Ground-sharing

[Eldar Hadzimehmedovic]

So much debate about the future of Scottish football and I very rarely see ground-sharing as an option to reduce costs. Why are we so opposed to this in Britain? It happens in so many countries in Europe. Would fans even contemplate sharing a stadium with Hibs? And if not, why not? What about Dundee and Dundee Utd? It's staggering that they don't seem to have even considered it seriously. Surely the fact so many teams do it renders arguments around state of pitch/facilities etc. non-starters. Genuinely interested to hear how people would feel about it.

[rossthejambo]

I wouldn't have a problem with it myself, assuming it would be a new purpose built stadium somewhere, but there'd be too many people opposed on both sides in pretty much any inter-city rivalry for it to ever get off the ground.

[Eldar Hadzimehmedovic]

I wouldn't have a problem with it myself, assuming it would be a new purpose built stadium somewhere, but there'd be too many people opposed on both sides in pretty much any inter-city rivalry for it to ever get off the ground.

 

 

I'm curious to why this only seems to be an issue in Britain. I get that not all European teams would be cool with it but why is every single inter-city rivalry in Britain deemed too nasty to contemplate sharing a stadium?

[leginten]

I would hate it with a passion. I love the tradition of having "our" area of the city with its own, very special, pubs, and of course our own stadium, which is the best place in Scotland to watch football. The idea of sharing a stadium with Hibs is anathema to me. It would be like going to a brothel. In my lifetime, there have been two constants with regard to Heart of Midlothian - the support and the stadium. Everything else is transient. When I'm at Tynecastle, I feel more at home than anywhere else in this city. I realise I'm stuck in the mud on this issue, but I'm happy to be so.

[RussAsia]

I suppose it would only happen if it was a new purpose built stadium in a neutral location.. As Hibs have just built their new stadium it would never happen in Edinburgh..

 

Some that confuse me.. of course the Dundee United/Dundee one.. but what about Everton/Liverpool.. both of them need a new stadium.. both would be happy with a new stadium in Stanley Park but they are against it.. Liverpool's plans have been terrible.. their first was a poor mans Emirates Stadium.. if they got together they could make a fantastic stadium that could be the best in the premiership..

[Cardiac Rucksack]

It wouldnt bother me so much. Never going to happen now though with the completion on the sticklebrick arena.

[Feeno]

Everybody needs there ground to stand, no one gives it up without a fight. Islander nature maybe?

[Eldar Hadzimehmedovic]

Everybody needs there ground to stand, no one gives it up without a fight. Islander nature maybe?

 

Could be. The Brits have always been obsessed with their "ground" and gaining as much of it as possible.

[Feeno]

Could be. The Brits have always been obsessed with their "ground" and gaining as much of it as possible.

 

 

I think so, the tribal nature of football as it is, the fact it would have to be neutral and without any of the parties losing face, airs and graces and pile of shite

[Eldar Hadzimehmedovic]

I suppose fans of clubs at lower levels feel as passionately about their local rituals too, but take Stenhousemuir, Falkirk and East Stirlingshire - all have their own stadiums about ten minutes from each other. Makes so much sense to share.

[DR1981]

Just couldn't accept it despite any economical sense it would make. A horrible thought.

[FWJ]

Would there be a problem keeping the pitch in a decent condition if it was played on at least every week - even more for cup games etc?

[alwaysthereinspirit]

I dont go that much anyway but I'm quietly confident I would go less if we ever shared a stadium with that bunch.

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

I think there is more to it that local rivalry. I'm pretty sure you'd find that, where groundsharing is successfull, the teams involved didn't originally own their grounds so the fans didn't identify with it too much. Just think of the depth of feeling over the possiblility of leaving Tynecastle even without sharing with Hibs. For underachieving teams like Hearts, and Hibs for that matter, fans have developed a love, not only for the club, but also for the ground and identify more strongly with our history and roots as a result. I'd imagine too, that with football being linked to politics in a lot of European countries, football clubs will get fantastic terms for groundsharing from ther local councils or governments. Could you imagine the outcry if Edinburgh District Council used ratepayers' money to build a state of the art stadium then rent it at discounted rates to Hearts and Hibs? There's also the fact that within the British psyche we see owning our own home as very important, this is not so prevalent abroad where even wealthy people are happy to rent their homes.

Ground sharing has been discussed in the media many times, and some teams, Dundee and Dundee Utd in particular, have come quite close to doing it. I think though, that they are an example of why it has never gone ahead as there was the possibility that Dundee would go burst at the time, and so United would be faced with the upkeep of a ground they didn't own.

[Bert Le Clos]

Would there be a problem keeping the pitch in a decent condition if it was played on at least every week - even more for cup games etc?

 

This. It would work fine if Scotland moved to summer football.

 

Look at the state of Motherwell and Aberdeen's pitches last season. I know they are two teams unlikely to ground share, but if an SPL pitch can be that bad playing every 2nd week, imagine the state of some of them with league matches every week.

[Eldar Hadzimehmedovic]

This. It would work fine if Scotland moved to summer football.

