You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > Can we adopt our 1861 date of birth?
November 12 2026 8.14am

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Can we adopt our 1861 date of birth?


Page 6 of 12 < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >
Penge Eagle Flag Beckenham 24 Apr 20 12.56pm

Originally posted by kenbarr

This post has been merged from a topic called 'Palace 1861 ?!' by bexleydave

My question is if the Crystal Palace Company was the majority shareholder why didn't the club return to the Crystal Palace football ground when World War I was over? Did the Admiralty retain it for a period or did they leave when the war ended or shortly after?

Two reasons apparently...

According to fang on the BBS: "The place was a complete mess. The top site had been used as a tip for bomb rubble from across SE London. The terraces had been used as a vehicle store and there was a large vehicle maintenance depot inside what is now the NSC foot print. Other parts of the park had been given over to allotments, including the cricket pitch and a radar assembly plant.There were also questions about who actually owned the Park at this point."

Also, Croydon Common were big rivals at the time, so Palace moved into their ground The Nest after they went bust in WW2 in case they re-formed while taking their fan base also. Ruthless.

Edited by Penge Eagle (24 Apr 2020 1.07pm)

 
Penge Eagle Flag Beckenham 24 Apr 20 1.04pm

Originally posted by jeeagles

Just because there is no record of matches in that 20 year period doesnt mean they didn't happen.

Matches were recorded in the local newspapers up till 1876. So if they did happen afterwards, then why would the press stop reporting on them?

A couple of Palace's England internationals' (Savage, Smith) last and only caps came in 1876. So either they kept playing for Palace and weren't good enough, moved to another club and not selected or gave up playing entirely like when the team disbanded...

Edited by Penge Eagle (24 Apr 2020 1.04pm)

 
chris123 Flag hove actually 24 Apr 20 1.25pm

Originally posted by jeeagles

Are you saying that the burden of proof should be on others now to prove the club folded and didn't play any games?

Just because there is no record of matches in that 20 year period doesnt mean they didn't happen.

It could be argued that continuity should be assumed unless there is an official record in Crystal Palace company records, players diarys, newspapers that say CPFC 1861 officially cease to exist in around 1885. Or a official record from around 1905 which says that the team which applied to join the league then was categorically a different entity.

Our former tennents AFC Wimbledon or MK Dons may have an interest in this story as they have a despute over who the clubs history belongs to.

There's probably other teams with claims that could rival Sheffield FC and Notts County. The Royal Engineers and Civil Service clubs both claim to be founded in 1863, but probably existed in some form before that.

It's a tenuous claim, but no one can claim that a Crystal Palace team didn't exist in 1861, and no one can prove there is not a direct link between the team that entered the league in 1905.... this could go on for years. Great lockdown story.

Well because if you want to seriously claim something like this it needs to be supported by contemporary evidence, surely?

 
gazNgiz Flag 25 Apr 20 11.39pm

The op says "our", so therefore the op already has.
But no it's not.
And no, no we can't/really, really shouldn't.

(Our clubs older than your club is as embarrassing as my dads bigger than your dad)

Edit....

I like Parish and everything he (and our other investors) have done for our club, but at the end of the day he is a business man and this has become his business, so dam right he's promoting this sh!te. It's almost 100% new merch for the club to sell £££'s

Edited by gazNgiz (25 Apr 2020 11.53pm)

 

I'm a little bit backwards

kiteagles Flag Melbourne 26 Apr 20 12.42am

We have the oldest manager in the Premier League and the oldest first team squad, only right we should be the oldest club as well. I've been shaking my head and saying "Same old Palace" for nearly 70 years - looks like I was right.

 
YT Flag Oxford 26 Apr 20 7.13am

Originally posted by Penge Eagle

Two reasons apparently...

According to fang on the BBS: "The place was a complete mess. The top site had been used as a tip for bomb rubble from across SE London. The terraces had been used as a vehicle store and there was a large vehicle maintenance depot inside what is now the NSC foot print. Other parts of the park had been given over to allotments, including the cricket pitch and a radar assembly plant.There were also questions about who actually owned the Park at this point."

Also, Croydon Common were big rivals at the time, so Palace moved into their ground The Nest after they went bust in WW2 in case they re-formed while taking their fan base also. Ruthless.

