Another incompetent Herald Sun journalist

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

I don't normally care about this sort of stuff but Fox Sport's "Before the Bounce", when talking about the Queen's Birthday game and how Melbourne used Jack Watts to try and draw a larger crowd Barrett stated that last year Melbourne only got a crowd of around "40,000" to the game. In reality 59,548 were at the game last year.

If it was a simple mistake I wouldn't mind but it was said in the context of whether or not Melbourne should continue to host the Queen's Birthday game.

Poor effort, but what can you expect from a "journalist" from a celebrity gossip publication?

[Matt Demon 1,579]

Are you positive It was 59,548? I remember It being lower than that.. Happy to be proven wrong.

[Je Roos Salem 661]

It was definitely 59,548. I don't understand why everyone thinks it was lower. Barratt also said the same thing on Triple M about a week ago. Don't know who wrote this but the guy who did the mid season review in the age a few days ago, said that Colin Garland had not made it to the field for a game this year. I mean if you want to do a bloody mid season review at least get your facts right.

[Trisul 674]

I distinctly remember the 59k figure being officially announced post match.

Having said that, I read this ~40k number recently and went and re-checked official attendance- 40k.

I also checked post match media reports - 40k. Not that they couldn't have been altered, but very strange.

Am I wrong in thinking that the original official announcement was to save us some face? Was it just wrong?

[45HG 1,559]

Definitely over 59,000. I wasn't happy with it at the time, but now find myself defending it...

[Sir Why You Little 37,342]

I don't normally care about this sort of stuff but Fox Sport's "Before the Bounce", when talking about the Queen's Birthday game and how Melbourne used Jack Watts to try and draw a larger crowd Barrett stated that last year Melbourne only got a crowd of around "40,000" to the game. In reality 59,548 were at the game last year.

If it was a simple mistake I wouldn't mind but it was said in the context of whether or not Melbourne should continue to host the Queen's Birthday game.

Poor effort, but what can you expect from a "journalist" from a celebrity gossip publication?

Notify the Club about this discrepency. I am sick of this stuff, These Football scribes think there poo doesn't smell. Barrett is a Jerk Like Rohan Conolly.

This sort of reporting could jepeodize future Queens Birthday Fixtures, so i would let the club know.

[Je Roos Salem 661]

I want to see a report that says the crowd was 40k

[Gippy Dee 48]

I was there last year ... It was certainly about 60k.

When at the MCG there is a big difference between a 40k Crowd and a near on 60,000 crowd.

I heard Damien Barrett say this too. Talk about sticking the boots in.

A reputable Journalist should know their stuff, and if not, should be made to look bad.

Problem being is that anybody would probably believe him, and thats what I hate about Journalists getting it wrong.

Barrett has lost alot of credibility with me now.

Gippy Dee

[Little Goffy 14,795]

Here's another source with the 59648 figure -

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_matc...istics?mid=3567

[Rogue 585]

I distinctly remember the 59k figure being officially announced post match.

Having said that, I read this ~40k number recently and went and re-checked official attendance- 40k.

I also checked post match media reports - 40k. Not that they couldn't have been altered, but very strange.

That's bizarre...

[Hannabal 4]

Are you positive It was 59,548? I remember It being lower than that.. Happy to be proven wrong.

How can you remember something that didn't happen ?

It was a big issue at the time and all eyes were peeled on the scoreboard in the last quarter to see what the attendance figure was. I'm surprised that any supporter wouldn't know off the top of their head that it was 59,000 something. As I said, it was a big talking point at the time.

Also, there are numerous websites that give crowd attendances. Look them up.

[w00dy 146]

I remember Demetriou earmarked 60,000 as a rough figure we needed to keep the game, and I remember falling just short, somewhere around the 58-59k mark... definitely not 40,000

[Rogue 585]

I remember Demetriou earmarked 60,000 as a rough figure we needed to keep the game, and I remember falling just short, somewhere around the 58-59k mark... definitely not 40,000

It was a big issue at the time and all eyes were peeled on the scoreboard in the last quarter to see what the attendance figure was. I'm surprised that any supporter wouldn't know off the top of their head that it was 59,000 something.

What these guys said.

[demon_king 13]

On a side note this guy was talking footy on the today show the other day and mentioned niknat's upcoming debut. Mentioned how he'll do things exciting etc etc and we'll see why many people still think he should have been the number 1 draft pick. Mentioned that # 1 pick was Watts who debuted last week and appears to be a long way off senior footy whereas niknat has been ready to go at senior level for weeks now.

I mean fair enough to talk up Naitanui, i'm looking forward to seeing him on the park as much as most people but didn't think it was really necessary to mention Watts in the negative sense like he did. He just gave me the impression that he doesn't care much for Melbourne and thought he'd take a dig while he could.

[1858 285]

I remember Demetriou earmarked 60,000 as a rough figure we needed to keep the game, and I remember falling just short, somewhere around the 58-59k mark... definitely not 40,000

Completely correct.

[45HG 1,559]

On a side note this guy was talking footy on the today show the other day and mentioned niknat's upcoming debut. Mentioned how he'll do things exciting etc etc and we'll see why many people still think he should have been the number 1 draft pick. Mentioned that # 1 pick was Watts who debuted last week and appears to be a long way off senior footy whereas niknat has been ready to go at senior level for weeks now.

I mean fair enough to talk up Naitanui, i'm looking forward to seeing him on the park as much as most people but didn't think it was really necessary to mention Watts in the negative sense like he did. He just gave me the impression that he doesn't care much for Melbourne and thought he'd take a dig while he could.

[jacey 333]

Barrett has lost alot of credibility with me now.

He went with it for a few rounds too. Started off saying it was 40,000 then 40,00ish. Disappointing Gaddy didn't pick up on it.

How can someone miss 20,000 people.

That's like saying Anzac Day only attracted 60,000ish people or no one showed up at all to the North v Port game. In fact negative 6,000 people was recorded at the North Port game.

Barrett's a [censored].

[Tony Tea 2,816]

Another source for 59,000+.

Ditto Hannabal and Vanlo. Demetriou and his flunkies at the AFL and in the press were making noises about the attendance needing to be greater than 60,000 or else the hierarchy might have to revisit the fixure. Thus, when the scoreboard showed the attendance was 59,548, Collingwood fans jeered.

[Yencks 8]

the reason he got the stat wrong was because in round 2 this year, there were 40,000 there then...

he obviously forgot that we played against them in round 2...

[The Emblem 1]

He went with it for a few rounds too. Started off saying it was 40,000 then 40,00ish. Disappointing Gaddy didn't pick up on it.

How can someone miss 20,000 people.

Not even a North Korean dictator on a bad day would miss that many people.

Very unprofessional journalism.

[H_T 3,049]

If it was a simple mistake I wouldn't mind but it was said in the context of whether or not Melbourne should continue to host the Queen's Birthday game.

Poor effort, but what can you expect from a "journalist" from a celebrity gossip publication?

Good pick up CB. And I couldn't agree more. There was 59K+ there. As Hannabal and others pointed out it was there for everyone to see. Makes you wonder why it was reported in the context you speak of, and the journalists intentions or reasoning behind it. It does to me anyway.