A defence of the decision to play the Hearts-Hibs Scottish Cup semi-final at Hampden

Let's get a previously unimaginable caveat out of the way first. Yes, if the coronavirus spreads around the country to such an extent that it would much more sense from a health perspective to have the game in Edinburgh instead of Glasgow, then yes it definitely should be played there. But the rest of this is written under the assumption that the football will not be affected by the illness and the game will go ahead at Hampden Park, as the SFA have dictated.

Picking Hampden over Murrayfield is an irrational argument, but so what? Football is an irrational game. It's an irrational love. The cost of the recent Edinburgh derby was £32 a ticket. Hearts were bottom of the league, lost to Hibs in the previous match, fans had just forked out £30 to see them beat Rangers in the Scottish Cup three days prior, with a semi-final also to save for, and yet the away end was sold out. How can you rationally explain that?

On the surface, it would make sense to have Hearts v Hibs at Murrayfield. It would mean the majority of the supporters wouldn't have the extra burden of travelling outwith their own city and the increased capacity would mean more fans could attend the game.

But tradition is such a massive part of football and what makes it special to fans. You can't get any more traditional in Scottish football than having a Scottish Cup semi-final at Hampden. Getting to the national stadium what supporters collectively dream of when the cup starts in January. When Hearts defeated Rangers in the quarter-finals, I punched the air and said "we're going back to Hampden". I didn't say, "boy, I hope we draw Hibs so we can play the game in Edinburgh".

If you're a Hearts fan, Hampden holds some of your fondest memories in recent years, especially when it comes to the Edinburgh derby. Paul Hartley's hat-trick in the 2006 semi-final took place in G42, as did the 5-1 final in 2012.

Even Hibs supporters don't have to look too far in the rearview mirror to find their own wonderful Hampden experience. After all, we're just four years removed from the 2016 final, where David Gray's historic header ended the club's 114-year wait for the trophy and sparked scenes of exuberance we've barely witnessed before.

Let's also not romanticise Murrayfield and make it out to be anything better than what it is. It holds more than Hampden, the gradient on the stands is better behind the goals, but it's still not a great place to watch football. Like the national stadium, there exists a running track. The atmosphere dissipates quickly in the cavernous surroundings. Take a look at the two Celtic v Hearts games in the cup competitions from last season. Was the atmosphere better at one over the other? I wouldn't say so. And if I had to pick, I'd say the Scottish Cup final at Hampden provided the bigger buzz, not the Betfred Cup semi between the pair.

When comparing those two fixtures we come across another Hampden superiority - it is a much better day out for those who live in the capital.

It's a major part of what makes a trip to semi-finals or finals in the Scottish Cup special for every club outside of Glasgow. It's a fan experience that's much more than just the 90 minutes. Be it travelling by train, supporters bus or in a crowded car, there's the camaraderie with fellow supporters and the communal pre-match nerves and expectations. It's an integral part of the build up and the post-match dissection. And if you've got the flexibility to go through to Glasgow early and sample some unfamiliar establishments prior to kick-off then it adds to the experience. Before May's final, this writer spent a not-too-insignificant period of time in a bar where bottles of beer were being sold for 99p. You certainly aren't getting that in Edinburgh.

To underline the point, you don't want to be approaching a Scottish Cup semi-final with the same routine as Hamilton at home.

Another reason to pick Hampden Park over Murrayfield is to avoid the tedious squabbling that will exist between supporters across the divide, and perhaps even between the clubs, with regards to whether Hearts have an advantage due to their familiarity with Murrayfield. This was something even Brendan Rodgers complained about in the lead up to the Betfred Cup semi last term, despite the fact that there were more players in the Celtic team who had previously played football at the home of Scottish Rugby than their opponents.

It would be a similar story this time around with Hearts' familiarity overblown by anyone who's happy to bend facts to suit their narrative. Michael Smith and one out of Lewis Moore, Euan Henderson or Jamie Walker would be the only players likely to start the game who previously played at Murrayfield when it was considered a "home" ground for Hearts during Tynecastle's reconstruction. But it wouldn't matter. If Hearts won there would be an argument that they were significantly helped by the choice of venue and this fixture can do without that nonsense.

And, most of all, do we really want to be giving money to the Scottish Rugby Union? I know supporters aren't exactly thrilled at the idea of giving money to the Scottish FA either, what with all the "beaks" and "blazers", but at least that money is going back into Scottish football, not to the country's second sport. You know, the one where fans are treated like saints while we're treated like second-class citizens.