Edited by Penge Eagle (24 Apr 2020 1.07pm)


If this is true then our nickname should be "The Cuckoos" rather than "The Eagles".

 

Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)
kenbarr Flag Jackson Heights, Queens, New York ... 07 Jun 21 5.56am

After watching When Eagles Dare, which made a brief reference to Palace claiming to be one of the oldest clubs in the world, I found an American sports precedent for our claim. The oldest professional baseball team is the Cincinnati Reds, founded in 1869 as the Red Stockings. This club went bust in 1870 & in 1871, a new Red Stockings team was founded in Boston (they eventually became the Braves). In 1876, the National League of Professional Baseball Clubs (todays N.L.) was formed & a new Cincinnati Red Stockings under the same ownership as the old was admitted. This forced Boston to change its name to the Red Caps. Even though Cincinnati’s team stopped play & then restarted some years later, they retained rights to the nickname and the 1869 foundation date. I realize these are different countries but wouldn’t the same principles apply given both the amateur & professional clubs were owned & operated by the Crystal Palace Company?

 

Divorced...And LOVING it!
VJRAM Rev.
CPFC since Boxing Day 1989 CPFC 2-2 CFC
Gregg Berhalter, US International & USMNT Head Coach
Jill Ellis, England International & Retired USWNT Head Coach
Trevor Francis, International PRAT
kenbarr Flag Jackson Heights, Queens, New York ... 07 Jun 21 7.10am

After watching When Eagles Dare, which made a brief reference to Palace claiming to be one of the oldest clubs in the world, I found an American sports precedent for our claim. The oldest professional baseball team is the Cincinnati Reds, founded in 1869 as the Red Stockings. This club went bust in 1870 & in 1871, a new Red Stockings team was founded in Boston (they eventually became the Braves). In 1876, the National League of Professional Baseball Clubs (todays N.L.) was formed & a new Cincinnati Red Stockings under the same ownership as the old was admitted. This forced Boston to change its name to the Red Caps. Even though Cincinnati’s team stopped play & then restarted some years later, they retained rights to the nickname and the 1869 foundation date. I realize these are different countries but wouldn’t the same principles apply given both the amateur & professional clubs were owned & operated by the Crystal Palace Company?

 

Divorced...And LOVING it!
VJRAM Rev.
CPFC since Boxing Day 1989 CPFC 2-2 CFC
Gregg Berhalter, US International & USMNT Head Coach
Jill Ellis, England International & Retired USWNT Head Coach
Trevor Francis, International PRAT
YT Flag Oxford 07 Jun 21 7.43am

Originally posted by kenbarr

After watching When Eagles Dare, which made a brief reference to Palace claiming to be one of the oldest clubs in the world, I found an American sports precedent for our claim. The oldest professional baseball team is the Cincinnati Reds, founded in 1869 as the Red Stockings. This club went bust in 1870 & in 1871, a new Red Stockings team was founded in Boston (they eventually became the Braves). In 1876, the National League of Professional Baseball Clubs (todays N.L.) was formed & a new Cincinnati Red Stockings under the same ownership as the old was admitted. This forced Boston to change its name to the Red Caps. Even though Cincinnati’s team stopped play & then restarted some years later, they retained rights to the nickname and the 1869 foundation date. I realize these are different countries but wouldn’t the same principles apply given both the amateur & professional clubs were owned & operated by the Crystal Palace Company?

You can say THAT again!

 

Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)
silvertop Flag Portishead 07 Jun 21 12.37pm

I have not red the whole thread so apologies for repetition.

There is precious little connection with many of the football teams from their founding origins (boys clubs etc.) to the "formed" FA sanctioned teams. That distinction is specious, and we had existed for 4 decades before we were allowed in.

Taking the 1905 date for us is unfair, even with that argument, as we had a fully incorporated team well before that date (I don't know the date?) but the English FA had difficulty allowing a team that played from the (then) national stadium to be allowed into the hallowed FA. I'm not sure the Scottish FA had the same issue with Queens Park?

Step forward Aston Villa. A very important team with a lot of clout who sponsored/supported us to form in 1905. I am not sure what they got out of it, but we then played in their colours for over 60 years.

The date above in bold would be a fairer one to put on our badge (if anyone knows it?).

 
Beastie Flag 08 Oct 21 4.24pm

[Link]

“Crystal Palace F.C., one of the founding fathers of the Football Association, will be taking part in a special tournament to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the FA Cup.”

