.

 

[Feicarsinn]

Interesting. They could do with a third side in terms of (re)growing the game, but do they have the playing numbers to support it? Edinburgh's recent improvement has been built on a lot of imports. I guess you could argue that there are an awful lot of Scots plying their trade abroad, but I can't seriously imagine this new team having the financial clout to bring guys back from France and England.

 

[iINDOMINUSxx]

The Scots need a third team, but they need the numbers to add up.

Currently, I'm not sure if Edinburgh could exist without significant support from the SRU.

Getting into a smaller stadium than Murrayfield should be a priority to add some atmosphere and entice more to the games.

agreed and there are plenty smaller stadiums in edinburgh which they can play in. and im sure they played in a smaller stadium against the ospreys but i want to see them use that stadium more and i hate watching an edinburgh match with an empty stadium. the third team im sure would inspire younger rugby players in scotland with a better chance to reach pro 12 rugby.

 

[flashash2k9]

Just do what Wales are doing with RGC 1404. It's a bit insane how Wales at the moment has too much young talent for the 4 sides, and Scotland has to fill both its pro sides with foreign players. The stupid thing is, the Scottish premiership league has about the same amount of talent as the Welsh, so if they scout players from there, I'm sure they'll find gems.

 

[iINDOMINUSxx]

Just do what Wales are doing with RGC 1404. It's a bit insane how Wales at the moment has too much young talent for the 4 sides, and Scotland has to fill both its pro sides with foreign players. The stupid thing is, the Scottish premiership league has about the same amount of talent as the Welsh, so if they scout players from there, I'm sure they'll find gems.

i think that is because the scouts main focus are on edinburgh and glasgow only and that is causing alot off problems as there have been many talents from the north especially from fife and further north in scotland and having a team in aberdeen who are in the highlands and can use the Pittodrie Stadium for they're games as some scotland matches have been played up there. and im sure they're scouting system would also target highland players who are talented and im sure it would help out alot but i'd wish edinburgh could extend they're scouting to fife to get more youth players and buy less Foreign players which will give the youth players less chance to get into pro 12 rugby

 

[Rumpi]

i think that is because the scouts main focus are on edinburgh and glasgow only and that is causing alot off problems as there have been many talents from the north especially from fife and further north in scotland and having a team in aberdeen who are in the highlands and can use the Pittodrie Stadium for they're games as some scotland matches have been played up there. and im sure they're scouting system would also target highland players who are talented and im sure it would help out alot but i'd wish edinburgh could extend they're scouting to fife to get more youth players and buy less Foreign players which will give the youth players less chance to get into pro 12 rugby

Sounds interesting, Scotland really could use a third team but yerman would need to have deep deep pockets, how rich is he exactly?

 

[William18]

I hear in Aberdeen there have been on/off plans to build a new stadium. This stadium would be owned by the City Council rather than by Aberdeen. Surely the City Council would like another tenant and be more likely to build the stadium if a tenant could be found?

 

[sigesige00]

I am delighted. Aberdeen RUFC would be a great stepo forward for Scottish Rugby.
And in Football there should be relegation/promotion between the SPFL (strange name, because there is Queen's Park FC!) and the Highland/Lowland leagues. I want to see a derby between the Dons and Cove Rangers!

 

[Thingimubob]

I am delighted. Aberdeen RUFC would be a great stepo forward for Scottish Rugby.
And in Football there should be relegation/promotion between the SPFL (strange name, because there is Queen's Park FC!) and the Highland/Lowland leagues. I want to see a derby between the Dons and Cove Rangers!

Sorry, what's strange about the SPFL name? :huh: also what's football got to do with this?

 

[Feicarsinn]

Oh you've done it now.

 

[Thingimubob]

Oh you've done it now.

I know that I shouldn't, but my natural curiosity just wins out every time

 

[sigesige00]

Sorry, what's strange about the SPFL name? :huh: also what's football got to do with this?

Scotland's Rugby games are sometimes held at Pittodrie (Aberdeen FC stadium). And the name SPFL (Scottish Professional Football League) is strange because it includes an amateur club Queen's Park FC (the oldest Scottish club which manitains the amateur code).

 

[Thingimubob]

Scotland's Rugby games are sometimes held at Pittodrie (Aberdeen FC stadium). And the name SPFL (Scottish Professional Football League) is strange because it includes an amateur club Queen's Park FC (the oldest Scottish club which manitains the amateur code).

