Resource List thread - Inaccuracy in official records

[rbartlett]

So remain discrepancies with the 1930 year are:
Ralph Empey 8 games (AR) vs 6 (AFL Tables)
Maurie Hunter 18 games (AR) vs 19 (AFL Tables)
Carl Watson 13 games (AR) vs 14 (AFL Tables).
Not sure if they are all connected somehow, or whether the AR has just got their details wrong.

But lets look at Carl Watson. AFL Tables say he played an extra game.

Now looking at Rd 10 LINEUP vs Melbourne in The Age, it says Watson will be out of the team.



Here's the preview lineup in the Age the night before with Watson said to miss.
http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article202465791

In The Herald preview it says that same thing. That Watson and Weidner and O'Halloran will be out
http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article242803766

Watson's next game according to AFL Tables is ROUND 12 vs Hawthorn. (and it doesnt look like he played Rd 11 which is correct)
And The Herald for that Rd 12 match preview says that Watson is coming back into the team (which indicates he missed the previous match/es



So did Watson not play in Rd 10 1930. And if not, who took his place (perhaps as 19th man). And did it have something to do with the other discrepancies at the start of this post?

Extra observation: Those article indicate that Oakley will come into the team. But he's already played the Round before (which is Round 9).
Even more peculiarly, the match reports of Round 9 say he kicked a goal, while AFLTables says he didnt. The dispute there is Foster is credited with 2 goals, and Oakley with none on AFLTables, where match reports says Oakley kicked 1 and Foster kicked 1. But that may be something to look at once these game disputes are investigated.

 

[35Daicos]

Thoughts?

1930 Richmond AR vd AFLTables have a few discrepancies
I wont post all atm, I'll post the first one.

AR says Cusack of Richmond played 3 games in 1930. AFL Tables say he played 2
AR says Dunne of Richmond played 5 games in 1930. AFL Tables say he played 6.

I wonder if Rd 18 1930 Richmond v StKilda has a discrepancy.
Sporting Globe has Cusack as 19th Man. I can't see Dunne in the lineup. http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article182995927View attachment 947714

In The Herald, day before the match, that put Cusack or Judkins as emergency. Cant see Dunne in the lineup
View attachment 947715

In The Herald REVIEW of the match, they have Cusack as 19th man. No reference to Dunne
View attachment 947716

The next game for Richmond after Round 18 was the SF against Collingwood some 14 days later.
The Herald notes that Oakley and Watson are omitted (they both played in the Rd 18 match on AFLTables), and in are Dunne and Judkins (which would indicate neither men played the previous game which is Rd 18, and we know Judkins didnt) http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article242758384
View attachment 947721

Dunne doesn't get a mention in the Reserves' details in two Monday papers, but this (in The Herald) suggests he may not have been fit to play:


In The Age on the Friday:

 

[rbartlett]

Dunne doesn't get a mention in the Reserves' details in two Monday papers, but this (in The Herald) suggests he may not have been fit to play:
View attachment 947788

In The Age on the Friday:
View attachment 947793

But Oakley played the Round before according to AFLTables so he couldn't be an "in" for this round , right?

 

[35Daicos]

But Oakley played the Round before according to AFLTables so he couldn't be an "in" for this round , right?

I think that comes down to Oakley being 19th man the week before. It looks like he was named on the field for the Rd. 18 game, so they considered him an 'in' that week! This is in The Herald following the Rd. 17 game:

 

[rbartlett]

I think that comes down to Oakley being 19th man the week before. It looks like he was named on the field for the Rd. 18 game, so they considered him an 'in' that week! This is in The Herald following the Rd. 17 game:
View attachment 947806

Yep, That is logical, as back then they didnt consider them as having 'played' on the field.
So atm, for Rd 18 we are considering Dunne out and ... does it look like to you that Cusack is a possibility. Or am I trying to make the research fit the narrative of the Cusack/Dunne discrepancy

 

[35Daicos]

Yep, That is logical, as back then they didnt consider them as having 'played' on the field.
So atm, for Rd 18 we are considering Dunne out and ... does it look like to you that Cusack is a possibility. Or am I trying to make the research fit the narrative of the Cusack/Dunne discrepancy

It has to be extremely likely that Cusack was in the team, in place of Dunne, especially as the two Saturday night papers had him as 19th man.

