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

A selection of the very best posts and/or most memorable threads on KUMB since the current Forum launched in 2002.

Moderator: Gnome

Post Reply
User avatar
clawhammer
Posts: 7590
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 8:58 pm
Has liked: 1 like
Total likes: 20 likes

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

Post by clawhammer »

Speaking as the proud owner of one of Bobby O's Salmon shirts.....I would be quite relieved if it turned out to be pale blue with a claret band and I would be happy to shell out again as the quality is top notch. Dare I wear the pink one again without the historical justification? Could i bear the opprobrium from all of the scholars at the Millers if i turned up wearing an article of raiment with a historical correctness debate raging about it> Life is full of decisions. :think:
User avatar
Up the Junction
Thinks he owns the place
Posts: 70929
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 12:03 am
Has liked: 748 likes
Total likes: 3445 likes

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

Post by Up the Junction »

Ironworx wrote:No we don't know. Pink shirts were listed by Historical Kits and that is the only reason to think pink as it were, I have been in touch with Dave Moor of Historical Kits and all that emerged is that the evidence he had for blue was better than pink, although that much could probably have be taken as obvious given as he changed the listing from pink to blue.
Okay. I think we need to know where Mr Moor get his original information from though.

My view is that we seem to be placing a lot on the evidence of one newspaper report. There must be more out there than can prove this conclusively one way or the other.
User avatar
Ted Fenton
Posts: 4253
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2003 8:28 am
Location: Rural Sevilla & the quieter part of Costa del Sol, sunny Spain
Has liked: 1 like

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

Post by Ted Fenton »

clawhammer wrote:Speaking as the proud owner of one of Bobby O's Salmon shirts.....I would be quite relieved if it turned out to be pale blue with a claret band and I would be happy to shell out again as the quality is top notch.
I agree 100%.

I'll continue to wear my 'salmon' shirt and, as for historical accuracy, well there's always the possibility of alternate realities and the quantum theory/mechanics* extrapolations ..........


* and to quote Richard Feynman: "If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."
User avatar
Chavs
Posts: 10260
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 2:52 pm
Location: Nice one Brother, I said nice one Brother
Has liked: 1 like
Total likes: 762 likes

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

Post by Chavs »

Next person i see with a Salmon one on is getting a mug off from me :lol: 8-)
User avatar
clawhammer
Posts: 7590
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 8:58 pm
Has liked: 1 like
Total likes: 20 likes

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

Post by clawhammer »

I8CHAVS wrote:Next person i see with a Salmon one on is getting a mug off from me :lol: 8-)
Can I have a mug of Adnam's Broadside please?
User avatar
Ted Fenton
Posts: 4253
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2003 8:28 am
Location: Rural Sevilla & the quieter part of Costa del Sol, sunny Spain
Has liked: 1 like

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

Post by Ted Fenton »

I8CHAVS wrote:Next person i see with a Salmon one on is getting a mug off from me :lol: 8-)
Theakston's Old Peculier for me. Never seen it for sale here in Spain.
Ironworx
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

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

Post by Ironworx »

Up the Junction wrote: Okay. I think we need to know where Mr Moor get his original information from though.

My view is that we seem to be placing a lot on the evidence of one newspaper report. There must be more out there than can prove this conclusively one way or the other.
Righto UtJ, Ill get back in touch with Dave Moor with that specific question, I'll do it now.

It is not a case of just one newspaper report, it's a case of all the evidence I've been able to find including that newspaper report, against nothing whatever if you discount the original HK pink shirts listing.

I havn't been able to find anything to support pink, not one thing.
lopsidedbunny
Posts: 1014
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:00 pm

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

Post by lopsidedbunny »

So Bobby mugged everyone off to shift a load of pink shirts then?
:lol: Del Boy...
User avatar
cockney hammer
Resident badge expert
Posts: 108461
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 12:52 pm
Location: http://boleynbadges.com
Has liked: 1 like
Total likes: 143 likes
Contact:

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

Post by cockney hammer »

Image del boy orangeboom :wink:
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
Posts: 40710
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado
Has liked: 1904 likes
Total likes: 1612 likes

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

Post by Cuenca 'ammer »

Image


Bobby Orangeboom.....