 

Look at the state of Motherwell and Aberdeen's pitches last season. I know they are two teams unlikely to ground share, but if an SPL pitch can be that bad playing every 2nd week, imagine the state of some of them with league matches every week.

Yeah, the effects of the weather on the pitch is a fair one. I wonder if clubs in countries with similarly crap climates share pitches.

[Charlie-Brown]

Tynecastle and Easter Road are 2 of the longest established football grounds in Scotland so why would anybody want to give those up? Iam also against the idea of a new Hearts stadium at Sighthill or Gyle or Gogar or anywhere on the edge of darkness like that. I'd be prepared to go to a new stadium at either Saughton Park or Murrayfield but not any further west than that - it simply wouldn't be Hearts or Gorgie anymore if that happened and that is why Iam against any proposals that involve David Murray's land in the green-belt outside of Edinburgh.

[I.T.K]

Yeah, the effects of the weather on the pitch is a fair one. I wonder if clubs in countries with similarly crap climates share pitches.

 

Well if they are sharing the costs this they could fork out for some of these bad lads... http://www.sglconcept.com/nl/news20051001.htm

 

In fact I think all SPL clubs should look at getting these!

[12XU]

Imagine if they did in Milan !

 

Scotland stuck in the dark ages.

[Eckauskas]

Let's be honest, the seats at a Hearts/Hibs groundshare would have to be maroon/green.

 

No chance would I want a green seat.

[mitch41]

Would there be a problem keeping the pitch in a decent condition if it was played on at least every week - even more for cup games etc?

and it would be even more of a problem if hearts shared with edinburgh rugby. these egg chasers plough pitchs up.

[Kramer]

Finances will dictate that it happens eventually.

 

Dundee and Dundee Utd first imo.

[portobellojambo1]

Well if they are sharing the costs this they could fork out for some of these bad lads... http://www.sglconcep...ews20051001.htm

 

In fact I think all SPL clubs should look at getting these!

 

I wouldn't imagine it is the same system as Arsenal's one but both Rangers and Celtic have some sort of lighting system to help the grass grow. Think it was Celtic that tried it out initially and then Rangers followed. No idea of the costs, but if it were to also raise the temperature of the ground during winter, keeping it frost free, and the costing was reasonable such a system would probably be better than under soil heating, which I think actually does a lot of damage to the playing surface (possibly through misuse (i.e. being on too long at too high a heat, or something like that)).

[Swanyl]

There's a lot more money in owning your own stadium, look at Juventus and Torino.

[jamboozy]

I suppose fans of clubs at lower levels feel as passionately about their local rituals too, but take Stenhousemuir, Falkirk and East Stirlingshire - all have their own stadiums about ten minutes from each other. Makes so much sense to share.

Stenhousemuir & east stirlingshire share ochilview now Eldar, but to reply to op, i would not like to share a ground with hibs, just hate the idea, but i think it would make sense to share with Edinburgh rugby at- say gogar, it would have to be called Tynecastle, so we only had to change one word in our song, away up in GOGAR at TYNECASTLE park.

[Ray Gin]

So much debate about the future of Scottish football and I very rarely see ground-sharing as an option to reduce costs. Why are we so opposed to this in Britain? It happens in so many countries in Europe. Would fans even contemplate sharing a stadium with Hibs? And if not, why not? What about Dundee and Dundee Utd? It's staggering that they don't seem to have even considered it seriously. Surely the fact so many teams do it renders arguments around state of pitch/facilities etc. non-starters. Genuinely interested to hear how people would feel about it.

 

In Dundee it is bonkers. 2 stadiums across the road from each other.

[Craigieboy]

The subject of where we will be playing in the near future has become an awful sore point with me recently.

 

Emotionally, I'm finding that I'm far more attatched to Tynecastle than I thought.

[RobM]

Not sure but I can't think of too many ground shares in top-level Spanish/German/French football.

 

Italy yes but how many clubs are there of similar size actually sharing elsewhere?

[fabienleclerq]

Not sure but I can't think of too many ground shares in top-level Spanish/German/French football.

 

Italy yes but how many clubs are there of similar size actually sharing elsewhere?

The munich teams share.I think most cities on the continent seem to have one team or if it's two one seems much larger.

 

 

I actually dont mind the idea of sharing a ground (seats could be a neutral colour ) the main point would be where it would go?

Hibs are steeped in their leith roots and Hearts with the west of the city so where do you put it?

 

Dundee is a ridiculas situation, they should both sell up and build a new Ground.

[Buffalo Bill]

It's perhaps worth remembering that not a million years ago, both Dundee clubs, at different times, were amongst the very best in Europe. Their individual identities were fully justified, as were there grounds. These days, a 'Dundee City' might not seem like a bad idea, but let's not dismiss their past so easily.

 

 

As for the Edinburgh clubs, there is no need for it, as Hibs have fully completed their stadium, and are running within their means.

[Craigieboy]

 

 

 

As for the Edinburgh clubs, there is no need for it, as Hibs have fully completed their stadium, and are running within their means.

 

[portobellojambo1]

The munich teams share.I think most cities on the continent seem to have one team or if it's two one seems much larger.