This was in The Age on the Friday as well:

Removing Dunne does seem a pretty safe move.

 

[35Daicos]

So remain discrepancies with the 1930 year are:
Ralph Empey 8 games (AR) vs 6 (AFL Tables)
Maurie Hunter 18 games (AR) vs 19 (AFL Tables)
Carl Watson 13 games (AR) vs 14 (AFL Tables).
Not sure if they are all connected somehow, or whether the AR has just got their details wrong.

But lets look at Carl Watson. AFL Tables say he played an extra game.

Now looking at Rd 10 LINEUP vs Melbourne in The Age, it says Watson will be out of the team.
View attachment 947782


Here's the preview lineup in the Age the night before with Watson said to miss.
http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article202465791View attachment 947739

In The Herald preview it says that same thing. That Watson and Weidner and O'Halloran will be out
http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article242803766View attachment 947746

Watson's next game according to AFL Tables is ROUND 12 vs Hawthorn. (and it doesnt look like he played Rd 11 which is correct)
And The Herald for that Rd 12 match preview says that Watson is coming back into the team (which indicates he missed the previous match/es
View attachment 947791


So did Watson not play in Rd 10 1930. And if not, who took his place (perhaps as 19th man). And did it have something to do with the other discrepancies at the start of this post?

Extra observation: Those article indicate that Oakley will come into the team. But he's already played the Round before (which is Round 9).
Even more peculiarly, the match reports of Round 9 say he kicked a goal, while AFLTables says he didnt. The dispute there is Foster is credited with 2 goals, and Oakley with none on AFLTables, where match reports says Oakley kicked 1 and Foster kicked 1. But that may be something to look at once these game disputes are investigated.

For the Rd. 10 game the Sporting Globe and The Herald didn't name Richmond's 19th man in their Saturday night papers. With Martin, Harris and Empey named as emergencies by The Age the day before it's likely to have been one of them who was 19th man (taking Watson's place). The Age and The Argus on the Monday only give the final score for the Richmond Seconds game, no other details. That makes it even more difficult!

The Age says this the following Friday (Rd. 11 game):

I think that just might mean Martin was the 19th man the week before, but very hard to be sure. Richmond kept the 18 intact for the Rd. 11 game, but Empey was 19th man.

Also in The Age:


Yet this (in The Herald - Rd. 10) perhaps suggests that either Harris or Empey would miss the Seconds game, presumably because they would make the senior side (Martin is named as well)!:


Very tricky one! Watson has to go out from the Rd. 10 game, but the identity of the 19th man still needs to be found.

 

[rbartlett]

So looking through all Herald and Sporting Globe evening papers for 1930 I cant really see any other discrepancy.

Atm we believe Cusack should replace Dunne in Rd 18 (as per earlier posts)
And, looks like Watson is out of Rd 10 side, but inclusion is not entirely sure...perhaps Empey or Harris or Martin. (if we go by the AR vs AFLTable dispute then it would most likely be Empey)

Looking at the REMAINING AR/AFLTable discrepancy that would leaves (if we assume Empey replayed Watson in Rd10), 1 game where Empey plays but AFLTables dont recognise him, and one game where Hunter is recorded as playing in AFLTables, but actually didnt.
The closest I got to those two was perhaps Rd 15, where 19th Man wasnt really documented, but in one newspaper it lists Hunter as one of the best players. So I might just have to assume that some of the AR vs AFLTables discrepancies are legitimate, and the remaining are not.

 

[ThePope]

Henry Merritt, 3 games for St Kilda in 1911, has become Henry Merrett on Wikipedia, according to User:Lindsay658 (don't think he's active here). WhiteHartLane23 had previously added the middle name of Frederick, so I wonder how he missed the spelling change. Anyone have any idea or looked into this before? Maybe born Merritt, changed to Merrett later?

 

[GreyCrow]

Henry Merritt, 3 games for St Kilda in 1911, has become Henry Merrett on Wikipedia, according to User:Lindsay658 (don't think he's active here). WhiteHartLane23 had previously added the middle name of Frederick, so I wonder how he missed the spelling change. Anyone have any idea or looked into this before? Maybe born Merritt, changed to Merrett later?

