You can't argue with getting to go to a Scottish Cup final for a fiver, can you?
That is one of the ticket prices set by the Scottish FA for the looming Falkirk v Caley Thistle showpiece event at Hampden Park on May 30.
If you are an OAP, a student or under 16 then you can enter the 2015 Scottish Cup final for just £5, in either the East or West stands at Hampden.
It is an excellent move by the SFA, and I hope many will buy these so-called "concession" tickets. It looks a very good deal.
In other areas of their pricing, though, I wish the SFA had been far more bold. In fact, I think they've mucked up. For a national cup final involving two clubs with a modest supporter pull, some of the ticket prices still seem too steep.
Here is the ticket pricing for May 30 at Hampden in full:
South Stand: £30
North Stand: £30 adult/£10 concession
East and West stands: £25 adult/£5 concession
Accessible Areas (North and South stands): £15 adult/£5 concessions
Family-of-4 deal: £60
Here is the point: the SFA on this occasion needs to protect and nurture this national cup final. The two clubs will bring impressive but modest cavalries of supporters with them, so the occasion as a spectacle needs enhancing.
The SFA's aim should be to fill Hampden, or to try to attain as close as possible to a 40,000 crowd.
To that end, a £30 adult ticket just seems too much. Why not £20? I'm not convinced Hampden's South Stand will sell at all well for 30 quid a pop.
A family-of-4 deal for £60? That is still too much. Why not have capped it at £50?
East and West stand tickets for £25? These should have been £15 or £20, taking the cost for would-be spectators as low as possible.
These prices simply look too high, given today's economic climate in Scotland, for a Falkirk-Caley Thistle cup final.
The fans of these clubs are being reasonably served by such pricing. It is the willing neutral - the extra customer the SFA needs to attract - who I don't see being lured to this game.
I'm perfectly aware the SFA has to incur costs to put the event on. There are sundry bills to be met, such as for stewarding and policing. Yes, of course you cannot plan to run a Scottish Cup final at a severe loss.
But the Scottish Cup final is one of British football's showpiece events. It projects the image of our sometimes beleaguered game to the world. So on this occasion I don't join in the SFA's slightly self-congratulatory tone about its ticketing policy for the game. I think it has set the bar too high.
There is a fascination about this 2015 cup final, with two surprising teams contesting, which makes it a game to look forward to. I just wish the wider "neutral" public had been given a greater incentive to go along.
6 out of 10, SFA. Not good enough.
Also
Quite a few people were taken aback last weekend when Falkirk's Tom Taiwo predicted that Queen of the South could sweep all before them in the Championship play-offs and get promoted.
I sat listening to Taiwo, having just watched Rangers toil to draw 2-2 with Falkirk at Ibrox.
If things stay as they are in the Championship, the first play-off hurdle will be Queens v Rangers over two legs.
In four matches against Rangers this season the Dumfries club have won two, drawn one and lost one. Not for one second will Queens feel intimidated by facing Rangers.
I've said it before, I want Rangers in the Premiership ASAP, they are missed in the top flight. But only there on merit: in the Premiership via football played, and by no other method.
I'm not sure many Rangers fans could stand a fourth season in this purdah. The gods appear to decree the suffering of this club goes on and on.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article