Remove this Banner Ad

Resource List thread - Inaccuracy in official records

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Hmmmm AFLTables says Ian Stewart (Stk/Rich) was born 14 July 1943.
His wiki box says he was born - 14 July 1943- in Queenstown, Tasmania, yet the opening sentence of his wiki says 30 July 1943
 
This is a very peculiar question - so bear with me.
Long story short: I'm trying to decide whether to place Gordon Webber M.L.A onto my 'Richmond War List'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Webber_(politician)

At the 1913 AGM he seconded the club's financial report, as well as making a short speech. http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article254612609
But, for the life of me I cant see him as an actual official of the club. The 1913 AR doesn't list him at all as a committee member/ vice president etc.
He was President of the state executive of the Labor by this stage (and the club's president was Labor identify Frank Tudor).
So my question is... at AGM's can anyone present 'second' a motion. Or does it have to be an actual committee-member of the club.
 
rbartlett said:
This is a very peculiar question - so bear with me.
Long story short: I'm trying to decide whether to place Gordon Webber M.L.A onto my 'Richmond War List'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Webber_(politician)

At the 1913 AGM he seconded the club's financial report, as well as making a short speech. http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article254612609
But, for the life of me I cant see him as an actual official of the club. The 1913 AR doesn't list him at all as a committee member/ vice president etc.
He was President of the state executive of the Labor by this stage (and the club's president was Labor identify Frank Tudor).
So my question is... at AGM's can anyone present 'second' a motion. Or does it have to be an actual committee-member of the club.
Click to expand...
Only if they are a member


now this is amateur league club background but I am sure it is the same , and would have been in 1913
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

GreyCrow said:
Only if they are a member


now this is amateur league club background but I am sure it is the same , and would have been in 1913
Click to expand...

That solves it. Cause he is listed in the Members Roll for that season. So obviously, using his standing in the political arena, and being friends of the Pres, he's done a short speech then seconded. Cheers. I think in that case I'll leave him off the list cause he isn't actual working at the club
 
rbartlett said:
Rodgers update:
"He is, simply, H.Stokesbury in the original R.H.Campbell 1915 Richmond sheet.
Also, on the half back flank, in the Richmond typed teams, for that match.
As we know, not in the Footy Record both for that game, and the week after's, not even bothered to include, on the full Richmond list.
That's it!! - in terms of what's in here. "

"You ask us, where we got the Hamilton from. I can only imagine, it was from Paul (Hogan, who authored Tigers of Old), because that was what he called him. Paul, I'm pretty sure, did his 1996 book (and his years of research, in the lead-up to it), completely independent of AFL records - that's what I've always believed."

Rhett's comment:
Well looking at Paul's book entry he has "He was the son of long-time club trainer, Joe Stokesbury".
So he may be right in that description, but simply researched the wrong person because of the surname spelling (which was often misspelt in newspaper and club records)
Click to expand...

The more I look at this the more it makes more sense, AND its more logical that the H Stokesbury for Richmond is William Henry Stokesberry right?
I mean, he is the offspring of Richmond trainer Joe Stokesberry (who is often spelt wrong as Stokesbury).

There's no reference to Hamilton Stokesbury at all in the newspaper at this time. But there is for Joe's offspring - Harry.
So when the paper makes a passing reference that Stokesbury played the 1 game, it surely is Joe's offspring from 2 years earlier.
There's no evidence anywhere that it is a player called Hamilton.
Paul Hogan's book at the back makes no reference to receiving an letters/oral testimony from the family. So he has quite rightly identified the player as Joe's son - but because he has been misled by the paper at the time showing the spelling of Stokesbury - he's come across 'Hamilton'. But Hamilton's father isn't Joe. If Hogan had been given the correct spelling he would have come up with William Henry.

I'm thinking of going back to the Rodgers to reiterate that percentage wise its more logical its William Stokesberry, than Hamilton Stokesbury. And of course the Wiki has his full name as Albert Hamilton Stokesbury cause the AFL would have been searching for a full name of 'Hamilton Stokesbury' in BDM.
Am I missing anything?
 
GreyCrow said:
How does Brodie Smith's jumper mix-up get counted?

26 in the first half and 33 in the 2nd half
Click to expand...

On AF we decided on 33 as he wore it for longer.

#26 for 60 minutes 16 seconds
#33 for 62 minutes 53 seconds

We have made a note in our game notes and when our system can handle a two jumper player it will be updated.
 
Not sure if this has been brought up but Denis Pagan was on The Front Bar last night and they showed some footage of "him" playing in the #40 for North Melbourne in a game against South at Arden St however records show he wore...

#45 in 1967
#26 in 1968
#17 in 1969-1974

During Pagan's time at North, records show the following players wearing the #40...

Kerry Haywood - R18, 1968
Dick Ivey - R19, 1969
John Duthie - R9, 1970
Peter Chisnall R9-PF, 1974

Pagan played South at Arden St six times...

