1901/02 WHU Kit, It Was.................

The very best posts from KUMB over the years ...

Moderator: Gnome

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Was (Probably).................

Postby Ironworx on Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:07 am

The Old Mile End wrote:
Hate to say it - but vermilion is a sort of orangey-red colour. When faded, it could quite easily look.....salmon pink. :think: Lucky it was only on the socks though. Got any of those Bobby? :wink:


There is no question that the Thames Ironworks socks were scarlet, or vermilion is good enough, see reference colour at bottom of post. The blue shirt was from the Castle saltaire colour, so was the white shorts, the scarlet socks were the castle steamers funnel colour.

Image

Image

How about a primary source: '......A prettier and more distinctive costume than theirs I have never yet seen on a football ground. Light blue shirts, white knickers and scarlet stockings were their colours.'

Image
Ironworx
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Was (Probably).................

Postby sutts07 on Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:20 am

so am i right in thinking the 1899-1900 season was the same as the season before just without the red sash??
that would make perfect sense and round it all off quite well IMO


Image
User avatar
sutts07
 
Posts: 4204
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Dubai

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Was (Probably).................

Postby Ironworx on Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:50 am

sutts07 wrote:so am i right in thinking the 1899-1900 season was the same as the season before just without the red sash??
that would make perfect sense and round it all off quite well IMO


Yes, quite correct. The only evidence that I'm aware of for the scarlet sash is the 1897 team group....

Image

It isn't mentioned in any text that I'm aware of that isn't talking about that photo.

Thames Ironworks kit is very straightforward. 1895/6 All Oxford blue. 1896/7, 1897/8, 1898/9 and 1899-1900 Castle Swifts colours of light blue shirt, white shorts, scarlet socks.

Change strip all white, but that's only from 1899 photo evidence as the non photo primary source for white kit is not until 1900/01 WHU.
Ironworx
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Was (Probably).................

Postby sutts07 on Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:21 pm

Ironworx wrote:Change strip all white, but that's only from 1899 photo evidence as the non photo primary source for white kit is not until 1900/01 WHU.



you have started on the away shirts already???

:clap:


http://www.kitclassics.co.uk/kits/westham.gif
User avatar
sutts07
 
Posts: 4204
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Dubai

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Was (Probably).................

Postby Green Hornet on Wed Oct 28, 2009 4:25 pm

I'm looking at that 1897 team group photo and, correct me if I'm wrong, but the 'sash' is only noticeably being worn by one player.

Would that be the goal keeper ?

I understand that goalies used to wear the same shirt as outfield players in the early days of football and perhaps this was a method used to identify the keeper.

Perhaps the team didn't wear a sash at all ?
Green Hornet
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 1:30 pm

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Was (Probably).................

Postby Ironworx on Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:30 pm

sutts07 wrote:

you have started on the away shirts already???

:clap:


http://www.kitclassics.co.uk/kits/westham.gif" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


We'll not really, it's just that references to an all white kit cropped up, and references to the all light blue shirt being worn as a second strip post 1904 cropped up too....

So while it had made an appearance I thought it should be mentioned.
Ironworx
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Was (Probably).................

Postby Ironworx on Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:37 pm

Green Hornet wrote:I'm looking at that 1897 team group photo and, correct me if I'm wrong, but the 'sash' is only noticeably being worn by one player.

Would that be the goal keeper ?

I understand that goalies used to wear the same shirt as outfield players in the early days of football and perhaps this was a method used to identify the keeper.

Perhaps the team didn't wear a sash at all ?


Funny that you should raise that as until today I would likely have agreed with what you've just said, but just today I found a reference to the sashes and to a red cap as well....

'...The team played in royal Cambridge blue shirts and white shorts. They also wore a red cap, belt and socks.' http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/WestHamHistory.

I'm assuming that belt and sash are the same thing....

There's only the one photo showing it that I know of, and the above quote is the only mention of it that I know of that isn't talking about the photo...

