tazhearts Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I have heard this question asked a number of times but have never heard a definitive answer. My understanding of tynecastle is that the dimensions of the pitch do not meet the required standard to us the ground for certain European fixtures. I believe the pitch size is ok but the 'run off' (the distance between the by-line and the advertising boards is now big enough. This was why the Pieman said we had to move as Hearts didn't apply for special dispensation to use Tynecastle. Now does anyone have definitive answers to the following questions:- 1. Once the new stand is built can we play games at Tynecastle in any/all of the following competitions:- a) UEFA Cup Qualifiers UEFA CUP Matches c) UEFA Group Stage Matches d) Champions League Qualifiers e) Champions League Matches f) Champions League Group Stage Matches g) Intertotto Cup 2. If not then is it true that the long term plan is to move the school end back to make the pitch longer and thus fit the criteria? Is this why the new main stand is going to be longer than the Wheatfield? 3. Have Hearts ever tried to apply for special dispensation to use Tynecastle for European Matches? 4. Why are there big chunks missing from the front tier of the new main stand model? 5. Should Hearts not make some enquiries with FIFA re the re-introduction of standing within grounds? I Many German clubs have terracing that can turn into seated areas for European games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
269miles Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I don't know about the pitch being suitable for Euro games but if it isn't then it seems crazy that Vlad is building a new media centre - which is mandatory (or will be ?) for Euro games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heres Rixxy Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 a) UEFA Cup Qualifiers UEFA CUP Matches c) UEFA Group Stage Matches d) Champions League Qualifiers e) Champions League Matches f) Champions League Group Stage Matches g) Intertotto Cup Could you not have just put: a) UEFA Cup Champions League c) Intertoto Cup Anyway... I am fairly sure the new stand would allow us to play any fixture at Tynecastle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazhearts Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 Could you not have just put: a) UEFA Cup Champions League c) Intertoto Cup Anyway... I am fairly sure the new stand would allow us to play any fixture at Tynecastle. I could have but I thought there were different ground requirements for group/later stage games than the early rounds. I really hope you are right about the new stand making us Euro compliant. Why was Pedro Lopez not asked this in his interview today? Why does nobody seem to know the answer to this question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K1874M Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Our team isnt I know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FERRYABROAD Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 The eye-catching development, shown in our exclusive Evening News pictures, should ensure Tynecastle becomes the fourth largest football stadium in Scotland as well as being fully compliant with all UEFA regulations for European competition. From the Evening Erin (so it must be true !!!!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ribble Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Could you not have just put: a) UEFA Cup Champions League c) Intertoto Cup Anyway... I am fairly sure the new stand would allow us to play any fixture at Tynecastle. Qualifying rounds to the CL don't have the same restrictions as the Group stages regarding tv/media capabilities and advertising boards. Hence we could have played AEK Athens at Tynecastle but had we beat them and went into the groups we would have had to move to Murrayfield. It was deemed by Hearts that it was better to play all our euro games at MF ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldenboy Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Does anyone really think that Hearts would be planning major development of Tynecastle without addressing European Football's rules and regulations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Rob Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 It was deemed by Hearts that it was better to play all our euro games at MF ! I can understand why they decided to do so, although in the long run it proved to be a mistake. 1. If we were going to have to play group games at MF, it made some sense to have the players familiar with the surroundings. 2. It allowed many more people to attend than would have been possible at Tynie (myself included), at a time when the board were trying to raise the profile of the club and attract more fans. 3. People would have felt very different about the decision if we hadn't lost the two goals (one of which was a freak bounce) right at the death and had pulled off an unlikely win. In retrospect, it would certainly have been better to have had all our home games at Tynie. On the other hand, I think sometimes the 'Tynie effect' can be exaggerated in the minds of the support. Bordeaux didn't exactly look intimidated when they pitched up there and overturned a first-leg deficit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazhearts Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 Does anyone really think that Hearts would be planning major development of Tynecastle without addressing European Football's rules and regulations? Yes! That's why I'm posing the question. If the problem with the pitch size is to do with the "run off" behind the goals then the new main stand will not affect/change this. So how is the stadium going to become fully compilable with euro regs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxteth O'Grady Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Would we actually play all European games at Tynie though with a 23000 seater stadium? If we were to get an attractive draw I could see us going to Murrayfeild again:mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 If I remember correctly I was positive that it was the length of the pitch. I recall they were saying that the School end stand would need to