Posted By:
Addie_JossI think the intention is clear that the card is meant to depict Dad Clarkson due to the team featured. So I would also then say that this is a Dad Clarkson card and not a John Clarkson card, even if John Clarkson is pictured, which I don't think is the case.
Is this the general concensus amongst the board? That this thread may have paved the way for a re-cataloguing of the card? I don't see how anyone can say that this is still a John Clarkson card when it seems to me that the card is clearly meant to depict Dad Clarkson and is therefore a Dad Clarkson card regardless of whether or not the image MAY be John.
right?
Edited to add: That's true that he was traded but the set may have been fully run at the time. I'm curious as to when Brouthers was traded in relation to the date Dad Clarkson was.
Edited to add: Also, I still think the Brouthers cards make it evident that the cards were indeed produced during the 1895 season which would mean that there is no way possible that the card is meant to depict John Clarkson.