 

 

I actually dont mind the idea of sharing a ground (seats could be a neutral colour ) the main point would be where it would go?

Hibs are steeped in their leith roots and Hearts with the west of the city so where do you put it?

 

Dundee is a ridiculas situation, they should both sell up and build a new Ground.

 

They are still sharing, but I think that was more to do with Bayern Munich. TSV 1860 Munich were in danger of going out of business earlier this year I believe, and were offered finance by Bayern to keep them going, because Bayern would have lost out on about 15 years of rental at the Allianz by all accounts. Not sure if Bayern actually paid any money across mind you, because I think someone from the Middle East put money into TSV and wiped their debt.

 

The main European country where there does seem to be ground sharing though is Italy, and possibly a few of the former Soviet satellite countries. I think in the formers case it was politically driven, as many of the shared stadiums seem to involve the local council (Juventus and Torino ceased sharing when Juventus built their own stadium) and in the latter case of the Easter European countries I think it may have been down to a lack of facilities being built when they were still under communist rule (suppose in a roundabout way that comes under politically driven as well).

 

I also agree with the gist of what you say above in finishing off, i.e. that one of the major stumbling blocks to Hearts and Hibs sharing a stadium would be the actual location of the stadium. The geography of Edinburgh means there is nowhere sort of mid point between the two existing grounds, unless you stick it in Princes Street Gardens so you would have to look towards the city outskirts, and do you go East, West or South.

[southside1874]

So much debate about the future of Scottish football and I very rarely see ground-sharing as an option to reduce costs. Why are we so opposed to this in Britain? It happens in so many countries in Europe. Would fans even contemplate sharing a stadium with Hibs? And if not, why not? What about Dundee and Dundee Utd? It's staggering that they don't seem to have even considered it seriously. Surely the fact so many teams do it renders arguments around state of pitch/facilities etc. non-starters. Genuinely interested to hear how people would feel about it.

 

Probably something to do with most of europe being a warzone for large chunks time. The tribalism that we have in football in this country wouldn't be the same if we had some French or German army running over the top of us in the last 200 years.

 

Or maybe its a sign of intelligence if you accept that it makes financial sense to share.

[H2]

It is a complete non debate. as already stated by others the weather is against us. January -Feb, psotponed games, no growth then lots of games, just not sustainable.

[fabienleclerq]

They are still sharing, but I think that was more to do with Bayern Munich. TSV 1860 Munich were in danger of going out of business earlier this year I believe, and were offered finance by Bayern to keep them going, because Bayern would have lost out on about 15 years of rental at the Allianz by all accounts. Not sure if Bayern actually paid any money across mind you, because I think someone from the Middle East put money into TSV and wiped their debt.

 

The main European country where there does seem to be ground sharing though is Italy, and possibly a few of the former Soviet satellite countries. I think in the formers case it was politically driven, as many of the shared stadiums seem to involve the local council (Juventus and Torino ceased sharing when Juventus built their own stadium) and in the latter case of the Easter European countries I think it may have been down to a lack of facilities being built when they were still under communist rule (suppose in a roundabout way that comes under politically driven as well).

 

I also agree with the gist of what you say above in finishing off, i.e. that one of the major stumbling blocks to Hearts and Hibs sharing a stadium would be the actual location of the stadium. The geography of Edinburgh means there is nowhere sort of mid point between the two existing grounds, unless you stick it in Princes Street Gardens so you would have to look towards the city outskirts, and do you go East, West or South.

Interesting about bayern offering their city rivals money even if it was mixed with their own interest! imagine us doing that for hibs.

 

When did council owned stadia come about in Italy? Did milan/Inter ever own their own ground?

 

Is it maybe just the case that clubs only ever owned their ground in this country so thats why most clubs still do?

i.e its just the way its always been.

[J Cheever Loophole]

Yeah, the effects of the weather on the pitch is a fair one. I wonder if clubs in countries with similarly crap climates share pitches.

 

This,we don't have the climate,weather nor social.

[Pistol1874]

I would hate it with a passion. I love the tradition of having "our" area of the city with its own, very special, pubs, and of course our own stadium, which is the best place in Scotland to watch football. The idea of sharing a stadium with Hibs is anathema to me. It would be like going to a brothel. In my lifetime, there have been two constants with regard to Heart of Midlothian - the support and the stadium. Everything else is transient. When I'm at Tynecastle, I feel more at home than anywhere else in this city. I realise I'm stuck in the mud on this issue, but I'm happy to be so.

Perfectly put, no more to add.

 

It's perhaps worth remembering that not a million years ago, both Dundee clubs, at different times, were amongst the very best in Europe. Their individual identities were fully justified, as were there grounds. These days, a 'Dundee City' might not seem like a bad idea, but let's not dismiss their past so easily.

 

 

As for the Edinburgh clubs, there is no need for it, as Hibs have fully completed their stadium, and are running within their means.

Agreed.

 

I'm not sure that is 100% the case.

[vegas-voss]

The two Dundee clubs is a crazy one I mean the fans both get on with each other and everything.