calscot 0 Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 67,000 I think 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 How many does Murrayfield hold ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murrayfield_Stadium 67,130. Did you already know it was pretty much the 70k mark? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 According to WikiP it's 67800. Absolutely no chance of the final being held there though. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murrayfield_Stadium 67,130. Did you already know it was pretty much the 70k mark? Just read it's been reduced due to installing the biggest jumbo screens in the country. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 Just read it's been reduced due to installing the biggest jumbo screens in the country. Too lazy to read it, just saw the capacity in the box on the side. I'd be quite happy for finals to be held at murrayfield. I don't have experience of going to Old Hampden etc so wouldn't be overly perturbed about tradition. It would reduce complaints such as the current one over the final and sitting behind the goals at Hampden is a crappy view. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 SFA could have saved a ton of money by renting out Murrayfield and, at the same time, getting access to a larger stadium. Do we REALLY need two national stadia in the country ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 Absolutely no chance of the final being held there though. Agreed, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be. As I said, the SFA could have saved a ton of money by renting Murrayfiled, or gotten into some form of partnership. Murrayfield isnt used all that often anyway, is it ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 788 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Rugby stadiums seem to have have it sorted out. Twickenham holds 82,000 yet was build or redeveloped with no hassle but Wembley was a joke! Murrayfield is a superb stadium with 67,000 seats and room for upgrading if the old stand gets redeveloped also. Hampden is about the same size as Murrayfield but holds 15000 less due to the silly design of the stands being so far behind the goals. This was fine when it was all standing as you could cram plenty more in to generate noise. They should have pulled the stands in and made them steeper behind the goal and made the North stand the same as the 2 tier south stand and Hampden would look great and hold about 70000 0 Quote Link to post 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.