Make of it what you will.
Ironworx
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Was (Probably).................

Postby Ironworx on Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:55 pm

mushy wrote:Thats all I got today I am afraid.


Are you still intending to go back to the Library Mushy ?

If you are would you take a look at seasons 1896/7 and 1897/8 as an uncertainty has cropped up.

In 1896 the Thames Iron Works entered the London League. The team played in 'Royal Cambridge Blue' shirts and white shorts. They also wore a red cap, belt and socks.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/WestHamHistory.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


But John Powles says in Iron in the Blood, page 43, 1897/8: '...When the Irons took to the field they were sporting their new colours of blue and white with red stockings.'

Clearly both can't be right, if the kit was worn 1896 then it wasn't new in 1897/8, or if it was new in 1897/8 then it couldn't have been worn in 1896.

I thought 1896/7 was blue white and red, but given what John Powles says now I'm not so sure, might it have been Oxford blue like 1895/6 ? :think:
Ironworx
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Might Have Been.................

Postby Pop Robson on Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:15 pm

Posted this earlier in the thread with regards to the cap and belt, depends where Brian Belton got his info from, biblography mentions 'East and West Ham Gazette' 10 Nov 1888 and the 'Stratford Express' 25 Oct & 1 Nov 1884 and 17 Sept 1890

Pop Robson wrote:Founded on Iron: Brian Belton

Chp 6 1887/88:
"The Irons sported their new kit when they kicked off their first competitive season at the Memorial Ground. The strip consisted of Royal Cambridge Blue shirts, white knickers, red cap, belt and stockings. The Thames Ironw Works gazette commented that when the new colours were worn on the field 'The contrast supplied by the delightful green turf is very pleasing'. From time to time Thames would play in a Harrovian blue strip (a mid-to-dark blue, which appears to have been the side's original strip, consistent with Hills' school and university colours)"

Chp 9 1899/1900
"In the final season of the 19th century, the Iorns again changed their home strip to red, white and blue, with Cambridge Blue shorts."
User avatar
Pop Robson
 
Posts: 13170
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 9:12 pm

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Might Have Been.................

Postby Up the Junction on Wed Oct 28, 2009 11:14 pm

Pop Robson wrote:"In the final season of the 19th century, the Irons again changed their home strip to red, white and blue, with Cambridge Blue shorts."

This is what HK based their recent abomination on, IW?

It's a little ambiguous ... Mushy, given your research do you think by 'home strip' they're referring simply to the shirt - or the entire kit (eg red/vermillion/claret shirt, (cambridge) blue shorts and white socks)?
User avatar
Up the Junction
Thinks he owns the place
 
Posts: 40807
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 1:03 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Was (Probably).................

Postby Bobby Orangeboom on Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:38 am

Ironworx wrote:
There is no dispute full stop.

We have non photographic primary source evidence from two different sources for the blue kit, Mushy and John Northcutt both came up with that within four hours of one another, Mushy won by a short head...

And we also have non photographic primary source evidence for the white kit, also from Mushy...

Anything in photographs is a long way second place to that, and only serves to confirm what we are already certain of.


Hmmmmm, you're hard work you are Grant at times..

Ok, like i said previously, we have established that the Sky Blue was our primary/main/home Colour, we are aware that we highly likely used White Shirts in that time era also but what i was trying to say before you once again battered my point down rather abrubtly was what then is the Colour of this Shirt as like i said previosuly before you once again battered my point down, the 2 Shirts below are not the same Colour & i believe even David Blunkett could see that ??

IW aside, would we be thinking people that the 1897 Shirt is Sky Blue & the 1900 Shirt is White in these Pictures ??

Image

Image
User avatar
Bobby Orangeboom
 
Posts: 34465
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:10 pm
Location: London, unfortunately.

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Might Have Been.................

Postby Bobby Orangeboom on Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:44 am

Up the Junction wrote:This is what HK based their recent abomination on, IW?