Is it not still, by and large, a professional entity though?
One club sticking to its amateur set up and values (good on 'em tbf!) does not warrant the dropping of "professional" from SPFL, especially as they aren't even anywhere near the top of the Pyramid, despite having being an integral part of Scottish football history. Must be odd going to see them with an average attendance of 750 in the 52,025 seater Hampden Park!

Which leads me back on topic... as others have said here, first thing that Scottish rugby needs to do is move Edinburgh out of Murrayfield. I believe only around 12,000 if the ground is opened for the average home match, so even if they manage to get that it still looks like barely anyone has shown up in such a big stadium. No idea what the atmosphere is like there, but I'd imagine it isn't far off that of the Blues during the their time in the Cardiff City Stadium, which just did not work, even with relatively big attendances.

What would they call an Aberdeen side anyway? Is there a potential fan base there too? Seemed like the national side gets decent crowd up there, but different proposition for a club side playing week in week out!

 

[William18]

But what sort of crowds do you really need? I mean it seems like 5k or a little bit more is enough for some teams. I would presume that any team would need heavy assistance from the SRU.

I'm guessing, and a Scottish person could confirm or deny this, but Edinburgh play at Murrayfield so they don't offend anyone. Easter Road and Tynecastle both seem to have good capacities for a rugby team (about 20,000) but both are occupied by rival soccer teams. Of course, Murrayfield is also the cheaper option. I think in your part of the world you are a bit "silly" with your stadiums and it makes it difficult to attract major events to your countries (I'm talking Ireland, Wales and Scotland here). New Zealand with a similar population has hosted things like the RWC, will host the Cricket World Cup and FIFA age group world cups.

It is ridiculous to me that a country like Scotland with a population similar to New Zealand has two national stadiums. Ideally, a stadium with 60,000 seats would be built somewhere between Edinburgh and Glasgow, be owned by the government and serve as a home to both rugby and football. Edinburgh should have a modern stadium owned by the government at one level or another with 25,000 seats which could host both football teams and rugby. In Ireland you also have two national stadiums. Limerick and Cork both have two stadiums, Dublin has several minor stadiums while in Belfast rugby, soccer and gaelic games all use different venues. Dublin should have a two stadium model, Belfast, Cork and Limerick should have one.

Now I understand that there are intense politics and established rivalries in especially Ireland but even Scotland which make many of these proposed stadiums mere wishes. However, it is these differences which stops Ireland and Scotland from hosting major events such as a jointly hosted Euro. Simply put stadiums should be owned by government at some level or in trusts as we do in New Zealand. Having stadiums owned by each individual team means that generally teams cannot afford stadium refurbishment and if they do renovate and another team in the same city also renovates then there is just wasted investment. Obviously, a city like Manchester should have two different stadiums for each two teams but both those teams are massive.

I know the Wakefield City Council has been unwilling to fork out money to build Castleford and Wakefield new stadiums yet those two teams refuse to ground share. Right now neither has got the new stadium they wanted. Had they agreed to ground share they would be playing in a new stadium and hopefully have higher attendances as well.

 

[sigesige00]

Hampden is going to go an athletic stadium for the Commonwealth Games. There is a big problem with this. That is, unlike Stadio Olimpico, the reformed Hampden athletic stadium is not suitable for Football and Rugby.

 

[Thingimubob]

But what sort of crowds do you really need? I mean it seems like 5k or a little bit more is enough for some teams. I would presume that any team would need heavy assistance from the SRU.

I'm guessing, and a Scottish person could confirm or deny this, but Edinburgh play at Murrayfield so they don't offend anyone. Easter Road and Tynecastle both seem to have good capacities for a rugby team (about 20,000) but both are occupied by rival soccer teams. Of course, Murrayfield is also the cheaper option. I think in your part of the world you are a bit "silly" with your stadiums and it makes it difficult to attract major events to your countries (I'm talking Ireland, Wales and Scotland here). New Zealand with a similar population has hosted things like the RWC, will host the Cricket World Cup and FIFA age group world cups.

It is ridiculous to me that a country like Scotland with a population similar to New Zealand has two national stadiums. Ideally, a stadium with 60,000 seats would be built somewhere between Edinburgh and Glasgow, be owned by the government and serve as a home to both rugby and football. Edinburgh should have a modern stadium owned by the government at one level or another with 25,000 seats which could host both football teams and rugby. In Ireland you also have two national stadiums. Limerick and Cork both have two stadiums, Dublin has several minor stadiums while in Belfast rugby, soccer and gaelic games all use different venues. Dublin should have a two stadium model, Belfast, Cork and Limerick should have one.