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

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

Post by Bobby Orangeboom »

Up the Junction wrote:
Prior to this latest revelation there was no evidence that we played in a blue shirt during that period either. Where did Historical Kits get their original info from re:the pink shirts; do we know?
Of course we do UTJ contrary to what Grant might say & i posted it & Grant read it in the other Thread...

To cut a long story short, HK got the info from Spartacus ( Simkin who has said in as many words that he may have got the information wrong on the Salmon but didn't clarify, just changed all the information on teh Spartacus Site ), a Guy called Kevin Slade who no one can get hold of & he says below that John Hellier can confirm the Slamon, back in September 2007.

Read the below from the bottom up.

** PLEASE NOTE ** I notice that the original Email i sent to the bottom was a C&P from a message that i sent to John Simkin & i didn't change John's name to David ( HK ) but the message ( i still have the original ) was sent to HK even though it doesn't read that way..

From: David Moor [mailto:david.moor@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 6:31 PM
To: Bobby Orangeboom
Subject: Re: West Ham Shirt Question


Kevin is one of the hundreds of individuals who have contributed to the site.


On Jan 29, 2008 10:07 AM, Bobby Orangeboom<wesley@xxxx.com> wrote:

That's great, really appreciate you reply Dave.

If you don't mind me asking, who is Kevin Slade ??

Rgds
'
Bob




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Moor [mailto:david.moor@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 5:02 PM
To: Bobby Orangeboom
Subject: Re: West Ham Shirt Question


Bobby - thanks for getting in touch.

The evidence of tha Hammers turning out initially in salmon pink is based on the following submission from Kevin Slade:


Dear Sir,

West Ham's first colours from their formation in 1900, were all salmon pink. However, they started to wear claret & blue from 1903 onwards. Club historian John Helliar at West Ham will be able to confirm this fact.

Kind regards,

Kevin Slade.


I was checking the sources only yesterday and found a picture of the plain shirt now added for 1900 on the Spartacus site, something I'd previously missed. I must admit that the image is rather hard to interpret and could show the team wearing white change shirts.


On Jan 29, 2008 2:50 AM, Bobby Orangeboom <Bobby@xxxx.com> wrote:

Hi John,

I regulary post on KUMB & am a Fan of your Spartacus Site & regular viewer too..

I recently viewed the Historical Kits Website & saw a change in Shirt that was the first ever West Ham United Shirt, could you advise me at all as to how you got information with regards to the colouring of the Shirt ( it looks as if it's a Salmon or Pink Colour ) as i see quite a bit of conflicting information with regards to the colouring of it on different Websites ??

Thanks in advance for any information you can give me.

Regards

Mr Bobby Orangeboom



--
Regards

Dave http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
Bobby Orangeboom
Posts: 34465
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:10 pm
Location: London, unfortunately.

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

Post by Bobby Orangeboom »

Ironworx wrote:I'm sorry Bobby but the 1901/02 situation is now resolved enough for me.

1897, 1898, and 1899 Light (castle) blue shirts 100% definite. There are three contemporaneous reports that state the colours, and we know that it was Old Castle Swifts kit.

We also know that claret was the commercial colour of the Thames Ironworks, again more than one source for that. We know exactly where light blue and claret came from.

1900 we have no evidence for, other than a team photo which is in black and white so inconclusive.

1901/02 we have the contemporaneous report for, there is no reason that I'm aware of as to why anybody should want to falsify that, it is such a detailed report that its good enough for me when backed by the rest of the overall scenario, it even gives the team played against - Brentford.

1903 Ironworks Claret and Castle blue in the modern combination 100%, we have both match and team photos showing it.

The history is of blue, and I have to ask myself where is there room for pink fitting into that ? It would have needed to have appeared from no historical background lingered for a couple of seasons and disappeared again even more unexplainedly given that we also know that South West Ham FC were called 'Pink Uns'.

I've looked into this dispassionately wanting to establish what the colours actually were, and all I've found is evidence for blue.

