Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

[Eric]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

Reid, you should find it interesting that the most memorable examples of baiting and libel by other members were removed by Eric. He said that he was removing them to help people avaoid potential legal problems. This is because I was being attacked as a fraud but all of a sudden the items being attacked were being passed by MEARS. This is because they were legit items. When I defended myself, I got out of line along with the other posters. The difference was, they stopped when they were warned. I addressed each individual who was badmouthing me and about the 7th or 8th time I did so, Eric informed me that I was continually not following the rules. The differece was, I have 6-8 different people taking shots at me but they all just got warnings. I was warned after responding to the first few people but decided I wanted to address the rest of the people as well. Also keep in mind was banned after refusing to share information I overheard an auction house say about Eric. Eric did not like that too much as he felt I should name names if I wanted to be a member of this board. That goes against what I do unless provoked and I was not provoked by that auction house. Therefore, I did not want to bring them directly into it. Bottom line is.....the reason you can't read the posts is because Eric was trying to protect people from libel based on what they said about me and my jerseys. How would you like if Eric did that to the posts where people wrongly libeled and slandered your name? I was proven to have legit jerseys and my jerseys were proven to not be fraudulent. Unfortunately, Eric chose to not let others see the unfair comments made about me. Now that they are edited, they are gone for good. That is why I felt people on this board were choosing sides based on personal issues rather than based on the facts of the items.

Wow-
That is a truly bizarre interpretation of what actually happened.
David- You were suspended because you violated the forum rules with your abusive posts.
You were then banned, and then suspended again once you re-registered under a different name with a different email address pretending to be someone else.
Then you were suspended again for posting again without permission, after claiming that you were told to take a few months off and then come back.
None of it had to do with you withholding gossip about me. I don't care about that stuff. People badmouth me all the time to my face and behind my back, so I'm pretty much used to it.
Let's make it clear- David, you could not follow the rules and after numerous warnings I had no choice but to ban you for you immature behavior.
That's the truth of the matter. Do not contact me. I don't feel like getting 20 emails from you accusing me of this or that. Thank you.
Eric

[staindsox]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

Does VA have the right to alter an item that was consigned to them? It seems that they would either have to choose whether or not to accept an item, but have no right to alter anything. This seems very odd to me. Are auction houses in the habit of altering items once they have been consigned??? This is a very scary prospect. I think an excellent point was made: did they tear the Schmidt name plate off of the jersey that was recently removed from the auction? This makes me nervous. Any comments?

[staindsox]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

It is generous to assume that the chain-stitched 62 is incorrect, but the Musial chain-stitching is correct. My gut instinct is that if the 62 is wrong, so is the Musial stitching.

[sportscentury]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

Wow-
That is a truly bizarre interpretation of what actually happened.
David- You were suspended because you violated the forum rules with your abusive posts.
You were then banned, and then suspended again once you re-registered under a different name with a different email address pretending to be someone else.
Then you were suspended again for posting again without permission, after claiming that you were told to take a few months off and then come back.
None of it had to do with you withholding gossip about me. I don't care about that stuff. People badmouth me all the time to my face and behind my back, so I'm pretty much used to it.
Let's make it clear- David, you could not follow the rules and after numerous warnings I had no choice but to ban you for you immature behavior.
That's the truth of the matter. Do not contact me. I don't feel like getting 20 emails from you accusing me of this or that. Thank you.
Eric

Eric and David,

Thanks for your notes.

Eric,

Yes, "Wow" is a word that came to my mind, as well.

Based on my communications with Steve Jensen (Vintage) earlier today, I have come to understand a very different version of events than that which has been shared in this thread. I have asked Steve to make a post on this thread to clear things up ... and things definitely need to be disentangled.

Finally, I am confused as to how many times ISUbirdjersey/David has been suspended and banned from this forum. Just for clarification, how many times can a person be suspended and banned before they are permanently banned? Is this stated in the forum policies?

I hope that we can continue to shed light on the history and ongoing issues of this Musial shirt. The only thing that I am certain of is that this story is far from complete.

Reid

[hblakewolf]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

Reid-
I too spoke with Steve at Vintage about a different issue, and we also discussed this particular thread. Steve told me that David was informed about the possibility of this jersey resurfacing as a gamer, and as such, the 62 was removed by Vintage to prevent this. Likewise, David approved of this, and the 62 was removed.

Seems pretty clear.

David, what are we missing?

Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@patmedia.net

[staindsox]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

It has been concluded that this jersey could not be a 1962 Musial. That is why the 62 was removed, correct?

Then...If it has been assumed that the "62" was not genuine, why are we assuming that the same chain-stitched "Musial" is correct? If the "62" was added to the jersey by some person, they also added "Musial." If one piece of the chain-stitching is false, they both are.

I am surpised VA has not completely pulled this lot. Something isn't right with this jersey. Any thoughts?

