Polo Grounds [IV] / Brush Stadium (1911-1963)

[RichardLillard1]

Think about how fast that was happening, the ball was coming down from the arc and he was running towards the point he caught it at.

You think they didn't react, but it was more likely that they couldn't tell what EXACTLY was happening. I bet a picture taken a couple of seconds later would have some very different looks from the fans.


Richard


Edit: I would also think that a fair amount of them just couldn't see what was going on because that wall is so high.

[RichardLillard1]

I found this while looking for that unusual gras pattern, maybe it was for decoration? Either way, it appears to have been on both sides of the dirt.



I also saw this one of the 1923 World Series.




Richard

[SHOELESSJOE3]

[QUOTE=RichardLillard1;1306483]Think about how fast that was happening, the ball was coming down from the arc and he was running towards the point he caught it at.

You think they didn't react, but it was more likely that they couldn't tell what EXACTLY was happening. I bet a picture taken a couple of seconds later would have some very different looks from the fans.


Richard [Quote]


I think the same. In the last picture the ball is not yet in his glove, I think the reaction of the fans a couple of seconds later would appear much more animated, excited.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

New York Times 1923.

[metfan13]

New York Times 1923.

I wonder if there were any comments in the papers at the time? Some people questioning the absurd dimensions? Questioning why you'd have bleachers that far away from the action.

[StanTheMan]

Well, it's original purpose was for polo (New Yorkers play Polo??) I guess the Giants bit off more than they can chew. Imagine Major League ballparks with those measurements:

Polo was not played at the Polo Grounds as most of us know it. (Mays, Thomson, etc) The name was taken from a PRIOR Giants ballpark further south in Manhattan that just stuck with the Giants and their fans in the last 1800's.

As for fans ability to see Mays when he was making the catch... the could see him, but they do seem ambivalent in the famous photo.

Here's another angle... while it does not show any fans, it appears the "wall" (really just tthe batters eye backdrop) might not have obstructed too many fans. I'm thinking there were more fans in the right-center bleachers that could see the play than you might originally think. This shot is probably taken from the Photographers Perch we discussed a few pages back with the photos of giant zoom lens cameras.

The Catch with screen.jpg

I'm always amazed at Willilams and Dark in this photo. Neither of them (It's Williams fault, really, as it is his play) are in any position whatsoever to be the cutoff man. No way they EXPECTED him to catch it, and if he did so, they still need to be the cutoff man. Look how far Wertz has ran... and Williams in still on the dirt of the infield?

The Catch Diagram.jpg

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I wonder if there were any comments in the papers at the time? Some people questioning the absurd dimensions? Questioning why you'd have bleachers that far away from the action.

I read articles from some of the bigger newspapers and no mention about the odd configuration. Only one comment in the NY Times that had anything to do with dimensions, only that CF distance was 150 feet deeper than before.

[jints15]

Think about how fast that was happening, the ball was coming down from the arc and he was running towards the point he caught it at.

You think they didn't react, but it was more likely that they couldn't tell what EXACTLY was happening. I bet a picture taken a couple of seconds later would have some very different looks from the fans.


Richard


Edit: I would also think that a fair amount of them just couldn't see what was going on because that wall is so high.

You are right my dad was sitting to the right of Mays half way up the bleachers and he always said that he never saw the catch only the ball being thrown back to the infield and never new what happened until the fans not in the bleachers reacted to the catch.

[RichieA13]

You know, come to think of it, you are right. The years the PG had someting OTHER than Chesterfield advertisements, it was complete crap. The Babe's best all around year of all time for example, was played in an unimpressive park beacause they were not touting cigarettes.

The huge "wall" in CF? I hope you don't mean the batters eye screens.... The are pretty tiny when compared to an entire ballpark. The walls in front of the bleachers are the shortest (height) in the entire park, so you cannot be thining of those.

Perhaps the Clubhouse wall? Impressive indeed, but only with a Chesterfield sign on it. And it was not a wall at all, just one side of building, really. Without a Chestefield sign, that side of a building sucked indeed.

I hate to politely disagree with you, Stan. During Babe's tenure at The Polo Grounds, there was the beautiful, ornamental facade/freize around the top of the stadium (first two photos below). Also, I always felt the later Knickerbocker Beer billboard in CF was just as cool (if not cooler) than the Chesterfield ad, personally (last photo below).

[chip saunders]

I alway's wish I could have seen a game at the Polo Grounds and Ebbets Field. They both had such cool and peculiar nooks and cranny's. Games must have been fun there.