Now I understand that there are intense politics and established rivalries in especially Ireland but even Scotland which make many of these proposed stadiums mere wishes. However, it is these differences which stops Ireland and Scotland from hosting major events such as a jointly hosted Euro. Simply put stadiums should be owned by government at some level or in trusts as we do in New Zealand. Having stadiums owned by each individual team means that generally teams cannot afford stadium refurbishment and if they do renovate and another team in the same city also renovates then there is just wasted investment. Obviously, a city like Manchester should have two different stadiums for each two teams but both those teams are massive.

I know the Wakefield City Council has been unwilling to fork out money to build Castleford and Wakefield new stadiums yet those two teams refuse to ground share. Right now neither has got the new stadium they wanted. Had they agreed to ground share they would be playing in a new stadium and hopefully have higher attendances as well.

I do get your point, but as you say, politics and established rivalries would always stand in the way of any pragmatism like that. Doubt rugby and football fans in Scotland would be happy to see their respective historical homes replaced and merged any time soon! However, slightly confused as to how having two national stadiums, one 67,144 seater (Murrayfield) and the other 52,025 (Hampden Park) stands in the way of Scotland hosting events? Not exactly overly different size wise to Eden Park and Westpac Stadium in NZ size wise? Obviously both cater to more sports than their Scottish equivalents, but still good enough to host major events with both being RWC venues in 1999, staging European finals in their respective sports as well as international fixtures.

Club wise, you're completely right, the systems in not only Scotland but the rest of the UK, Ireland and Europe is very inefficient compared to the NZ model. However for the Government to step in and take over like you suggest would mean trampling over a ridiculous amount of history for the sake of streamlining everything. Plus groundshares are fickle things, some work (like the Ospreys/Swansea City in the Liberty Stadium) and some are just complete flops (Cardiff City/Cardiff Blues in the Cardiff City Stadium).
You also seem to be forgetting how horrendously complicated it is to make fixture lists over here. Calculating multiple tiers of football, then rugby, then any other cultural events (plus the GAA in Ireland) and figuring out how to make them clash as little as possible is a hell of a job. Chucking them all into less stadiums probably would only add to the difficulty!

Hampden is going to go an athletic stadium for the Commonwealth Games. There is a big problem with this. That is, unlike Stadio Olimpico, the reformed Hampden athletic stadium is not suitable for Football and Rugby.

Its only a temporary track, will be shifted back to normal after the Commonwealth Games are done:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19834277

 

[Will]

William18, I don't think Edinburgh playing at Murrayfield has anything to do with not wanting to offend any football team. To be honest i don't think Hearts or Hibs (the two football teams) would want Edinburgh playing at their stadiums every other Friday evening as it would destroy the pitch. I think it has more to do with the SRU saving money and having Ediburgh play at the SRU's own stadium. It is a shame though as the set up the Glasgow have at Scotstoun is ideal at the moment and with two temporary stands up the other week got a full house of 10,000 against Munster. If Edinburgh's biggest crowd was about 40,000 odd in the Heineken cup a while back, but even a crowd of 10,000 looks lost in Murrayfield. Hopefully the possible branding of Murrayfield, which would wipe out the SRU's debt, would help with a possible new home for Edinburgh.

And ignoring Murryfield for the moment, Glasgow itself as a city has three stadiums each with 50,000+ capacity. Hampden, Ibrox and Parkhead. It's not very efficient I'll grant you, but having those facilities in one city has lead to Glasgow getting the Commonwealth games this year.

 

[sigesige00]

Its only a temporary track, will be shifted back to normal after the Commonwealth Games are done:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19834277

Yes I know, but I think that Scotland needs a decent athletic stadium. So, Hampden should remain to be an athletic stadium. New national stadium for RU, RL and Football should be built at the place of Scotstoun.

 

[Thingimubob]

Yes I know, but I think that Scotland needs a decent athletic stadium. So, Hampden should remain to be an athletic stadium. New national stadium for RU, RL and Football should be built at the place of Scotstoun.

Ha everyone looking to change Scotland's sporting landscape in this thread Not gonna happen, would be daft if it does. From looking at maps, I doubt Scotstoun even has the space to expand to be a big enough national stadium for anything.
And anyway, does Scotland "need" a permanent big athletics stadium? Seems to be making do by temporarily editing Hampden for the Commonwealth, and can't see it getting enough use every year as an athletics stadium to scrap it as a historic football stadium? Wales makes do without a huge athletics ground with its small but well developed International Sports Stadium in Cardiff.