Help identifying the sliding player in this T212

[premiercardcollectors]

Hey all. I know the catcher is Billy Sullivan but does anyone know who the player sliding into home is?

Thanks

Geoff




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Beercan collector]

Be pretty impossible without seeing the front of the uniform,
Appears the runner has his cap on backwards but that doesn’t help.
Wild stab would be Pelty teammate Roger Bresnahan

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Beercan collector

Be pretty impossible without seeing the front of the uniform,
Appears the runner has his cap on backwards but that doesn’t help.
Wild stab would be Pelty teammate Roger Bresnahan

Actually I believe the runner is turning his head back towards the camera, you're seeing a 3/4 face shot deep in shadow, which is why the hat appears to be backwards.

[premiercardcollectors]

Just wasn’t sure if the 73 action photos in the set have been documented somewhere.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fred]

Someone should start a rumor that it's Joe Jackson. There'd be people looking everywhere for the card trying to pick it up on the cheap.

[premiercardcollectors]

Originally Posted by Fred

Someone should start a rumor that it's Joe Jackson. There'd be people looking everywhere for the card trying to pick it up on the cheap.

I just picked a nice one of these up to add to my Pelty collection and if it were Shoeless Joe then I guess I got a steal! lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RUKen]

Originally Posted by Beercan collector

Wild stab would be Pelty teammate Roger Bresnahan

Barney Pelty pitched for the St. Louis Browns. Roger Bresnahan played for and managed the St. Louis Cardinals.

[jbsports33]

The Library of Congress, New York and Boston Public libraries have extensive photo archives and have had luck in the past getting info. These days maybe harder to get access, I just know they are available in person or sometimes online – I just cannot remember the channels to go through. Just something to think about – great question and yes maybe hard to ever find out!

[Beercan collector]

Originally Posted by RUKen

Barney Pelty pitched for the St. Louis Browns. Roger Bresnahan played for and managed the St. Louis Cardinals.

Ouch .. never mind

[judsonhamlin]

Does look like a fleur-de-lis on the left arm of the uniform so probably a Browns player

[Mark17]

It's Cobb, and no, I am not joking. I am almost positive. I posted this awhile ago but it didn't get much traction:

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...=328942&page=3

Post 109 and a few subsequent. I won't be redundant and re-state my reasoning here, but I will add one thing:

In the T202 set, the backs are very descriptive of the action on the center panel, even when a player misses a pitch, is late with a tag or throw, or is out. Yet on this card, the player prominently displayed, who is being called out, is left unnamed. Why?

If you're making baseball cards to put in cigarette packages between 1909 and 1912, who is your most valuable subject? Wagner is off the table and near the end of his career. Clearly, your top draw is Cobb. That's why he has 4 cards in the 1909-1911 T206 set. Also consider, who is the one player especially prickly when it comes to any criticism of his play? Again, Cobb.

So, if you have a great action shot to use in your set, that's fine, but to make sure you can avoid the wrath, and possible objection to using his image in the future, don't publish a card declaring Ty Cobb is out at the plate.

You can say Chase looks awkward, you can have Wheat striking out, and you can strongly imply Bugs Raymond is often too drunk/hung over to pitch, but you don't want to say anything critical of Ty Cobb.

For comparison:

[premiercardcollectors]

Originally Posted by Mark17

It's Cobb, and no, I am not joking. I am almost positive. I posted this awhile ago but it didn't get much traction:

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...=328942&page=3

Post 109 and a few subsequent. I won't be redundant and re-state my reasoning here, but I will add one thing:

In the T202 set, the backs are very descriptive of the action on the center panel, even when a player misses a pitch, is late with a tag or throw, or is out. Yet on this card, the player prominently displayed, who is being called out, is left unnamed. Why?

If you're making baseball cards to put in cigarette packages between 1909 and 1912, who is your most valuable subject? Wagner is off the table and near the end of his career. Clearly, your top draw is Cobb. That's why he has 4 cards in the 1909-1911 T206 set. Also consider, who is the one player especially prickly when it comes to any criticism of his play? Again, Cobb.

So, if you have a great action shot to use in your set, that's fine, but to make sure you can avoid the wrath, and possible objection to using his image in the future, don't publish a card declaring Ty Cobb is out at the plate.

You can say Chase looks awkward, you can have Wheat striking out, and you can strongly imply Bugs Raymond is often too drunk/hung over to pitch, but you don't want to say anything critical of Ty Cobb.

For comparison:

Thank you for the reply. Great information!

Best

G


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RUKen]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Actually I believe the runner is turning his head back towards the camera, you're seeing a 3/4 face shot deep in shadow, which is why the hat appears to be backwards.

Originally Posted by Mark17

It's Cobb, and no, I am not joking. I am almost positive. I posted this awhile ago but it didn't get much traction:

Take a good look at the guy sliding home on this T202. The position of his body, the size and shape of his back, the haircut, the belt loops, the pinstripes on the cap...... It's Ty Cobb. Compare to the attached known image of Cobb. It's the same guy, and someday, a documented image from that T202 card, either on a vintage photo, or in a newspaper or book, will confirm it. My guess as to why Cobb isn't identified on the back of the T202 is that he was out on the play, and Ty wouldn't have been happy with that citation.