R10, 1967
R7, 1968
R1, 1969
R2, 1970
R11, 1971
R17, 1972

Here are a couple of stills, can anyone positively ID the player as Pagen, if so we've got an inaccuracy in at least one game.

719154
719157
 
Oliver Gigacz said:
Not sure if this has been brought up but Denis Pagan was on The Front Bar last night and they showed some footage of "him" playing in the #40 for North Melbourne in a game against South at Arden St however records show he wore...

#45 in 1967
#26 in 1968
#17 in 1969-1974

During Pagan's time at North, records show the following players wearing the #40...

Kerry Haywood - R18, 1968
Dick Ivey - R19, 1969
John Duthie - R9, 1970
Peter Chisnall R9-PF, 1974

Pagan played South at Arden St six times...

R10, 1967
R7, 1968
R1, 1969
R2, 1970
R11, 1971
R17, 1972

Here are a couple of stills, can anyone positively ID the player as Pagen, if so we've got an inaccuracy in at least one game.

View attachment 719154
View attachment 719157
Click to expand...
This doesn't clear this up, but it might help! From Football Record, 1967 Night series. Match 4. Melb. v. NM (the game was played in September):
719271
719273

According to the 1967 Rd. 3 Football Record G. McCarthy had number 40 (Pagan 45). M. Holderhead had #40 in the Rd. 5 & 6 Record (Pagan 45).
From the 1967 Rd. 15 Football Record:
719286
Pagan didn't play in this game, but he must have made the move at some stage of that year - at least in time for the rd. 10 game against South Melbourne! In the Grand Final Record he was #40 on the Reserves team list.

Identifying the pictured South Melbourne player (with #15 on his back) would be handy! If it's Des Bethke then that would confirm it was the 1967 game - he never played against North again.
7plus.com.au

The Front Bar - Watch & Stream Episodes on Channel 7 | 7plus

Watch, stream & catch up with your favourite The Front Bar episodes on 7plus. The boys are back! Mick Molloy, Sam Pang and Andy Maher return to the Front Bar.
7plus.com.au 7plus.com.au
719305
Looks like he might be a blonde or redhead, from the above picture!:
719306
So I'd say it most likely would be Bethke. What is puzzling is that the North player in the same picture seems to be wearing #35 or 36, and North weren't meant to have anyone in that number for that game!!

Any Football Records I've seen from 1968 that show Pagan's jumper number have #26.
 
Last edited:
rbartlett said:
The more I look at this the more it makes more sense, AND its more logical that the H Stokesbury for Richmond is William Henry Stokesberry right?
I mean, he is the offspring of Richmond trainer Joe Stokesberry (who is often spelt wrong as Stokesbury).
Click to expand...

After speaking to Stephen Rodgers today he accepts there is it more logical that the 1915 Richmond player currently identified as Hamilton Stokesbury should be William Henry Stokesberry.
And as such he agrees that the records are to be changed to reflect that Richmond player now as:
William Henry "Harry" Stokesberry b: 1896 Melbourne West, d: May 5 1981, Queensland

Hamilton Stokesbury is therefore also removed as a War Service footballer. William Henry "Harry" Stokesberry does not have a War record.

Should any evidence in future surface that disputes all this, we will address it as it arrives.
Certainly there's a whole Stokesbury/Stokesberry craziness if you do a BDM Birth search between 1870-1905, so you can see why it got confused over the years. But Stokesbury and Stokesberry certainly look to be two different families.

Everyone cool with that. Please make adjustments where neccessary. I'll advise the RFC.
*Paul* WhiteHartLane23 35Daicos the croucher Oliver Gigacz
 
rbartlett said:
After speaking to Stephen Rodgers today he accepts there is it more logical that the 1915 Richmond player currently identified as Hamilton Stokesbury should be William Henry Stokesberry.
And as such he agrees that the records are to be changed to reflect that Richmond player now as:
William Henry "Harry" Stokesberry b: 1896 Melbourne West, d: May 5 1981, Queensland

Hamilton Stokesbury is therefore also removed as a War Service footballer. William Henry "Harry" Stokesberry does not have a War record.

Should any evidence in future surface that disputes all this, we will address it as it arrives.
Certainly there's a whole Stokesbury/Stokesberry craziness if you do a BDM Birth search between 1870-1905, so you can see why it got confused over the years. But Stokesbury and Stokesberry certainly look to be two different families.

Everyone cool with that. Please make adjustments where neccessary. I'll advise the RFC.
*Paul* WhiteHartLane23 35Daicos the croucher Oliver Gigacz
Click to expand...
Good work, Rhett! I was rather surprised that this was knocked back the previous time, as there seemed to be a very reasonable case for a change to be made, so glad it's going to be changed now!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

rbartlett said:
After speaking to Stephen Rodgers today he accepts there is it more logical that the 1915 Richmond player currently identified as Hamilton Stokesbury should be William Henry Stokesberry.
And as such he agrees that the records are to be changed to reflect that Richmond player now as:
William Henry "Harry" Stokesberry b: 1896 Melbourne West, d: May 5 1981, Queensland

Hamilton Stokesbury is therefore also removed as a War Service footballer. William Henry "Harry" Stokesberry does not have a War record.