go back a certain distance to meet the requirements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JALBO Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I think that's right. If you look at the proposed new main stand, you can clearly see that it's extending past the Roseburn stand, and that the centre of the stand is also off-centre in the same direction. This suggests to me that the Roseburn will be moved back a few metres in Phase 2 to gain the necessary pitch length/run off, and in the meantime, Hearts will have permission to play European games at Tynecastle until Phase 2 is complete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Dave Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 A couple of years ago, a few rows of seats were removed from the school end, this allowed the pitch to be extended a metre or so to make it compliant for UEFA matches. For champions league matches (not that we should be too worrried about them right now), the run off area needs to be a bit bigger but we dont have the room. However, I believe the way round this is to cover a few rows of seats with mesh or whatever and count this as your run off area - I think thats what some clubs do just now. We could also apply for special dispensation like Liverpool had to do for Anfield (I think) and Arsenal when they were at Highbury - So long as the stadium is modern and meets safety criteria etc, there surely wouldn't many problems getting this dispensation. All a bit pie in the sky for us right now anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbo Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I was told by Lawrence Brodie at the public consultation display on the new stand that the pitch will comply with the width but not the length requirements for the Champions League after construction of the new stand. However, it will be long enough once the second phase of the redevelopment is completed. Since HMFC has a firm plan to make the stadium compliant the club is confident that it will be given an exemption to play Champions League matches at Tynecastle. Arsenal had such as exemption in their last few seasons at Highbury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo, Goodbye Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Tynecastle meets Uefa cup requirements since we removed a row from both the Gorgie and the Roseburn stand...we still don't comply with Champions League regulations... If you look closely at the plans, pictures etc you'll all notice that the new stand actually carries on past the floodlights of the Roseburn stand, it looks like this will be so that we can move the Roseburn stand back and extend the pitch, the gap in front of the new stand will be to widen it too i would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazhearts Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 Can any architects or builders tell me how exactly you would be able to move a whole stand? Just get a saw, saw along the bottom and then push it back! So is the 50 million which has been quoted only to pay for phase 1 (i.e. the new stand)? Any idea how much phase two will cost? I presume the ground of Tynie school was bought by hearts with the intention of moving the stand back? Will the Wheatfield also have to be extended? That won't be easy give the roof supports in each corner of the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppercrutch Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I did a detailed look at this very thing a while back. But I cant search for it so cant help I am afraid. But you can look through the following if you want. All the details you can ever need. Stadium Requirements: http://www.uefa.com/newsfiles/551788.pdf UEFA Cup regulations: http://www.uefa.com/newsfiles/19070.pdf Champions League regulations: http://www.uefa.com/newsfiles/19071.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo, Goodbye Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Can any architects or builders tell me how exactly you would be able to move a whole stand? Just get a saw, saw along the bottom and then push it back! So is the 50 million which has been quoted only to pay for phase 1 (i.e. the new stand)? Any idea how much phase two will cost? I presume the ground of Tynie school was bought by hearts with the intention of moving the stand back? Will the Wheatfield also have to be extended? That won't be easy give the roof supports in each corner of the ground. The architect of Tynecastle said that the stands could be dismantled and then rebuilt (obviously new foundations would be laid) and lets face it, the roseburn is hardly a complicated structure. If by phase 1 you mean the stand, hotel and all the stuff we're being shown then yes that will all cost ?51million Phase 2, who knows... The ground of Tynie school was indeed bought. We wouldn't extend the Wheatfield, but if a new stand was built to replace the Roseburn the corners would probably be filled in on either side Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 The architect of Tynecastle said that the stands could be dismantled and then rebuilt (obviously new foundations would be laid) and lets face it, the roseburn is hardly a complicated structure. If by phase 1 you mean the stand, hotel and all the stuff we're being shown then yes that will all cost ?51million Phase 2, who knows... The ground of Tynie school was indeed bought. We wouldn't extend the Wheatfield, but if a new stand was built to replace the Roseburn the corners would probably be filled in on either side I think they are built in a modular fashion, allowing them to be moved easily. Well, as easy as it is to move a whole stand! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I think they are built in a modular fashion, allowing them to be moved easily. Well, as easy as it is to move a whole stand! CPR did suggest moving them to Hermiston at one point. So it can't be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo, Goodbye Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 CPR did suggest moving them to Hermiston at one point. So it can't be true. I think CPR's idea was to put the stands on 1000 skateboards and just wheel it around looking for a big bit of grass with no 'No Ball Games' signs around Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.