In the T202 set, the backs are very descriptive of the action on the center panel, even when a player misses a pitch, is late with a tag or throw, or is out. Yet on this card, the player prominently displayed, who is being called out, is left unnamed. Why?

If you're making baseball cards to put in cigarette packages between 1909 and 1912, who is your most valuable subject? Wagner is off the table and near the end of his career. Clearly, your top draw is Cobb. That's why he has 4 cards in the 1909-1911 T206 set. Also consider, who is the one player especially prickly when it comes to any criticism of his play? Again, Cobb.

So, if you have a great action shot to use in your set, that's fine, but to make sure you can avoid the wrath, and possible objection to using his image in the future, don't publish a card declaring Ty Cobb is out at the plate.

You can say Chase looks awkward, you can have Wheat striking out, and you can strongly imply Bugs Raymond is often too drunk/hung over to pitch, but you don't want to say anything critical of Ty Cobb.

I disagree with Aquarian Sports Cards that the sliding player is looking back at the camera. When the image is enlarged (see below), it appears that he is facing the direction that he is going, and his right hand is covering his right ear, as if he had just been tagged hard right there. What appears to be the bill of his cap is just his hair on the back of his head. There would be a team logo above the bill, if the player were looking back.

I also disagree with Mark17 that the sliding player must be Cobb. Nearly all men at that time had short haircuts, which would have looked the same from the back. I think that MLB teams received their uniforms from the same source, so the belt loop distribution would be similar on every uniform. As for the size and shape of his back, an athletic build was hardly unique to Cobb. It could be Cobb, but without seeing his face clearly, he cannot be identified with any confidence. (See post #16 below, in which I explain why it actually cannot be Cobb.)

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by judsonhamlin

Does look like a fleur-de-lis on the left arm of the uniform so probably a Browns player

Agreed. If not a fleur-de-lis then it looks like at least some other logo on the left sleeve, and only a couple of teams had a logo there during the 1907-1911 era when this photo was likely taken. Also seems he was wearing a striped cap, and those were donned by the Browns also.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by RUKen

I disagree with Aquarian Sports Cards that the sliding player is looking back at the camera. When the image is enlarged (see below), it appears that he is facing the direction that he is going, and his right hand is covering his right ear, as if he had just been tagged hard right there. What appears to be the bill of his cap is just his hair on the back of his head. There would be a team logo above the bill, if the player were looking back.

I also disagree with Mark17 that the sliding player must be Cobb. Nearly all men at that time had short haircuts, which would have looked the same from the back. I think that MLB teams received their uniforms from the same source, so the belt loop distribution would be similar on every uniform. As for the size and shape of his back, an athletic build was hardly unique to Cobb. It could be Cobb, but without seeing his face clearly, he cannot be identified with any confidence.

I like your blown up image, in fact I think it shows that you are correct he is facing away from the camera, but it also shows that his cap is on forward! You can see, on his left side, the edge of the bill of the cap just past what I'm guessing is the top of his left ear. What originally looked like the bill is just his hair in the back.

[RUKen]

Originally Posted by RUKen

I disagree with Aquarian Sports Cards that the sliding player is looking back at the camera. When the image is enlarged (see below), it appears that he is facing the direction that he is going, and his right hand is covering his right ear, as if he had just been tagged hard right there. What appears to be the bill of his cap is just his hair on the back of his head. There would be a team logo above the bill, if the player were looking back.

I also disagree with Mark17 that the sliding player must be Cobb. Nearly all men at that time had short haircuts, which would have looked the same from the back. I think that MLB teams received their uniforms from the same source, so the belt loop distribution would be similar on every uniform. As for the size and shape of his back, an athletic build was hardly unique to Cobb. It could be Cobb, but without seeing his face clearly, he cannot be identified with any confidence.

Now that I've looked at it again, I can state with confidence that it cannot be Cobb. Billy Sullivan is wearing a home uniform. (The White Sox road uniforms were dark blue.) Thus the sliding player must be in a road uniform. The Tigers had dark caps with their gray road uniforms from 1907 forward, and in Cobb's first two seasons (1905 and 1906), the road uniforms were dark blue. The only two American League teams whose light-colored road uniforms had light-colored caps with dark piping in the years 1907 through 1912 were St. Louis (1907 and 1910-1912) and Washington (1910 and 1911 only).

[G1911]

Yahoo AI told me it’s Jimmie Foxx, not Cobb.

[premiercardcollectors]

Originally Posted by G1911

Yahoo AI told me it’s Jimmie Foxx, not Cobb.

Jimmie would have been 4 or 5 years old LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[premiercardcollectors]

There is also a question whether these Action photos were staged or if they were actual game photos.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[G1911]

Originally Posted by premiercardcollectors

Jimmie would have been 4 or 5 years old LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tis a joke about a recent thread where a poster comically argued that a card pictured Jimmie Foxx that obviously did not, and got a third-rate AI to make up a story about Foxx being in the right place to force it to align. People like to assign a superstar to every picture - this is probably a Browns player with the arm patch and uniform and not Cobb or some other superstar huge name whose uniform doesn't line up, as RUKen did a great job of explaining.