Roberto Clemente Signed Autographed Baseball Global Authentics

[GrayGhost]

Chris or Brandon. Fascinating thread, and obviously stuff was removed below the ball logo. But, how do you know its not the 1970-3 one on left? Unless I can't see, how would you know it wasn't that one, of the two Feeney examples?

I also don't like the sig anyways, but what am I missing?

[thetruthisoutthere]

Scott, I knew the autograph was not authentic, but when I noticed the abrasions under the Spalding label my first thought was "Did someone remove some markings on the ball to hide something?" That's when I sent photographs of the baseball to Brandon. I do believe that Brandon's comment explains it in a nutshell.

[GrayGhost]

I just see the 2 ball size variations, and am asking how come the ball in question couldn't be the type that does not have the Made in Haiti, but is the earlier version on left of his two photos.

Regardless, the idea of Just removing something there casts potential suspicion at the very least.

[Bilko G]

Originally Posted by GrayGhost

I just see the 2 ball size variations, and am asking how come the ball in question couldn't be the type that does not have the Made in Haiti, but is the earlier version on left of his two photos.

Regardless, the idea of Just removing something there casts potential suspicion at the very least.

Edit- The actual "ball" on the stamp is bigger on the newer ball and the writing is a tad different, i see now.

[GrayGhost]

Its tough tho. wow..My eyes are bad I guess, but yes, the writing is def a bit different

[Bilko G]

Originally Posted by GrayGhost

Its tough tho. wow..My eyes are bad I guess, but yes, the writing is def a bit different

it is tough, i couldn't see the difference at first either. I thought he was saying the size of the actual baseball was a tad bit bigger, haha.

[Bilko G]

The thing is, is if Chris can catch the ball as a forgery without even having to see the autograph, just by dating the ball, why can't the so-called experts do this as well??

My advice to the "experts" is, don't even bother authenticating the autograph until you do research on the actual ball (or item) and make sure the ball is from the right time frame for an authentic autograph to be even able to exist on it.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by GrayGhost

Its tough tho. wow..My eyes are bad I guess, but yes, the writing is def a bit different

The stitching on the "printed balls" is different as well.... especially at the top-left and lower-right. This forgery is clearly the later version.

[Leon]

Someone tried to register this morning and said they had info on this ball and the dating of it...supposedly refuting what is said here. They didn't give the required info and when I emailed them, their email address wasn't registered and it bounced back. It isn't impossible to slime into our forum but I have gotten a sixth sense since moderating, concerning registrations. I try to make it difficult for the scammers or fraudsters. Now, if they want to register with all of the correct info, and then they and I have a long chat, they are more than welcome here to defend themselves. They won't be anonymous if I can help it though.

[BrandonG]

Originally Posted by GrayGhost

Chris or Brandon. Fascinating thread, and obviously stuff was removed below the ball logo. But, how do you know its not the 1970-3 one on left? Unless I can't see, how would you know it wasn't that one, of the two Feeney examples?

I also don't like the sig anyways, but what am I missing?

Okay a couple things, you guys really need to look at the two baseballs, the logo on the left baseball (70-73) is smaller, the stitching design is different, the "Cushioned Cork Center" writing is smaller, a different font, and tighter to the Splading circle. The "Reg in US Pat Off" doesn't have a period after it. If you REALLY look you should see the difference. There's no way the forged ball is the early model ball. If you had the two in hand you would definitely see a difference. If not, I guess that's why I'm writing the book and you're not lol

As for the authenticators not doing their research in the balls themselves, I think it's just because there was never any reference to do so, in reality I've recently just popped up as the guy to go to, and once my book is out I'm sure all of them will have a copy as a reference guide. Maybe I need to get my name out there more to these guys and start making a buck or two helping them.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Beautifully written, Brandon.