New-York tribune., 1906-06-19
YALE ATHLETIC REFORM,
Three Points at Issue in Adminis-
tratiOn of Sports.
IBy Telegraph to TIE Tribune.1


New Haven, June 1S.-The reorganization OF
4ale's methods OF athletic administration has for
the last eight weeks been the source OF much
friction between the general advisory COMMITTEES on
The one hand and the joint undergraduates faculty.
committee on the other There three points at
issue
The first point under discussion is the form of
annette accounts, so as TO fuller publicity
OF detail; secondly, questions of extravagance in
connection with expenses of visiting coaches: third
the equalzing OF eligibility rules as between YaIs
and Harvard. the issue involved In the last point
being the exclusion from intercollegiate teams OF
members of the Yale professional schools as ia
now the case at Harvard.
In explanation of the Yale situation at the pres
ent junCture the following statement was made to-
day by a representative Yale aIumnus Of New
Haven. who has not heretofore written on the sub
ject;
that the Once of the coT1-1ifte snail ba = :.+ - 5,s
the genera a+bIa+c 1oIi ~ rs % ,t oS 70 Glrees @
It's membership shall consist of the captains and
as well as the treasurer. Mr.. Camp together with
t rII[se sIaduaIes elected annually Inc theory OF
that the action of the committee may be reversed
noned In fact. the committees manages about as
1t peases, after the manner OF most boards OF d.
Tectors, with the somewhat unusual facility af-
graduate and undersraduate members ''0e-- -''
Where the student body is TO be called on its
Undergraduate members come TO the front. When
II Is necessary TO treat with the faculty the grad
yates, one of whom is on the Law School faculty
ana TWO on the corporation, undertake the work
nature. are prepared by the graduate advisers and
signed ny them and one Undergraduate. Mr., Camp
directs the strategy but in general does not ap-
AS has been recently shown in print the business
OF the committee is conducted in loose form.
Practically, therefore. Yae's athletic policy has
been shaped for decade by the athletic wing
Of the graduates primarily by Mr. Camp; second
ariy, by his graduate colleagues on the COMMITTEES
gers. In effect therefore. the undergraduate body
outside Of those who make business of athletics,
have little more influence over the policy OF ath-
lettcs than the stockholders of a bank the
character OF its investments. During the discussion
of athletic abuses OF the last year, and. indeed.
before it began, they showed themselves apprecia-
tive Of the need Of reform and IL has not been
due TO their reluctance conservatism that
forms have been slow in coming Probably there Is
no better way than by sucn sraduaJe assistance
managers ard secure a consistent and permanent
working policy but IL is a system quite different
from the control which underSraduates are gen
The centre Of influence is in the athletic wing OF
ory committee should be held responsible for the de-
fects Of Yales athletic system and the abuses that
have grown up under their hands as well as for
its merits The faculty has recenrIv called the at
tentiO1 OF this committee 10 the fact that the
power 10 manage athletics is delegated 10 them nv
the faculty subject TO withdrawal, il misused, and
certain matters have been pointed out, OF
FThich they insist must be promptly changed and
The unwillingness OF the graduate advisers 70
cept responsibility for these changes and 10 admit
sistence on them by the faculty. seems 70 be the
cause Of such friction as is commonly reported 10
exist.
A comment suggested by the situation IS that
Yales athletic policy would be benefited by broad
the elective members Of the committee who have
by representatfve New Haven alumni not members
either Of the faculty Of the corporation The rlan
double membership alluded 20 IS source OF some
embarrassment 20 all the interests involved