[StanTheMan]

I hate to politely disagree with you, Stan. During Babe's tenure at The Polo Grounds, there was the beautiful, ornamental facade/freize around the top of the stadium (first two photos below). Also, I always felt the later Knickerbocker Beer billboard in CF was just as cool (if not cooler) than the Chesterfield ad, personally (last photo below).

We need a sarcasm smiley so that Richie can get up to speed!! If anyone invents one, please go back and place it in my original post to help out my new pal RichieA13!

Hell yes the ornamental facade (which btw displayed the coats of arms of all the NL clubs and had to be handpainted frequently at great expense) was wonderful. Certainly the giant "Have a Knick" sign was better than the Chesterfield sign, etc.

My post seemed pretty clear to me, but calling me a wise-azz today would not be the first time I've ever heard it....

Cheers,
Bryan

[POLO GROUNDS 1957]

Here is a photo from 1934 showing the Polo Grounds during a Giants football game.

[RichieA13]

We need a sarcasm smiley so that Richie can get up to speed!! If anyone invents one, please go back and place it in my original post to help out my new pal RichieA13!

Hell yes the ornamental facade (which btw displayed the coats of arms of all the NL clubs and had to be handpainted frequently at great expense) was wonderful. Certainly the giant "Have a Knick" sign was better than the Chesterfield sign, etc.

My post seemed pretty clear to me, but calling me a wise-azz today would not be the first time I've ever heard it....

Cheers,
Bryan

That one went RIGHT over my head, Bryan!! I'm glad to hear that we are in total agreement. Alot of times, when I am being funny and/or sarcastic, I like to use the dancing smiley face. I vote for him! That early facade was awesome! Anyone know WHY it was removed? Anyone have any close ups of the different crests?

[StanTheMan]

Stew Thornley's excellent book "The Land of the Giants" mentions something about the high cost of maintaining the crests/coats of arms leading to their demise. Apparently, they were hand-painted as needed. With the harsh NY winter, I'm sure fresh paint was required every few seasons if not more frequently?

I'll look for some photos... there might already be a few in the thread?

BTW, that dancing smiley sucks unless he's holding a Chestefield and sucking on a Rheingold.

[RichieA13]

Stew Thornley's excellent book "The Land of the Giants" mentions something about the high cost of maintaining the crests/coats of arms leading to their demise. Apparently, they were hand-painted as needed. With the harsh NY winter, I'm sure fresh paint was required every few seasons if not more frequently?

I'll look for some photos... there might already be a few in the thread?

BTW, that dancing smiley sucks unless he's holding a Chestefield and sucking on a Rheingold.

That was sarcasm again, right Bryan......??!!
I'm GETTING IT!!!! (LL)...........

[StanTheMan]

That was sarcasm again, right Bryan......??!!
I'm GETTING IT!!!! (LL)...........

Very good. You are getting it. Now go jump off a building.

[POLO GROUNDS 1957]

Here is a photo showing the Reds playing the Mets at the Polo Grounds on 6-11-1963

[RichieA13]

Very good. You are getting it. Now go jump off a building.

YOU first!!!!!!!!

[bleacherbum73]

Here's one from 1914. Caption says Clarke and Norcross of Brown University.

Photo taken from Shorpy.com. A very interesting site by the way. Tons of old photo's covering everything.

[bleacherbum73]

October 9, 1913. The scene at the Polo Grounds in New York after the third game of the World Series. Philadelphia Athletics 8, New York Giants 2.

Photo courtesy of Shorpy.com

[bleacherbum73]

Another Shorpy.com photo.

Earl Smith, New York National League (Giants) June 9, 1923

[bleacherbum73]

October 8, 1912. First game of the 1912 World Series, between the New York Giants and Boston Red Sox. Right field grandstand at New York's Polo Grounds.

From Shorpy.com

[bleacherbum73]

More from Shorpy.com

John "Shano" Collins, first baseman for the Chicago White Sox, at bat in 1920 at the Polo Grounds, New York.

[Pelt]

Wow! Great pics.

*runs off to shorpy.com*

[mandrake]

Must have been a Yankee game vs White Sox. I wonder if this is before or after the scandal broke in 1920, because they are few people there. Also, note the 9th avenue elevated lines parked behind the stands. In the early 1950's, they built housing projects on the old rail yard next to the Polo Grounds, helping to destroy the PG.