It's a little ambiguous ... Mushy, given your research do you think by 'home strip' they're referring simply to the shirt - or the entire kit (eg red/vermillion/claret shirt, (cambridge) blue shorts and white socks)?


Surely the Kit in it's entirety & not just the Shirt ??

Otherwise we'd be talking about that monstrosity posted a couple of pages back of the RW&B Shirt..
User avatar
Bobby Orangeboom
 
Posts: 34465
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:10 pm
Location: London, unfortunately.

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Might Have Been.................

Postby Ironworx on Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:38 am

Pop Robson wrote:Founded on Iron: Brian Belton

Chp 6 1887/88:
"The Irons sported their new kit when they kicked off their first competitive season at the Memorial Ground. The strip consisted of Royal Cambridge Blue shirts, white knickers, red cap, belt and stockings. The Thames Ironw Works gazette commented that when the new colours were worn on the field 'The contrast supplied by the delightful green turf is very pleasing'. From time to time Thames would play in a Harrovian blue strip (a mid-to-dark blue, which appears to have been the side's original strip, consistent with Hills' school and university colours)"

Chp 9 1899/1900
"In the final season of the 19th century, the Iorns again changed their home strip to red, white and blue, with Cambridge Blue shorts."
[/quote]

Thanks for those Pop, I havn't reviewed anything from Founded on Iron yet so anything from there is new to me.

1897/8 - That ties in with what John Powles says in Iron in the Blood. Under that scenario the Irons played in Oxford Blue 1895/6 (which we know to be the case) AND in 1896/7, with the light blue shirts, white shorts, and scarlet socks being worn from the start of 1897/8.

That is as opposed to wearing the light blue, white and scarlet kit in season 1896/7 as it says on the Spartacus site.

We have two primary source photos for 1895/6 showing an all dark kit which is the Oxford blue one. We have a primary source photo and a quote from 1897/8 showing and saying light blue shirts, white shorts and scarlet socks.

But we have nothing primary source for season 1896/7, and worse still we have conflicting claims. That's why I've asked Mushy if he's going back to the library as he said he was, to look for evidence from 1896/7. 1896/7 is now uncertain.

1899-1900. That's clearly wrong as we have primary source quotes from both 1897/8 and 1898/9 and a photo from 1897/8 all saying / showing light blue shirts, white shorts and scarlet socks, so if it refers to that kit it's wrong -And- We have a photo taken after August and before the end of December 1899/1900 showing light blue shirts, white shorts and scarlet socks, so if it refers to a new combination of colours its also wrong.

The precise dating of the photo is known from the player Bradshaw who appears in the photo who didn't join until August 1899 and tragically died on Xmas Day 1899, so the photo must have been taken between those times.

This is the problem that is bedevilling us, conflicting reports, our own primary sources are too far apart to be able to winkle out all the incorrect ones. Here we have winkled out one incorrect report, but not an earlier one from two.
Ironworx
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Was (Probably).................

Postby Ironworx on Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:54 am

Bobby Orangeboom wrote:
Hmmmmm, you're hard work you are Grant at times..

Ok, like i said previously, we have established that the Sky Blue was our primary/main/home Colour, we are aware that we highly likely used White Shirts in that time era also but what i was trying to say before you once again battered my point down rather abrubtly was what then is the Colour of this Shirt as like i said previosuly before you once again battered my point down, the 2 Shirts below are not the same Colour & i believe even David Blunkett could see that ??

IW aside, would we be thinking people that the 1897 Shirt is Sky Blue & the 1900 Shirt is White in these Pictures ??

Image

Image



You must get away from the idea of being able to draw definite conclusions only from individual photos, they are not reliable enough for that.

The 1897 photo is *consistent* with primary source written reports that say light blue shirt, white shorts and scarlet socks - So it's a fairly safe conclusion to draw that light blue shirt, white shorts and scarlet socks is what the photo shows too...