I have to conclude that Historical Kits had it wrong - It's unfortunate but they did, it wouldn't have been intentional and I'm sure that they would have preferred otherwise.

I will continue trying to find contemporaneous evidence for the 1900/01 kit without the band, but there comes the point in drawing a complete blank with pink where I have to draw the line under 1902/03 kit with the band.
1 ) It might do for you but i find that strange given the fact that the rest of us are only reading what you have re quoted twice & not actually provided " conclusive proof " publically.. Again, can you show us this " Local Newspaper " article ?? If you have it or have access to it, surely it isn't too much to ask as it would nail down the Season's Kits that you are referrign to, once & for all & as conclusive as we can probably get, like i asked previously ??

2 ) As above

3 ) Excuse me but have you not just answered your own question adding a link, no matter how weak or strong IE The Pink Uns ??

4 ) In that case you're saying that Spartacus, Kevin Slade & then John Hellier had it wrong also yeah ??

5 ) WOW, remind me never to have you fighting my corner...

I still haven't seen ANY " conclusive proof " of what you are saying so far, only stuff which you & various other Websites, who have got things wrong big time previously as established, are writing..

I'm not saying we didn't wear the Blue, but what i ma saying is that since we allegedly wore Salmon & it was accepeted for the past 3/4 Years, there is nothing to confirm, other than a C&P of an alleged " local newspaper " that clarifies this. If you could show us the Newspaper cutting then it would be case closed Grant on that specific Season Shirt.. :thup:
Ironworx
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

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

Post by Ironworx »

'...When Brentford came to Canning Town for the opening home game of the 1901-02 season on 14th September, the home team took to the field wearing their new colours of light blue jerseys, with a red/claret band, and white knickers with a red stripe for the first time. The strip became known in the press as the “Union Jack”.

I have just checked the archive of Southern League Division One results for 1901/02 and West Ham did indeed play Brentford on 14th September, and it was the first home game of the season - I don't see any reason why this passage should be doubted.

http://www.westhamstats.info/westham.ph ... on_1901-02" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Ironworx
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

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

Post by Ironworx »

Bobby Orangeboom wrote:
1 ) It might do for you but i find that strange given the fact that the rest of us are only reading what you have re quoted twice & not actually provided " conclusive proof " publically.. Again, can you show us this " Local Newspaper " article ?? If you have it or have access to it, surely it isn't too much to ask as it would nail down the Season's Kits that you are referrign to, once & for all & as conclusive as we can probably get, like i asked previously ??

2 ) As above

3 ) Excuse me but have you not just answered your own question adding a link, no matter how weak or strong IE The Pink Uns ??

4 ) In that case you're saying that Spartacus, Kevin Slade & then John Hellier had it wrong also yeah ??

5 ) WOW, remind me never to have you fighting my corner...

I still haven't seen ANY " conclusive proof " of what you are saying so far, only stuff which you & various other Websites, who have got things wrong big time previously as established, are writing..

I'm not saying we didn't wear the Blue, but what i ma saying is that since we allegedly wore Salmon & it was accepeted for the past 3/4 Years, there is nothing to confirm, other than a C&P of an alleged " local newspaper " that clarifies this. If you could show us the Newspaper cutting then it would be case closed Grant on that specific Season Shirt.. :thup:
Bobby...

I have looked into this matter quite open mindedly and I would have reported any colour that I found evidence for, it doesn't matter to me what the colour was I have no preference, all I'm interested in is what the colour actually was....

To that end all I have found is blue, I havn't found pink anywhere, not the first mention of it....

The only reference to pink that I've found doesn't relate to WHU it relates to South West Ham FC...

There comes a point where finding no evidence of pink whatever, with blue cropping up right left and centre, and with no reason to doubt the specific 1901 blue quote which checks out as an actual game played on the date specified, I have to conclude blue not pink...

Especially when blue fits in with the 100% undisputable history commencing 1897 and also with a logical evolution of the kit 1897 through 1903, while pink doesn't...

