The age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1897-1902, 1899-12-04
Discusses at Length the Sc
wanee-Auburn Game.
HE HAS BEEN MISQUOTED
The Celebrated Trainer Says That Au-
burn Clearly Outplayed Sewanee
at Every Point But Got the
Worst of All Decisions.


verslty of Pennsylvania team, is in the
city. Mr.. Hesman is considered one of
tine best football experts in the United
States and talks very interestingly of the
past seasons sport.
He seems to regret exceedingly the de-
feat of Auburn by Sewanee, and says that
his team clearly outplayed the Tennes-
scans at every point of the game. though
they were unfortunate in getting the worst
of decisions
The following letter in regard to the con-
test was handed to The Age-Herald by the
celebrated coach last might:
Sporting Editor Age-Herad:
Dear Sir:-In The Sporting News col
umns of the Montgomery Advertiser of
December 2. writer, under the caption
of Squire Brown, referring to tine football
game between Auburn and Sewanee on
Thanksgiving Day, has the following to
say:
~ asked Mr. Heisrnan Thursday night
after the game his opinion of 1t, and he
stated that they would enter protest
against the decision on That first run and
| touchdown no other point did he mention,
though 1 asked him several times
II wish ito state that 1 have been entirely
misquoted. Not only did 1 not meet any
individual that night or any either time in
my life by the name of Squire Brown but
the words attributed to are entirely
fictitious I spoke them to nobody The
only newspaper man L saw at all was Mr..
Screws of the Advertiser, and he did ask
me what l thought of the game. This was
what l said, and all 1 said:
~ think we completely outplayed Sc
vance from start to finish, both extensively
and defensively; and it was only the out
raseous work of uhe officials That made
it possible for Sewanee to score at ALL 1
think the work OF both officials was, by
all odds, the worst 1 ever saw, and l don't
mind procla.ming it from the housetops."
This was exactly what l told Mr..
| Screws-no more, no less; and he did not
| say a single word more nor ask single
| other question. 1 said not one word about
! protesting the game or the grounds on
| which it would, could or should be pro-
tested.
LAS a matter of fact the ground which 1
| am alleged to have assigned was the very
| smallest of our troubles, and in nowse af-
| fected us, for we took the ball back willing
| ly enough, knowing we could duplicate the
performance, which we did, with the great
est imaginable ease. Here, however, did
come in Umpire Taylor's first meddling in
| terposition, as he made Auburn bring the
ball back, claiming he hadn't blown his
whistle ordering play to be resumed after
time had been taken out. Now 1t is the
| referees business not the umpires to order
| play to he resumed after time has been
| taken out for any reason, and Taylor had
| absolutely no power to make such a de-
| cision.
Question of the Punt Out
| "But what was of far greater consequence
| and damage to Auburn was Taylor'S de-
| eision that Skeggs had not made a fair
| catch from the punt-out after Auburn had
twice made her first touchdown. Here
| again he transgressed his authority, for
| 1t is the referees business to decide on
| fair catches Unwarranted meddling by
| the umpire, No. %
"These mistakes, however, pale into in
1 significance when compared to the same
\ officials failure to keep the Sewanee team
| ION side" behind its own goal when Auburn
1 tried to kick goal after the fair catch from
| the punt-out following Auburn's second
| touchdown. Instead he permitted them
| to line up within five yards of the
| ball, a ruling which would render it impos-
| sible for the most expert kicker in the
world to kick the goal without having it
blocked, which indeed was the result when
Auburn bravely tried, the ball going
straight for the goal posts when 1t was
| blocked
| Contrast now for a moment this ruling
| of Umpire Taylor with the one he made
| In identieally the same case after Auburn's
| second touchdown against Georgia on No
| yember IS. Taylor also umpired that game,
| and on the occasion 1 speak of he kept the
| Georgia team strictly behind its own goal
line while Auburn made its effort to kick
| the goal after the successful punt-out.
Neither ruling was correct.
| Ornaments cannot come within ten yards
| of tine line on which the fair catch was
l made. Rule (b), but by necessary i'm
| plication may come that near.
4 stake my reputation as a football expert
| on the statement that both rulings proved
TayIor's fncompetency
Scores Mr.. Taylor
| A third example of Taylor's meddlesome
| disposition was shown in his freely ex-
| pressed opinion at the most crucial period
! of the game as to whether, in measuring
| to see IL Sewanee mad made her yards
! or three trials, measurement should be
| made from the center of the ball or from
| the nearest point.
| There is no rule whatever on the point,
| but Taylor's put n'-entirely unwarranted
! and improper-turned the scales in the be-
| fuddled pate of the wishy-washy referee
| once more against Auburn, as 1t had be-
| fore gone and was still to go on every de-
| cision throughout the entire game.
| But the most atroeious of all Taylor's
| decisions were those in which he endorsed
| Sewanee's ends on falling on the ball aftet
| their fu1lback had kicked 1t. The claim
was-and it always allowed-that the
| fullback, after kicking it, ran down the
| field and put the men on side; but the
| fact was that 1t was generally not the
| fuilback, but some other Sewanee man
| who cried ION side and Taylor, to give
1 him the more charitable of the only two