The 1900 photo is *consistent* with an 1899 photo showing a darker and a lighter strip and with a 1900 primary written source saying white, so it is a reasonable conclusion to draw that it shows a white kit, that is as part of a train of evidence....

However taken in itself and *disregarding* the other evidence it is clearly a deteriorated photo, and it may be the case that mid tones have deteriorated to white, in which case the shirts could have been darker when the photo was originally taken and it could have been the blue shirted kit.

The photo in itself in inconclusive, but the train of evidence of which it is part is definite - There was a white kit.
Ironworx
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Might Have Been.................

Postby Ironworx on Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:17 am

Up the Junction wrote:This is what HK based their recent abomination on, IW?

It's a little ambiguous ... Mushy, given your research do you think by 'home strip' they're referring simply to the shirt - or the entire kit (eg red/vermillion/claret shirt, (cambridge) blue shorts and white socks)?


Yes UtJ, somebody, not Brian Belton, had sent that report to them but their source was a John Hellier article that said exactly the same thing to the word, so it's something that either Brian Belton or John Hellier got from the other, but we have no idea where it originally came from.

It must be remembered that while Dave Moor has expertise in football kits in general his expertise is widespread and not TIW / WHU focussed.

So as example he immediately picked up on the point that generally any colour of shorts other than black or white was noteably unusual at that time = Good general expertise which a TIW / WHU bod might not pick up on.

But equally his specific knowledge of TIW / WHU isn't good enough to pick up on the overall TIW / WHU picture.

Do we know more than him about TIW / WHU - Definitely yes, but what do we know about Accrington Stanley and Greenock Morton, not a lot I suspect.

I think UtJ that the only answer to this is for me myself to write up the history of TIW / WHU colours 1895 to 1904 in which I properly reference the primary sources such that anybody can go to them and look at them for themselves...

We have gone a long way to complete and correct the record, but with so much conflicting material muddying the waters a 100% referenced history of the colours is needed to nail the matter down for once and for all....

I can't see it being done in any other way as there's always another incorrect report cropping up.
Ironworx
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Might Have Been.................

Postby mushy on Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:43 am

Up the Junction wrote:
This is what HK based their recent abomination on, IW?

It's a little ambiguous ... Mushy, given your research do you think by 'home strip' they're referring simply to the shirt - or the entire kit (eg red/vermillion/claret shirt, (cambridge) blue shorts and white socks)?


I agree its ambiguous, sometimes they describe just the shirt and sometimes the whole kit, its all a bit random I am afraid.
My policy has been to note down any reference to the kit no matter how small, although the vermillion quote from the other day was as regards the socks, well thats the way I read it.
Ironworks I will be going back to the library, was hoping to go today but not sure if I can fit it in.
Are we happy with season 1897-98 or is it just the 1896-97 season that is in doubt?
And are we all happy now with the 1930 Arse home/away cup game?
mushy
 
Posts: 7449
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:17 pm
Location: Kumb Poster of the year 2009

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Might Have Been.................

Postby Up the Junction on Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:19 pm

Ironworx wrote:I think that the only answer to this is for me myself to write up the history of TIW / WHU colours 1895 to 1904 in which I properly reference the primary sources such that anybody can go to them and look at them for themselves...

Good idea. Obviously happy to host on KUMB.
User avatar
Up the Junction
Thinks he owns the place
 
Posts: 40807
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 1:03 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Might Have Been.................

Postby Ironworx on Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:34 pm

mushy wrote:
I agree its ambiguous, sometimes they describe just the shirt and sometimes the whole kit, its all a bit random I am afraid.
My policy has been to note down any reference to the kit no matter how small, although the vermillion quote from the other day was as regards the socks, well thats the way I read it.
Ironworks I will be going back to the library, was hoping to go today but not sure if I can fit it in.
Are we happy with season 1897-98 or is it just the 1896-97 season that is in doubt?
And are we all happy now with the 1930 Arse home/away cup game?


