Scottish newspaper brands World Championships a "ridiculous decision" and a "vanity project"

Is a newspaper saying the Scottish Government should have funded one thing instead of another "putting the boot into Scotland"? I'm sure lots of Scots would have rather the money had been spent on other things (probably other than arts and culture) too.
 

Most newspapers have a political agenda. The Scotsman is just another right-wing newspaper owned by millionaires. They hate the SNP, the notion of independence, and - to a large extent - devolution and the existence of the Holyrood Parliament.
If the Scottish Government had refused to fund The Worlds The Scotsman would be asking why they're wasting money on cycle lanes, or maybe even the arts.

I don't have strong feelings either way about independence, but I don't pay any attention to The Scotsman and I certainly wouldn't pay to read it.

I'm not too sure if I'd call Glasgow beautiful.... Parts of the centre are nice, but there's also a lot of dilapidation, and... less nice bits.

The country side is amazing though. You have such a variety within 30 minutes cycling. From the rolling lanes of Ayrshire and Renfrewshire if you go south or south east, to the hills and fells if you go north. You can go from the bustle of the centre to being on (what feels like) a remote little country lane very little time.

I miss the Scottish countryside, have to say.

All cities have industrial areas, commercial areas and less affluent parts.  Glasgow has excellent nightlife, shopping, architecture and leisure facilities and is a friendly welcoming community to visitors.

There's a wee bit of Edinburgh/Glasgow animosity and the Scotsman is an Edinburgh-centric newspaper which seldom carries positive images of the west coast. 

The world championships were a huge success for Scotland and will attract increased tourist traffic for a number of years to come.

Mate I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you. I studied in Glasgow for 8 years and it is a beautiful place. It's very similar to Liverpool in that it was once a hugely wealthy city and many of the buildings in and around the city centre, west end and south side attest to that.

I would strongly encourage anyone to visit Glasgow. Honestly it's a fantastic place - historic and modern. Great bars, restaurants, museums, university buildings, parks, shops. You name it, Glasgow has it.

Glasgow is no more or less grim and no more or less beautiful than most UK cities I have visited. We have friends who live in Gourock and it is always a pleasure to spend some time in Glasgow when we are up that way (and in Stirling which is closer to where we usually stay). 

The city is huge, but in less than an hour you can head over the Erskine Bridge and arrive on the banks (the bonny, bonny banks, no less) of Loch Lomond. 

For just one example. 

Jetmans Dad wrote:

The city is huge, but in less than an hour you can head over the Erskine Bridge and arrive on the banks (the bonny, bonny banks, no less) of Loch Lomond.

The women's senior and the men's U23 races started from the Loch, and indeed very bonny it looked.

Rendel Harris wrote:

a bit grim and slightly dangerous

Also many people's perception of Sarf Laandan!

As a long-term resident Glasgow (and SL) resident, I can recommend it as a place to visit (and live, apart from the dreich weather). Like many other UK cities, it's a mixed bag but much of the Victorian centre, West End and much of the south side is good. The bay-windowed sandstone tenements are much more impressive than the rows of terraces many English inner cities and lend a slightly continential scale and air.

The natives are notably friendly, although sometimes incomprehensible to outsiders. And the cultural and food offerings are very good - obviously smaller but more accessible than London.

As others note, there is great cycling countryside around too - and a good suburban rail network helps with getting out of the city. The Cowal Peninsula is glorious, and has the added bonus of being accessed via short ferry rides. Check out the Five Ferries ride for something few cities can offer on their doorsteps. The proper Highlands are easily accessible to the north.

Dnnnnnn wrote:

 Check out the Five Ferries ride for something few cities can offer on their doorsteps. The proper Highlands are easily accessible to the north.

Just make sure the ferries are actually working as it's a long detour otherwise!

Dnnnnnn wrote:

apart from the dreich weather

I'm not directing this at yourself - but people who complain about the weather in Scotland (which really isn’t that bad) have never visited Iceland, Finland, Norway, Sweden or Denmark. 

As for cycling – forget the West side – the East side of the country is where the best roads are located (and there are fewer cars). Fife, Angus, Perth and Kinross and up to Aberdeenshire. It's cycling heaven!

Glov Zaroff wrote:

the East side of the country is where the best roads are located (and there are fewer cars). Fife, Angus, Perth and Kinross and up to Aberdeenshire. It's cycling heaven!

We can agree on that - there are far more near-empty backroads, usually in better condition. Not such spectacular countryside - but still bonny and much less dreich :-p

Even in the South - there's the Lammermuirs etc. and despite the central belt being full of people it's still less so than much of England!  You don't need to stray far south or North for some more open country.

Bring your big sprockets or small chain rings for the Lammermuirs. And check the wind direction!

... and stop at the cafe (eg. Gifford) AFTER, not before...