Quick question about 1950's issues

[novakjr]

The Colavito photo is the same one they used for the action part of his '60 Topps Card. I'd also suspect that the main photo for that card was from the same shoot. You might be able to get a closer look at the stadium from that card.. The same main photo was also used on the '59 Topps if you want a little larger look..

[Volod]

Originally Posted by novakjr

The Colavito photo is the same one they used for the action part of his '60 Topps Card. I'd also suspect that the main photo for that card was from the same shoot. You might be able to get a closer look at the stadium from that card.. The same main photo was also used on the '59 Topps if you want a little larger look..

Thanks for the info and suggestions, guys, but both of those Topps cards show even less detail than the Bazooka.
I'm certain it can't be Cleveland Muni (old shot attached): no facade, dugout trim paint doesn't match. It still looks like the old facade at Yankee Stadium to me, even if it appears to be hanging low. Wasn't the facade at different positions over the years? I know it hung from the edge of the roof, but seems like I recall it being more prominent back in the 1950's than it was after the renovation in the '70's. And, even if it was some other park, it still would leave the mystery of the home uni.

The only All-Star game appearance for Rocky in an American League park was the 1959 game in the L.A. Colliseum, and of course, that was a huge football stadium with no pillars or facades of any type. So, as near as I can figure, that was the only other place outside of Cleveland where he could have worn the home uni.

[theseeker]

It is the old Yankee Stadium, obviously long before the extensive '76 renovation. It was the only ballpark, at the time, to have three levels. Dodger Stadium came along soon after. Cleveland Municipal had the single drab, over-sized upper level. It had a capacity of over 70,000, which really called attention to all the sparse crowds during the '70's, my childhood era.

[theseeker]

Opppps, there is no mystery. Just looked up the Indian's uniform history and that is indeed a road uniform. It does look grey. The Indians must have departed from tradition long before other teams and dropped the common practice of using the city name on the fronts of their road uniforms in the late '50's.

[Volod]

Originally Posted by theseeker

Opppps, there is no mystery. Just looked up the Indian's uniform history and that is indeed a road uniform. It does look grey. The Indians must have departed from tradition long before other teams and dropped the common practice of using the city name on the fronts of their road uniforms in the late '50's.

Whoa, you're right. I just realized the Indians had always worn Cleveland road uni's until the '58 season. Other teams that went with the same design for home and road before that year were the A's and Senators. That ties in with the general theme of franchise portability, I think. If the name of the city is abruptly of no importance, the team is ready to be moved, as far as ownership is concerned. It's easy to forget how close the Cleveland team was to being relocated, from the late '50's well into the early '80's. Trying to think what teams currently do not have their city name on road uni's...candidates for removal?