The Evening statesman. [volume] (Walla Walla, Wash.) 1903-1910, 1903-12-29

|
biguous in several instances. He says
| During the past year much discus
sion has arisen regarding the lntefpre-
| tation of some rules. When the play
| is made near a side line may any OF the
| PLAYERS line UP out of the bounds? Ihls
should be stated positively, yes or no.
as this is very often a ground Tor eA-
| cuse.
Rule says: "A goal is made by
| licking the ball, in any way except pv
A punt from the field of play over the
| cross-bar of the opponents goal NO"
| this should read: "A goal is made py
1 drop kick or place kick from the field
| Of play
During the past season the results OF
| two games We're left to me for decls-
ion based upon the follow conditions:
! In one game the center had passed the
| ball to the quarterback. who, standing
held the ball in his hand and the full-
back kicked it over the cross bar OF
| the opponents goal. Another time the
| ball had been fumbled by one side on
| their own 25-yard line, when one OF
| the opponents came through and kick
| ed it as it lay on the ground and 1t &C
cidentally went across the cross-bar'
| Under the rule as it now is you could
not do otherwise than allow goal,
Yet under rule no such methods of
kicking are described.
Under rule 10, section s. much dis
| cussiCn has arisen as to how player
must be punished for running into or
! interfering with the kicker after he has
| kicked. The rules committee require
that the officials punish this offense
severely, but do not state how why
not state that the offending side shall
receive so many yards or if in the opln-
ion of the officials the offense is very
J severe disqualification? However, a
PLAYER could be disqualified under the
rule of unnecessary roughness.
Rule II section A. as regards the
| loss of twenty yards. has been the sub
| ject of much dispute, most teams
| claiming that if. they were put back
twenty yards for holding on first down,
| anu IL lIitS tiiEli put INC Jctii Al Bi''S
by swapping the ball to the quarter
back and he touched it down, they
| would have a first down, as they had
| lost twenty yards. In this way they
! avoi1ed the rule, which said when they
wer put back under the penalty the
| point to be gained remained unchang-
| ed. The rule should read, the loss of
! twenty yards, exclusive of penalties.
This would be none too severe for
holding
Rule %, section \, in regard to
touching the ball in from out of bounds
and then Kicking, it is indefinite. Must
the man touching it be inside of the
side line when he kicks, and, if so. how
far may he come in before kicking?
Rule %, section A, says the Oppo
nents must remain behind the goal
line until the ball is placed on the
this rule, it should state they must be
put five yards in their own goal other
wise there can be no penalty for the
viola ton.
Under the rule for charging before
the ball touches the ground on free
kick l think this is true anyhow, but
many officials say you cannot put them
back in their own goal.
Rule IA, section B, should limit in
some way the number of times the side
having a free kick can have a short
kick, which does not go ten yards be-
fore being touched by an opponent.
Under rule %, section B, the penalty
for throwing, passing or batting a ball
toward the opponents goal as it is at
present is a shifting penalty and at
times seems very unfair. If the rule
read the point to be gained remains
unchanged,' the penalty would always
be a just one.
Instead of rule 49, sections Il, G and
D, and E.. why not substitute gem
eral rule which will say that at least
six players must be on the line of
scriminage at all times. but if seven
players are on the line of scrimmage
between the twenty-tVe-yard lines,
then the first player receiving the ball
from the center or snapperback may
carry it beyond the line of scrimmage.
provided in so doing he crosses such
line outside the second man from the
center on said line?
This rule would make it easy for Off
Gals to know positively when any vfo-
lation occurred. The way it is now it
is almost impossible to do so. If this
rule We're adopted it would make it
optional to use either style of play be-
tween the twenty-five-y yard lines.
The past year. l believe. has clearly
demonstrated that the game had not
shown any more open work between
the twenty five-yard lines than under
the old rule: in fact, l think the oppo-
site has been true. 1t has forced a line
attack, because there are not enough
men in the interference to circle a good
end successfully. The suggestions
would leave the style of game to be
played optional
WaIcott to Meet Temple.
BOSTON. Mass. Dec. 29.-After