Possibly due to this

Marriage

MERRETT Hy Fredk
Marriage
WILLIAMS, Eva Ruby

1907
7267/1907

Death


MERRETT Henry Frederick

<Unknown Family Name>, Polly UNKNOWN <Unknown Family Name>, MERRETT Thomas
WARRNAMBOOL LYSTERFIELD
<Unknown Family Name>
68
1954
16563/1954

Which matches the birth parents


MERRITT Henry Frederick
Birth
<Unknown Family Name>, Hannah POLLY <Unknown Family Name>, Thomas
ALLA

1886
15181/1886

* I assume ALLA could be any of these

​

Alla	Allambee
Alla	Allans Flat
Alla	Allansford
Alla	Allandale

But checking Allansford is now in the City of Warnambool - which ties in with death record


Edit : haha even the Dandenong Journal in the one paragraph misspells it

A CONSTABLE'S CHASE - THREE MEN COMMITTED. - The Dandenong Journal (Vic. : 1927 - 1954) - 11 Apr 1929

At the Dandenong Court on Monday, before Messrs. McLennan (chairman), Singleton, Barr, and Mrs. Cadle, J’s.P., George Dunkley, 24 years of ...

nla.gov.au

Senior-constable Haygarth with steal-
ing seven horses, the property of
Henry Frederick Merritt, Francis G.
Fordham, Robert Stewart, Joseph
Finn, Raymond Dobson, and Thomas
MoDougall, at Dandenong on 31st
March.
Inspector Hevey prosecuted, accused
being undefended.
Fix this textHenry Frederick Merrett, farmer,

 

[RedmanWasHere]

I wonder if he becomes part of the Merrett madness.

 

[GreyCrow]

Obit

Sudden Death Of Mr. Ted Merrett - The Dandenong Journal (Vic. : 1927 - 1954) - 17 Feb 1954

Last Saturday afternoon while out ferreting at Lyndhurst, Mr. Henry Frederick (Ted) Merrett, of 26 Pickett ...

nla.gov.au

Does not mention St Kilda but does mention 17 years of service for Dandenong FC

 

[GreyCrow]

May have to revisit this one

Ted Merret Dandenong FC looks to have been playing fpor Dandy in the same year as allegedly St Kilda

Strike 1

Strike 2

This article says he is from Warburton http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article11601490



Strike 3

This names one of the striking St Kilda players as C Merrett

FOOTBALLERS' STRIKE. - ST. KILDA SECESSION. 18 PLAYERS WITHDRAW. - The Argus (Melbourne, Vic. : 1848 - 1957) - 26 Jul 1911

The difficulty which has arisen between the committee and the players of the St. Kilda Footbal Club reached a climax yesterday evening, when 18 of the players ...

nla.gov.au

 

[35Daicos]

The records have the wrong DOD for former Collingwood and Hawthorn player Clem Splatt:

Wikipedia has 11 August 1963:

On Collingwood Forever and AustralianFootball.com it's 11 August 1962.

18 May 1963 should be the correct date, as it coincides with when the Richmond vs. Carlton game mentioned here was played:



Either they made a mistake with the date here, or (more likely) someone scrubbed/pulled the "1" off!!:

 

[Oliver G]

The records have the wrong DOD for former Collingwood and Hawthorn player Clem Splatt:

Wikipedia has 11 August 1963:
View attachment 982942
On Collingwood Forever and AustralianFootball.com it's 11 August 1962.

18 May 1963 should be the correct date, as it coincides with when the Richmond vs. Carlton game mentioned here was played:
View attachment 982913
View attachment 982911

Either they made a mistake with the date here, or (more likely) someone scrubbed the "1" off!!:
View attachment 982979

View attachment 983004

Thanks for that, AF has been updated.

 

[rbartlett]

Came across some footage in my archive that showed Robert Walls and Kevin Bartlett tossing the coin for the 1975 Semi Final Rich v Carl Sept 13

AFL Tables - Carlton v Richmond - Sat, 13-Sep-1975 2:30 PM - Match Stats

afltables.com

Looking on Blueseum, that say that Walls was acting capt that day. https://www.blueseum.org/Semi+Final,+1975
Royce Hart played this day, and was appointed captain in 1975, so I'm surprised that Bartlett was acting capt this day particularly if Hart played.
I know Hart had many injuries during this season, so perhaps he was only going to be on the bench and because they couldnt guarantee him playing a large part of the game (he did only have 4 disposals) , they made acting captain to the vice captain Bartlett.