Hi Mushy, don't sweat on any of this, all in whatever time suits you, if it takes us longer rather than shorter then so be it.

It's clear that there's no history of the colours that's ever been written, there's plenty of histories of the club that mention colours in passing but that's not the same thing.

The way gaps open up the moment that you've just plugged one, and bits get added on what somebodies said in a book but you can't find any really good original source for, and then one source says one thing yet another source says something that completely contradicts it, its a nightmare....

The more I think about it the more a proper history of the colours is needed, and one that when its states a colour gives a reference with it saying East Ham Echo, 1st June 1900, can be found in Stratford library. Only in that way are things ever going to get properly nailed down....

It'll take some writing, it'll be like a Masters dissertation, but I'm game. I've had a lot of enjoyment out of West Ham over the years and I'll look at it as putting some value back....

The library. Look for anything from 1896/7 because essentially we havn't got a single primary source for that year, nothing, not even a photo. The team were City of London League division one runners up and West Ham Charity Cup runners up too, so it was a reasonably successful season that should have been well reported.

1898/9 would be useful but again don't sweat on it, to be honest anything from 1895/6 right through to 1899/1900 would be useful if were going to write the reference book on it....

The 1930 FA Cup tie is a passing interest only consideration, was it at the Boleyn or at Highbury ? If you look the cup tie was on 1st March 1930, but there was also a home league game against Arsenal the very next week on 8th march to be aware of....

Take it easy Mushy there's no rush, we'll sort it eventually.
Ironworx
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Might Have Been.................

Postby Ironworx on Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:46 pm

Up the Junction wrote:Good idea. Obviously happy to host on KUMB.


I think it's the only way that it's going to get sorted UtJ, we could go on forever plugging gaps that open up because of conflicting accounts and killing off crap that arises from no really good source as things are...

This thread works doesn't it, we have made progress, I think we'll just keep plugging away as is and I'll make a start on writing everything up with the reference for it right next to it....

There's enough already for me to make a start, lets give it a go :thup:
Ironworx
 
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

Re: 1901/02 WHU Kit, It Might Have Been.................

Postby Pop Robson on Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:12 pm

Ironworx wrote:"Up the Junction"
This is what HK based their recent abomination on, IW?
It's a little ambiguous ... Mushy, given your research do you think by 'home strip' they're referring simply to the shirt - or the entire kit (eg red/vermillion/claret shirt, (cambridge) blue shorts and white socks)?

Yes UtJ, somebody, not Brian Belton, had sent that report to them but their source was a John Hellier article that said exactly the same thing to the word, so it's something that either Brian Belton or John Hellier got from the other, but we have no idea where it originally came from.


I posted this about a week ago, it came from a Jack Helliar Hammers Monthly which was out in around 82/83 for 9 issues

Hammers Monthy Vol 1 No 2: Helliar's Hammers History Part Two. By Jack Helliar Programme Editor WHUFC

"On March 10 1900, there were 10,000 fans at the Memorial Grounds for the visit of Sp*rs in a Southern League game. The 0-7 reverse eariler in the season was avenged in as much that he Works forced a goal-less draw, depsite Syd Kig breaking an ankle that kept him out of action until the October of the following season. Records of the period now disclose that the Iron Works colours were red, white and blue, with Cambridge blue shorts."

Hammers Monthy Vol 1 No 1: Helliar's Hammers History Part One. By Jack Helliar Programme Editor WHUFC, writing about the TIW early years,

"The club colours were apparently red,white and blue, although the exact composition is not recorded in any history that I have come across. This possibly was because the Works founder Arnold Hills - was obviously a great patriot and the works had intimate connections with the Royal Navy"
User avatar
Pop Robson
 
Posts: 13170
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 9:12 pm

PreviousNext

Return to KUMB Hall of Fame

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests