The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-12-22
FOOTBALL CHANGES.
COMMITTEE ON RULES WILL HAvE
SOME HARD NUTS TO
CRACK
PECULIAR PLAYS OF THE YEAR
Many Cases Where Umpires and Ref
erees Differ In Interpreting
Existing Code, Which
Puzzles Experts.

The football solons will have few
nuts to crack when they convene next
month for their annual survey of the
football situation and proceed to correct
and eliminate all the flaws and weak
nesses in the rules of the game.
The termination of a season upon the
gridiron usually results in some peculiar
construction of an existing rule being
brought very forcibly to the public gaze
or the rules themselves are discovered to
be wanting upon certain play. Conse-
quently, the official who presided. over a
game wherein such a condition arose be-
comes a law unto himself and lays down
ruling which the lawmakers must codi-
fly or enact some new rule to meet
similar contingency for the future.
During the season just brought to a
close several very pertinent questions
have arisen, which will materially affect
the game of the future. The most i'm
portant rule requiring legislation, new or
revised, is the one appertaining to long
run made when the opponents were Off
side or committing foul. The rule upon
this subject says:
whenever a foul is committed which,
in the opinion of the umpire, did not az
feet the play, the offended side may de-
cline the penalty. In case of a run being
made from this play, not more than fiji
teen yards from the spot where the foul
was committed shall be allowed
This is the verest nonsense and not
applicable to the needs of the game at
all. When this rule was first enacted 1t
was meant to apply to offsfde on a try
for goal, but has ever since been
mlSeonstrued into applying to all plays.
Can anyone imagine long run result
ing in which the offside or foul COM
mitted by the opponents did affect the
play? If it had then that play could not
have been accomplished.
But what the public desires, and par
ticularly the players, is a rule which
will legalize the long run, or at least
grant choice to the offended side in
stead of simply allowing them fifteen
yards.
In the 1ndian-Pennsylvania game this
year this rule operated in robbing the
redmen of touchdown on a run of
forty yards, and, as it turned out, lost
them the game, for an offside play of a
pennsylvania player, while in the Haver-
ford Charter game on two consecutive
plays, HaVerford only secured total Of
thirty yards where the runs actually
netted her fffty-f1ve and thirty-five yards
year, depriving them of possible touch
down and an opportunity to tie the score.
Again, the inadequacy of the rule arises
when a play of this character occurs on
or inside the ten-yard line The option
of fifteen yards cannot be granted here,
as this would result in a touchdown. and
another rule only allows half the dis
lance at this stage of the game, clearly
contradicting the former ruling and CIV
ing the defending side every advantage
for their own foul playing. This throws
the burden of Interpretation upon the Off
Gals. In the Episcopal-De Lancey game
the officials refused to allow De Lancey
a touchdown made from EpiscopaPs
eight-yard line, and allowed De- Lancey
to advance to the four-yard line, where a
tumble occurring and Episcopal securing
the ball touchdown and higher score
was averted. When a team is offsde ON
a kickoff and the five-yard penalty in
fjicted how should it be applied?
Where Experts Differ.
Here is rule where nearly all the ex-
perts are at odds Shall the team kick
over from the center of the field and
their opponents come five yards nearer,
or shall they retire to their fifty-yard
line for the kick, bringing their oppo-
nents up to their fifty-yard line? Such
and Carl Williams support the former
theory, while Dashiell, Weightington,
Wrenn, Corbin and Woodruff sustain the
latter Interpretation. The latter reason
ing is undoubtedly the only one to be
construed from the rules, as section d,
rule 13, says "at kickoff and on kick
from a fair catch the opposite side must
stand at least ten yards in front of the
ball until 1t s kicked while section b,
rule H. requires that in all kicks must go
at least ten yards to be legal. This would
as 1t would bring the opposing forces
within five yards of each other, and
should the kick be blocked it would only
go five yards into the opponents terri
tory.
The former ruling was made by Dr.
Stauffer in a game between Pennsyl-
vania and Swarthmore, following a
similar decision in a West Point game
of last year, at which time Woodruff and
all the Pennsylvania coaches and play
ers objected to his ruling. 1t has occurred
in many other games this year and al
ways decided as by the latter ruling, as
was done in the Annapolis-We loint
game by Umpire Wrenn last Saturday.
A Peculiar Play.
If free catch is made in a try Tor
goal from placement, and should time
expire, before the kick is made, should
the attempt at goal then be allowed?
This is a very peculiar play and oc-
CURED in the Swarthmore- Central high
school game. There is no doubt as to the
trial for goal after touchdown should
time expire as rule IL, section C, specih-
cally states that this should be done.
But in the absence O. a rule on the ques-
ton, should this be allowed? The referee
in the game in question decided to allow
the trial and the goal was kicked The
argument in favor of allowing the trial
Is that the kicking Of the goal is part
of the play, the same as the man run
ming with the ball cannot be deprived of
his touchdown until he has been tackled
and the ball declared dead there
fore the kicking of the goal only COM
pletes the balance Of the play But some
definite rule is necessary on this point
A very adroit piece of strategy came
to light In one of the school games and
which was afterwards attempted and
succeeded once in one It the big Four
games in New England.
Putting the Ball I'm Play.
This method Of putting the ball in play
after going out of bounds is by touch