So I'm looking for any article that indicates Bartlett was acting captain this day, on top of the footage I discovered.
I had Hart as captain this day, but am leaning towards giving that to Bartlett https://tigerlandarchive.org/tiki-index.php?page=Senior+Captains

 

[35Daicos]

Came across some footage in my archive that showed Robert Walls and Kevin Bartlett tossing the coin for the 1975 Semi Final Rich v Carl Sept 13

AFL Tables - Carlton v Richmond - Sat, 13-Sep-1975 2:30 PM - Match Stats

afltables.com

Looking on Blueseum, that say that Walls was acting capt that day. https://www.blueseum.org/Semi+Final,+1975
Royce Hart played this day, and was appointed captain in 1975, so I'm surprised that Bartlett was acting capt this day particularly if Hart played.
I know Hart had many injuries during this season, so perhaps he was only going to be on the bench and because they couldnt guarantee him playing a large part of the game (he did only have 4 disposals) , they made acting captain to the vice captain Bartlett.

So I'm looking for any article that indicates Bartlett was acting captain this day, on top of the footage I discovered.
I had Hart as captain this day, but am leaning towards giving that to Bartlett https://tigerlandarchive.org/tiki-index.php?page=Senior+Captains

This is in the Canberra Times on the day of the match:


First Semi-Final Football Record:


The match report in The Age says Hart only came on at the 18 minute mark of the last quarter: https://news.google.com.au/newspapers?nid=MDQ-9Oe3GGUC&dat=19750915&printsec=frontpage&hl=en (page 13/13)


Preliminary Final Football Record:


Newspapers.com doesn't seem to have The Age from September 1975! On Google News Archive The Age is missing on the Friday, Saturday and Sunday. I can't see the term acting captain used at all regarding this game (for Richmond).

 

[rbartlett]

Thank you.
That plays into why Bartlett was tossing the coin.
Royce was injured, brought in as 19th man, but didnt come on until right at end of last quarter.
You would think if he was captain of the day, he would have tossed the coin (as there was no other special reason for Bartlett to toss the coin, ie: milestone game)

 

[35Daicos]

Thank you.
That plays into why Bartlett was tossing the coin.
Royce was injured, brought in as 19th man, but didnt come on until right at end of last quarter.
You would think if he was captain of the day, he would have tossed the coin (as there was no other special reason for Bartlett to toss the coin, ie: milestone game)

So what happened the following week? It looks like Hart was going to start on the bench again (I see he only had 5 disposals), so did KB toss the coin?

From The Age: https://news.google.com.au/newspapers?nid=MDQ-9Oe3GGUC&dat=19750922&printsec=frontpage&hl=en (page 14/14)

 

[rbartlett]

So what happened the following week? It looks like Hart was going to start on the bench again (I see he only had 5 disposals), so did KB toss the coin again?

I dont have any footage of that. And cant see any on YouTube.
I do have him tossing the coin in the EF (which Royce didnt play in), the SF (which Royce played in), but not sure about PF v Nth

The Age for the PF says
"Richmond's secret weapon on the bench was captain Royce Hart.."
and it looks like he came on in the 3rd quarter.
I dont have evidence that suggests he wasn't captain that day.

As a side note I have noticed that in 1980 a newspaper cutting I have said Richmond had 4 captains from Rd 22 - GF.
So the SF of 1980, even though Monteath played, Raines is apparently captain and tosses the coin.
I only type that to show that Richmond had an acting captain even though the captain was there on the bench a few years later.

 

[35Daicos]

It looks pretty clear that there's an error in the official records with Melbourne's 1908 Rd. 17 lineup:
https://afltables.com/afl/stats/games/1908/041119080815.html || https://australianfootball.com/game/view/813

Jack Gardiner came into the side at the last minute, replacing Parke, who was set to play. However Jim Conquest is named in the official lineups (Parke isn't), and it seems he's the player who'll "lose" a game.
The Herald: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/242930958/26369430

Gardiner gets a few mentions in the match report.
The Herald didn't have him in the squad the day before the game, so they weren't expecting him. They didn't have Conquest either.


The Age: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/197350795


The Argus: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/10180988


Same in The Australasian: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/139205310/11426938


No doubt about Gardiner playing, and Conquest (who hadn't been in the side since Rd. 11 and I haven't seen mentioned anywhere) does seem to be the odd man out.