How can I possibly conclude pink given those circumstances ? I don't have one reason to do so while having a weight of evidence to conclude blue.
User avatar
The Collector
Posts: 5799
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 11:59 am
Location: The Misty Isle
Has liked: 4 likes
Total likes: 12 likes

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

Post by The Collector »

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

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

Post by Bobby Orangeboom »

Ironworx wrote:'...When Brentford came to Canning Town for the opening home game of the 1901-02 season on 14th September, the home team took to the field wearing their new colours of light blue jerseys, with a red/claret band, and white knickers with a red stripe for the first time. The strip became known in the press as the “Union Jack”.

I have just checked the archive of Southern League Division One results for 1901/02 and West Ham did indeed play Brentford on 14th September, and it was the first home game of the season - I don't see any reason why this passage should be doubted.

http://www.westhamstats.info/westham.ph ... on_1901-02" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I understand that completely but you, like me & everyone else, are just reading something that is written on a Website & can not be substantially back up, that's all i'm saying... :thup:
User avatar
Bobby Orangeboom
Posts: 34465
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:10 pm
Location: London, unfortunately.

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

Post by Bobby Orangeboom »

Ironworx wrote:
Bobby...

I have looked into this matter quite open mindedly and I would have reported any colour that I found evidence for, it doesn't matter to me what the colour was I have no preference, all I'm interested in is what the colour actually was....

To that end all I have found is blue, I havn't found pink anywhere, not the first mention of it....

The only reference to pink that I've found doesn't relate to WHU it relates to South West Ham FC...

There comes a point where finding no evidence of pink whatever, with blue cropping up right left and centre, and with no reason to doubt the specific 1901 blue quote which checks out as an actual game played on the date specified, I have to conclude blue not pink...

Especially when blue fits in with the 100% undisputable history commencing 1897 and also with a logical evolution of the kit 1897 through 1903, while pink doesn't...

How can I possibly conclude pink given those circumstances ? I don't have one reason to do so while having a weight of evidence to conclude blue.
But we have though Grant haven't, we have..

We have found someone claiming that we wore Salmon from 1900 - 1903 on an email i received & i posted above from Mr Moor at HK, that same someone has even said that John Hellier backs up that claim & if it was good enough for HK to have on their Website for the best part of 4 Years, then to say that you have not even seen the first mention of it is nonsensical.

Why on Earth would Kevin Slade say that John Hellier can back up that claim when HK had those Kits on their Website for the best part of 4 Years & as far as everyone was concerned for that time, we wore Salmon Pink ??

Why would Mr Simkin at Sparatcus, a Man with a very decent reputation who provides us with a wealth of excellent information regulary, say the same ??

Beacause they honestly don't know ( that's not a criticism by the way ) ??

Could that be an option because it's looking that way to me ??

I haven't a clue why or how one could conclude Salmon Pink & i am not concluding it or saying that that was the Colour we wore during that period, i'm just saying that your side of this argument isn' anywhere near as clean cut & dried as you seem to think it is & seem to keep on arguing whilst all the while ignoring various points that i bring up, that's all.. :thup:

PS : I'll gladly buy you the Beverage of your choice if you so wish if i ever get back Home as i feel what we're doing here is a good thing for the Supporters of our beloved Club, but i'm not gonna get palmed off with " evidence " that i deem unsatisfactory.. :thup:
User avatar
upton girlie
Purveyor Of Half-Time Confectionery
Posts: 7644
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 8:02 pm
Location: "Reality is an illusion created by a lack of alcohol."
Has liked: 7 likes
Total likes: 65 likes

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

Post by upton girlie »

A baby blue shirt would suit me better though Bobby :wink:
User avatar
Romford
Big X
Posts: 39027
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 1:16 pm
Location: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYyxdmHogLU
Contact:

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

Post by Romford »

If anyone knows...its Jacks Son John.

I have still not seen one of these Salmon kits by the way...anyone got a pic ?
User avatar
Bobby Orangeboom
Posts: 34465
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:10 pm
Location: London, unfortunately.

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

Post by Bobby Orangeboom »

Romford wrote:If anyone knows...its Jacks Son John.

I have still not seen one of these Salmon kits by the way...anyone got a pic ?
I've got a special Picture for you, you just wait there one moment... :lol:
Post Reply