Father Jack
8 Jun 2008, 11:28
One thing that always annoys me with journo's is when they use the odd fact or figure in their articles and then go and get it wrong. If they can't be bothered to make sure the easily-checked parts of their stories are correct, how do they expect us to believe the rest of what they write?
Here's an excerpt from an article by Tim Lane in yesterday's Age. I think we must have been watching different Grand Finals in the early part of the decade.
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/for-greatness-you-need-4/2008/06/07/1212259176737.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2
THE MALTHOUSE YEARS
Footscray: 1984-89, 135 games (67 wins, 66 losses, 2 draws) at 49.2%, best finish 3rd in 1985.
West Coast: 1990-99, 243 games (156 wins, 85 losses, 2 draws) at 65.8%, best finish 1st - 2 premierships in 1992, '94.
Collingwood: 2000-07, 186 games (92 wins, 94 losses) at 48.8%, best finish 2nd in 2001, '02.
TOTAL: 1984-2007, 564 (315 wins, 245 losses, 4 draws) at 56%.
I often find mistakes in articles, and I like nothing better than to point them out, so i think I might start doing so here from now on.
Here's an excerpt from an article by Tim Lane in yesterday's Age. I think we must have been watching different Grand Finals in the early part of the decade.
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/for-greatness-you-need-4/2008/06/07/1212259176737.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2
THE MALTHOUSE YEARS
Footscray: 1984-89, 135 games (67 wins, 66 losses, 2 draws) at 49.2%, best finish 3rd in 1985.
West Coast: 1990-99, 243 games (156 wins, 85 losses, 2 draws) at 65.8%, best finish 1st - 2 premierships in 1992, '94.
Collingwood: 2000-07, 186 games (92 wins, 94 losses) at 48.8%, best finish 2nd in 2001, '02.
TOTAL: 1984-2007, 564 (315 wins, 245 losses, 4 draws) at 56%.
I often find mistakes in articles, and I like nothing better than to point them out, so i think I might start doing so here from now on.