Supermercado

 

[35Daicos]

rbartlett

Joe Harrison is named in the Richmond side for the 1924 Rd. 16 game vs. Melbourne but it seems he was a late withdrawal.
https://afltables.com/afl/stats/games/1924/111419240823.html || https://australianfootball.com/game/view/2075

Second Quarter Rush Made Tigers Safe - They Added 41 Points to Melbourne's 9 - Sporting Globe (Melbourne, Vic. : 1922 - 1954) - 23 Aug 1924

[?] who are fighting [?] ately for fourth position on the [?] played their [?] game with Melbourne on the [?] ground ...

trove.nla.gov.au

Gale and B. Smith are named in the official lineup, but Vic Thorp isn't, and he looks to be the player who has incorrectly been deprived of a game. He gets several mentions in the match report.

The Herald names Thorp and leaves out Harrison: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/243882128


The Age: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/203668998


Here's The Age for the next week's game:


Same with Sporting Globe:


The Argus has Harrison returning a week later as well:


Looks very clear; Thorp played Rd. 16 and Harrison didn't. Thorp was meant to be in the side the week before and the week following this game, so seems a bit odd that he got "left out" here!

 

[rbartlett]

Footy Record Rd 17 1924 says "Gale, Bourke, and G Hislop, are replaced in Richmond's team by Harrison, Millar, Valentine" which correlate to your research

And on page 13+21 it says "Thorp played well at full back" which shows he played the Rd 16 game.

From memory, Thorp's career tally has jumped around the last decade. I think it's been 262, 263, 264 at one point.

Annual Report
Richmond's 1924 Annual Report lists each player game tally for the season, but part of the copy I have has the last few lines cut off so I cant see Thorp's games tally for the season.
However, Harrison's game tally according to Annual Report is 7. AFLTables has him as 8 games, but by removing him from this Round 16 match that brings him into line with the 7

 

[35Daicos]

Here are the key parts from an email I received recently from the AFL's Col Hutchinson:

Jeff McGee, when appearing on ‘Coodabeen Champions’ sessions on ABC radio, has mentioned in passing that he has been deprived of a career goal in the various sources of player information. As he claims, eight goals looks better than seven in a brief career.
Stephen Rodgers has kindly conducted research as described below.
The match examined was played in Round Nine, 1967.
The evidence strongly supports Torch’s claim.
=====================================================================================
In relation to the South Melbourne 1967 goalkicking amendment, I managed to make it in to the Library this afternoon.

However, the fact that Torch clearly remembers kicking the 2 goals, and the decisive weight of all the reports collectively, should make it safe, you'd think, to amend the goalkickers for Round 9, 1967 to:

J. McGee 2
H. McAuliffe 1
=====================================================================================
Oliver Gigacz
*Paul*

Australian Football - Match Details: 1967 R9 Melbourne vs South Melbourne
AFL Tables - Melbourne v South Melbourne - Mon, 12-Jun-1967 2:20 PM - Match Stats

 

[Gibbsy]

Here are the key parts from an email I received recently from the AFL's Col Hutchinson:

Jeff McGee, when appearing on ‘Coodabeen Champions’ sessions on ABC radio, has mentioned in passing that he has been deprived of a career goal in the various sources of player information. As he claims, eight goals looks better than seven in a brief career.
Stephen Rodgers has kindly conducted research as described below.
The match examined was played in Round Nine, 1967.
The evidence strongly supports Torch’s claim.
=====================================================================================
In relation to the South Melbourne 1967 goalkicking amendment, I managed to make it in to the Library this afternoon.

However, the fact that Torch clearly remembers kicking the 2 goals, and the decisive weight of all the reports collectively, should make it safe, you'd think, to amend the goalkickers for Round 9, 1967 to:

J. McGee 2
H. McAuliffe 1
=====================================================================================
Oliver Gigacz
*Paul*

Australian Football - Match Details: 1967 R9 Melbourne vs South Melbourne
AFL Tables - Melbourne v South Melbourne - Mon, 12-Jun-1967 2:20 PM - Match Stats

Am I missing something here? Is there actually anything more to it or are we just going off Torch’s word? It surely sets a dangerous precedent if the AFL is happy to amend records based off people’s recollections from events more than 50 years ago