Should any evidence in future surface that disputes all this, we will address it as it arrives.
Certainly there's a whole Stokesbury/Stokesberry craziness if you do a BDM Birth search between 1870-1905, so you can see why it got confused over the years. But Stokesbury and Stokesberry certainly look to be two different families.

Everyone cool with that. Please make adjustments where neccessary. I'll advise the RFC.
*Paul* WhiteHartLane23 35Daicos the croucher Oliver Gigacz
Click to expand...

Thanks Rhett, AF has been updated...

Australian Football - Harry Stokesberry - Player Bio

australianfootball.com australianfootball.com
 
For those with an Ancestry account - is there a tree for George Richard Peckham Beachcroft (1871 - 24 June 1941) (RFC /Melb secretary)
 
Is it an active tree. Many moons ago - say in 2000, I made contact with a relative of Beachcroft (I think they were living in NSW at the time), but for the life of me I can't find those details again
 
rbartlett said:
After speaking to Stephen Rodgers today he accepts there is it more logical that the 1915 Richmond player currently identified as Hamilton Stokesbury should be William Henry Stokesberry.
And as such he agrees that the records are to be changed to reflect that Richmond player now as:
William Henry "Harry" Stokesberry b: 1896 Melbourne West, d: May 5 1981, Queensland

Hamilton Stokesbury is therefore also removed as a War Service footballer. William Henry "Harry" Stokesberry does not have a War record.

Should any evidence in future surface that disputes all this, we will address it as it arrives.
Certainly there's a whole Stokesbury/Stokesberry craziness if you do a BDM Birth search between 1870-1905, so you can see why it got confused over the years. But Stokesbury and Stokesberry certainly look to be two different families.

Everyone cool with that. Please make adjustments where neccessary. I'll advise the RFC.
*Paul* WhiteHartLane23 35Daicos the croucher Oliver Gigacz
Click to expand...

AFL has confirmed the exact birth date of William Henry Stokesberry
It is March 30, 1896. They have also suggested his height and weight to be 179cm / 74kgs - but I'm sensing that is an approximation.

So Gigacz you can add that to AustralianFootball, and whoever is our Wikipedia person - we will need to change this wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton_Stokesbury to now be William Henry "Harry" Stokesbury

Leo Thomas Tyrrell, the North Melbourne/Collingwood player - date of birth is now to be June 2, 1915 not Dec 27, 1914.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

rbartlett said:
AFL has confirmed the exact birth date of William Henry Stokesberry
It is March 30, 1896. They have also suggested his height and weight to be 179cm / 74kgs - but I'm sensing that is an approximation.

So Gigacz you can add that to AustralianFootball, and whoever is our Wikipedia person - we will need to change this wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton_Stokesbury to now be William Henry "Harry" Stokesbury

Leo Thomas Tyrrell, the North Melbourne/Collingwood player - date of birth is now to be June 2, 1915 not Dec 27, 1914.
Click to expand...

Thanks Rhett, AF has been updated.
 
rbartlett said:
AFL has confirmed the exact birth date of William Henry Stokesberry
It is March 30, 1896. They have also suggested his height and weight to be 179cm / 74kgs - but I'm sensing that is an approximation.
<snip>
Click to expand...

I cannot see a WW1 record for him at National Archives (they usually have ht/wgt shown) so in the absence of any other obvious source, one wonders where the AFL found that info. Until they advise of said source, I think the physical measurements should be left blank.
 
the croucher said:
I cannot see a WW1 record for him at National Archives (they usually have ht/wgt shown) so in the absence of any other obvious source, one wonders where the AFL found that info. Until they advise of said source, I think the physical measurements should be left blank.
Click to expand...

Reading in the between the lines. AFL has guessed the height and weight. And something they've done with a lot of previous players I've been told. So tread carefully with player measurements
 
the croucher said:
Believe I have found another coaching change to be necessary in official records - 1968 Rnd 15 Geelong [ vs Collingwood ]
Coach should be listed as John O'Neill.

Peter Pianto was too ill to coach Geelong (attended match but didn't perform any duties)
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=MDQ-9Oe3GGUC&dat=19680729&printsec=frontpage&hl=en
go to page 20 of that day's paper [Google news page 11 of 36]

Rhett perhaps this could be added to the spreadsheet.
Click to expand...

Mmm..this was put on the spreadsheet quite quickly, but unfortunately since then, it appears at AFL level and at online resources no further action has been taken. Pianto is still listed as coach when he clearly was not.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

B
Why was VFL Park not used in Rounds 1 and 2 in the 1970s?
Replies
15
Views
492
mountain roy
mountain roy

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom