Waterbury Democrat., 1903-01-06
OPPOSE FOOTBALL CHANGES.

Julian Curtiss Says Game Is All Right
 As It Is-Open Play More Risky.
 Walter Camp of the football rules committee, was in New York ryester- day, and when asked concerning proh- able changes in the playing rules of the game, said that if majority Cf the players of the country favored changes they no doubt would be made. MT Camp said he was not wholly clear as to the cause of the agitation in be- half Of changing the rules, and for that matter it appears that the idea of making changes is a long way from being a universal desire among those who follow the game closely and un- derstand its fine points. One foot ball authority who believes the rules are all right as they are and should be left alone, is Julian Curtiss, who manages the Harvard Yale and Yale Princeton games.
 Those who are clamoring for more open play" says MT Curtiss, should bear in mind that there are more in- juries due to plays made in the open than in close and lineplays. There Is no time in a game mhen the hearts of the spectators are more in their mouths for fear man will be hurt than when a player has caught punt and starts to run it back. As everybody who knows the game is aware, there are more injuries in the open than when the men are punched in scrimmages..
 By systematic development and al- tering of the rules the game has come to be the greatest played by the col- leges, and I, for one would not like 4n Lhly n game brought back to a stage where 1t would be less interesting and scten- tific. When 3O,OOO persons go out to see the game as it is now played and shout themselves hoarse, it strikes me as pretty good evidence that the pres ent style of play is what the spectators like to see. They say that nowadays the onlooker cannot see the ball half of the time. There is one thing he can see, which is better, and that is one line go forward and the other go back. also the man with the ball go forward and those are plays which help make the game as now played so popular.
 Speaking Of open play, I venture to say that if the association game were played on one field and a game, under the college rules were played next door the latter would be no comparison. This tag, you're it style of play would not draw a corporars guard when there was a game of the other sort going on. It seems to me that there is a good deal of hysteria in this open play agitation and cry for the aboli. 1 tion of back of the line formations It comes principally, I suppose, either from those who do not like football and. never did, or from those sources where the teams have met with i'll success under the present style of play. The game has been improving, not go 1 ing backward, but that is no reason why the rules should be changed to suit those who have not kept pace with the development of the game" It is pointed out by the supporters of the game of the present that more 1 players are hurt now than formerly for the reason that many more persons engage in 1t, and not because there is more close play, Those who advance this argument contend that in view of the large increase in the number of football players, there would be as many casualties, if not more, under open play.