People always say that but the population of Newcastle is less than Hull. You could say that you should include the surrounding areas but if you do that with most places you get a fairly big figure.
Sorry, but that's simply not true, Newcastle is one side of the Tyne, Gateshead is on the other, they're about 50 yards apart, you can't look at Newcastle without adding both together. Tyneside has a population of 900k, even if add the entire population of East Yorkshire together you only get to 600k.
I don't get this. Should we include Barton as well just because it's touching if you ignore the river?
By that logic parts of Germany should count as East Yorkshire, they're next to each other if you don't count the North Sea.
I think you need to read the posts again - OLM is saying the exact opposite to what you think
I don't get this. Should we include Barton as well just because it's touching if you ignore the river?
By that logic parts of Germany should count as East Yorkshire, they're next to each other if you don't count the North Sea.
The thing is, as Scooter says, the north bank and the south bank of the Tyne are incredibly close together. They even have a foot-bridge from the north bank to the Tate and the Sage Centre, for Fooks sake!
Can you imagine a footbridge across the Humber? (The Humber is the estuary with the biggest flow of water of any in the country.)
Once you include 'the snotties' - Haltemprice and Bilton - you might be getting near half a million, but Tyneside dwarfs Hull!
Sorry, but that's simply not true, Newcastle is one side of the Tyne, Gateshead is on the other, they're about 50 yards apart, you can't look at Newcastle without adding both together. Tyneside has a population of 900k, even if add the entire population of East Yorkshire together you only get to 600k.
I've not got time to search any further than Wikipedia but it states that Tyneside is 879,996 and the equivalent comparison for Hull made on Wikipedia is the Hull and Humber City Region which is 887,500. Pretty close really. I also don't understand how anyone can state you can't look at the population of Newcastle without also taking into account Gateshead and similar. Surely the population of Newcastle is the number of people that live within the boundary of the city of Newcastle? It doesn't matter how close it's neighbours are.
None of this really bothers me anyway. Just sticks in my mind as I was once out of curiosity seeing how much bigger Newcastle was than Hull, only to find the opposite.
Well of course it does if you're including a city and a neighbouring big town.
From a footballing point of view, that means Newcastle should get big crowds, which was the point of this article, but from a pride in my City point of view, Hull is bigger than Newcastle.
= 'salient point'tigercity: There's no denying Newcastle are a big club, they have the 4th (is it?) largest attendances in the country
I've not got time to search any further than Wikipedia but it states that Tyneside is 879,996 and the equivalent comparison for Hull made on Wikipedia is the Hull and Humber City Region which is 887,500. Pretty close really. I also don't understand how anyone can state you can't look at the population of Newcastle without also taking into account Gateshead and similar. Surely the population of Newcastle is the number of people that live within the boundary of the city of Newcastle? It doesn't matter how close it's neighbours are.
None of this really bothers me anyway. Just sticks in my mind as I was once out of curiosity seeing how much bigger Newcastle was than Hull, only to find the opposite.
Ehh? What's the Humber City region? Humberside doesn't exist anymore, so by saying that I presume parts of North Linconshire are being included.
I take your point about Newcastle and Gateshead, but it practically the same city when you look at it - it's divided by a river and a bridge. It's just like Istanbul being separated by the river that runs through there, where in fact it is the same city (divided into 2 continents, strangely)
As far as I can see Tyneside has a combined population of 880k; East Riding has a pop. of 314k.
Erm...catchment area of Tyneside (= attendances at St. James' Park) is much bigger.

Erm...catchment area of Tyneside (= attendances at St. James' Park) is much bigger.
I've not got time to search any further than Wikipedia but it states that Tyneside is 879,996 and the equivalent comparison for Hull made on Wikipedia is the Hull and Humber City Region which is 887,500. Pretty close really. I also don't understand how anyone can state you can't look at the population of Newcastle without also taking into account Gateshead and similar. Surely the population of Newcastle is the number of people that live within the boundary of the city of Newcastle? It doesn't matter how close it's neighbours are.
None of this really bothers me anyway. Just sticks in my mind as I was once out of curiosity seeing how much bigger Newcastle was than Hull, only to find the opposite.
I don't get this. Should we include Barton as well just because it's touching if you ignore the river?
By that logic parts of Germany should count as East Yorkshire, they're next to each other if you don't count the North Sea.
From the National Statistics Office (I trust them more than Wiki...)
mid-2010 Population Estimates:
Kingston-upon-Hull: 262,000
East Riding: 337,000
Newcastle-upon-Tyne: 284,300
North Tyneside: 197,200
South Tyneside: 152,400
Gateshead: 190,800
some of those folk may go to watch Sunderland (pop 281,700)