Chris

[kingjammy24]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

"Steve told me that David was informed about the possibility of this jersey resurfacing as a gamer, and as such, the 62 was removed by Vintage to prevent this. Likewise, David approved of this, and the 62 was removed."

is it me or is this absolutely wild? i mean..beyond nuts. i understand the intent to help the hobby but i also think that this sort of policy is a very slippery slope.

let's say, for example, a jersey pops up and it's atypical in it's tagging. due to the atypical tagging, MEARS rejects it and everyone agrees. the auction house then permanently defaces the item to prevent it from being sold as a "gamer". everyone cheers as we win another victory for the hobby. then a photo pops up of this jersey in action with the atypical tagging. a "uni watch" type of moment. oh dear. looks like the jersey's already been defaced when everyone was so positive that we had it right.

except for photomatched items, most items in this hobby require a leap of faith. personally, i don't ever think that something was either game-worn or not. i believe it's "likely" or "unlikely". unlikely doesn't mean impossible.
there's a 1990 Fisk jersey up on GFC right now with very odd tagging and an incorrect NOB. it comes with a team letter. without the team letter, i believe most authenticators would reject the jersey based on those 2 issues. i can't say whether the jersey was ever worn or not. i believe it's unlikely. if anyone defaced that jersey and was later shown a photo of Fisk actually wearing the odd jersey in a game (stranger things have happened), then what?

point is, by permanently defacing a jersey, you're saying that you're absolutely positive, without any doubt whatsoever, that the jersey wasn't worn. that's a huge statement. better hope you're right because if you aren't, you just ruined a good shirt.

rudy.

[staindsox]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

I absolutely agree with Rudy.

a) the jersey is real and has just been defaced. we have lost an example of unique tagging.

OR

b) the jersey is a fake and should not be sold in the first place, not altered. an auction house should not alter tagging just so it looks authentic.

Either way, I completely disagree with the decision to doctor the tagging. It's crazy, no matter which way you view it.

Chris

[both-teams-played-hard]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

I think I could do the whole auction house thing as good as how they are presently run.

Unfortunately, I totally agree with this statement.

[Steve Jensen]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

Just to clarify the issues surrounding the Stan Musial jersey. This jersey had actually been given to us twice. The first time the consignor wasn’t sure if he wanted to auction it or keep it for whatever reason. We submitted it to MEARS and they couldn’t authenticate it as a Musial playing day jersey. The Cardinal on the front dated the jersey to the mid-late 60’s. I relayed that info to the consignor and said we would offer it a post career Musial flannel but the ’62 needed to be removed because it had been deceptively added to this jersey and he agreed. It was not original stitching, It didn’t match the aging or color of the other stitching leading us to believe someone added it in to try to pass it off as a gamer which we weren’t comfortable with and either was the consignor. He decided he wanted to keep the jersey for the time being however.

The jersey was resubmitted for the current auction with a bunch of other items and I reminded the consignor that we would run it as a post career Musial (not a ’62) and the tagging would be very deceptive in marketing this jersey because it was recently added and he was in complete agreement. He never at anytime wanted it presented as a ’62 Musial gamer and his expectations were in line with what we thought the jersey was worth. Both parties were in complete agreement that it would be deceptive to leave the ’62 stitched on the jersey and wanted to make sure that it described accurately. Still a nice ‘60’s post career flannel.

There was no attempt to deceive here by either party but rather an effort to prevent it. The stitching was fraudalently added to the jersey recently (it was NOT original stitching) and it was very obvious to most novice observer. Both us and the consignor were in complete agreement as to how to market this jersey.

I'm not sure why this situation has been conveyed in such a negative light since the consignor was a part of all decisions made with this jersey and both parties wanted to take all precautions in making sure the item was presented correctly. I've e-mailed all of the current bidders and we've updated the lot on our website to try to help clarify. If anyone has any questions or concerns please e-mail me at: steve@vintageauthentics.com


Best Regards,
Steve Jensen
www.vintageauthentics.com

[sportscentury]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

David/ISUbirdjersey,

Based on the recent posts from Eric and Steve Jensen, it would seem that you have a very unique way of remembering and presenting history.

Can you make sense of all of this for us? I need help here ... as your posts (including the ones you made under your banned userid) just don't add up for me. Please do not misinterpret my post as an attempt to "bait" you. I intend nothing of the sort. Clearly, I'm not the only one utterly baffled here (e.g., Warren, Steve, Eric, Howard, Rudy, Chris, and others all seem to share in at least some form of confusion, if not amazement).

Reid

[staindsox]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

First, thank you very much for that post Steve. This helps clear up some confusion.

Secondly, your reasoning for the first banning seemed odd. The times I have talked with him, I have only seen patience in Eric. I could not see him banning someone out of vindictiveness. Thank you for that quick response Eric.

Thirdly, I agree completely with Reid here. I believe David (ISUbirdjersey) should clarify his story/stories. There are many details that are not adding up. I am one of the confused, and concerned, so please help us out.

Chris

[Eric]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

And ISUbirdjersey, it might ring a bell that another reason you were banned is because you have posted under, broken the rules under and been banned under the following names.

apujols04
youngjerseycollector
david-a
davida
and of course my favorite youareajerk

David, have I missed any?
Eric

[kingjammy24]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

this is great stuff.

re: removal of the "62"

david: "I did not remove it and did not tell or authorize anyone to remove that stitching...The auction house made that decision without my consent."

steve: "I relayed that info to the consignor.. the ’62 needed to be removed because it had been deceptively added to this jersey and he agreed. Both parties were in complete agreement that it would be deceptive to leave the ’62 stitched on the jersey"

re: the original MEARS grade

david: "You may confirm with Steve that this jersey was originally issued an A7."

steve: "We submitted it to MEARS and they couldn’t authenticate it as a Musial playing day jersey"

mears: "no grade was issued for this jersey and was deemed "unable to authenticate"...No MEARS letter was ever issued with a grade"

anyway, 2 things i'm curious about:

- what evidence is there to suggest musial wore this as a coach?

- if the "62" wasn't legit then why is the "musial" stitching legit?


rudy.

[both-teams-played-hard]

Re: Stan Musial Possible 1962-1963 gamer

David, have I missed any?
Eric

"ebayautos" was used and was banned within minutes.