“The full list of teams competing in the unique tournament is: Crystal Palace, Hitchin Town, Maidenhead United, Upton Park F.C., Reigate Priory F.C., The Royal Engineers, Civil Service, The Wanderers F.C. and Clapham Rovers F.C.”

Love this!

 
m/k mick Flag milton keynes 08 Oct 21 7.57pm

As I understand it The Crystal Palace Company, started the club in 1861, the very same business was the one that registered us in 1905, the intervening years are where there are issues, but my reading is there is a continuation and has its merits, if people say there was a gap where there are no recorded games, so is there a gap for all teams during at least the WW2, the same guys were mentioned in the 1870 s and 1900 inc internationals

 
Ginger Pubic Wig Flag Wickham de L'Ouest 09 Oct 21 9.33am

Modern mankind (bermondsey aside) is homo sapien, but we can recognise that neanderthals roamed the earth before then.

Let's just enjoy the connection, recognise the reason for the claim, and not sweat it. There was a club founded in 1861 with a few connections to the club founded in 1905. But there was also a big gap betweenthe two existing.

 

If you want to live in a world full of kindness, respect and love, try to show these qualities.

Davepalace707 Flag Northumberland 09 Oct 21 11.37am

An FA Cup without Man U in it. We might have a chance of winning it. Is there a European place available?

 
Penge Eagle Flag Beckenham 22 Nov 21 1.58am

New book out – Palace Pioneers: How the first Crystal Palace FC helped create the modern game. [Link]

 
PalazioVecchio Flag south pole 30 Nov 21 10.31pm

Originally posted by Palace_denizen

now that the dust has settled on our centenary, there is ample evidence that we existed and thrived from 1861 to 1876 , including participating in some of the first FA cups.

our name is in the annals of FA cup history going way way back prior to 1905. Does anybody think another England club has a better claim to the Crystal Palace name than us ?

Added to the hosting of the FA cup at our home ground, why do we not honour our tradition and print 1861 on all our merchandise ? It will give these 'johnny come lately' teams with lots of money something to think about.

[Link]
,
[Link]


Edited by Palace_denizen (29 Jan 2014 12.11pm)

agreed.

The club is not a legal entity on a piece of paper.

The club is the local fans and the local geography.

1861

 

Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford
Penge Eagle Flag Beckenham 01 Dec 21 4.59pm

Two separate clubs:

Crystal Palace 1861-76

Crystal Palace 1905-present

We can celebrate both and all is explained in brilliant new book Palace Pioneers [Link]

Edited by Penge Eagle (01 Dec 2021 5.00pm)

 
fleurs Flag Rochester 12 May 22 5.15am

This post has been merged from a topic called 'palace1861 - Change the Badge Campaign ' by Penge Eagle

All explained on [Link] Please vote and spread the word

 
PalazioVecchio Flag south pole 12 May 22 4.14pm

This post has been merged from a topic called 'palace1861 - Change the Badge Campaign ' by Penge Eagle

agreed. The Crystal Palace , of Joseph Paxton, had one of the first proper football clubs in the World.

Print the logo, own the year, 1861.


And even if the paperwork is ambiguous....the geography isnt. We are not 1905 , we are Pioneers.

A ton of massive games were held at Upper Norwood...back in the time of the Dinosaurs.

Edited by PalazioVecchio (12 May 2022 4.16pm)

 

Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford
kingdowieonthewall Flag Sussex, ex-Cronx. 13 May 22 7.38pm

This post has been merged from a topic called 'palace1861 - Change the Badge Campaign ' by Penge Eagle

Originally posted by PalazioVecchio

agreed. The Crystal Palace , of Joseph Paxton, had one of the first proper football clubs in the World.

Print the logo, own the year, 1861.


And even if the paperwork is ambiguous....the geography isnt. We are not 1905 , we are Pioneers.

A ton of massive games were held at Upper Norwood...back in the time of the Dinosaurs.

Edited by PalazioVecchio (12 May 2022 4.16pm)

well said PV.
suprised weve not moved on this already.

 

Kids,tired of being bothered by your pesky parents?
Then leave home, get a job & pay your own bills, while you still know everything.
Page 6 of 12 < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > Can we adopt our 1861 date of birth?