Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-10-07
GIANTS AND CUBS
TO PLAY IT OFF
The National League Directors
SO Decide at
Meeting.

CINCINNATI. October For the first
time in the history of the National
League Of Base Ball Clubs a post-season
game for the settlement of the champion
ship is announced for Thursday Of this
week. the tangle that arose over the last
series in New York between the New
York and the Chicago clubs having
brought decision from the National
League directors to that effect.
For nearly two days and large part Of
one night the three directors eligible to
sit in the case listened to evidence and
considered the matter in it's various
phases. They finally announced their
decision yesterday afternoon. Chairman
Ebbets Of Brooklyn made a little speech
before asking August Herman of Gin
cinnati to read the text of the decision
and called attention to the Importance of
the case and the care that had been
| taken to give proper consideration to all
Interested.
Two protests were up for decision on
appeals from the ruling of President Pull
| liam. New York appealed from the de-
ciSion sustaining the ruling Of the UNI
pires that a game played September %
was tie, and Chicago appealed from the
decision that it was not entitled to a
| forfeited game score under the league
| constitution. In both cases president
| Pulliam was sustained.
Of Great Importance.
AS to the first case. the decision says:
| I'm our Judgment, this case is the most
| important one that has ever been pre-
scented to the board of directors OF the
National League for it's adjudication
We have given the entire matter the
most careful thought and consideration.
We have examined all Of the testimony
| submitted in evidence very carefully,
and have listened attentively to the argu-
ments advanced by both parties. In ar
irving at our conclusions we are guided
entirely by the law and the rules as they
| exist. and the evidence as 1t Is SUBJ
mitted and cannot be governed by any
thing else. The case. no doubt is fully
understood by every person who has
taken an interest in it,
After detailing the play the directors.
| speaking of Player Merkle's failure to run
| to second base. say:
THE game should have been won for
the New York club had 1t not been for
the reckless, careless. inexcusable blunder
| of one of its players-Merkle.
| The rule covering the play IS quoted,
and the decision continues:
! while 1t may not have been complied
| with in many other games. while other
clubs may not have taken advantage of
conditions. yet 1t did not deprive the
| Chicago club of the -:e..t to do so II 1t so
desired notwithstanding that it might be
termed taking advantage of winning
or losing game upon technicality.
Merkle Alone to Blame.
"Merkle should have had only one thing
! in his mind. viz: To rea' second base in
safety. by a hit. error. or in any other
way. The evidence clearly shows the fol-
\ lowing: After Bridwell hit the ball safely
he ran to and over first base: Mccormick
started for home and crossed the plate;
| Merkle started for second. and when
about half way to the base turned and
ran in the direction of the clubhouse
without having reached second base.
"Emslie was officiating as umpire back
of the pitcher; ODay back of the catcher.
| When the hit was made Emslie fell to the
ground to escape being hit by the ball; he
| got up and watched the play at first base
and saw that the batter had run out his
hit. In the meantime the ball was fielded
| in by Hoffman and eventually felded to
| second base 10 Evers for a put-out on
Merkle. Tinker notified Emslie that Mer-
| kle did not run to second base. Emslie
| stated he did not see the play. and then
| went to his colleague. ODay, and asked
| him whether he had seen the play.
| "O'Day answered in the affirmative. and
then Emslie asked him whether Merkle
| had run to second. and. being informed
| that he had not. Emslie declared Merkle
! out which, under the rule quoted above.
| he not only had right to do, but was re-
| Quired to do"
| Similar Case.
That similar case was remarked at
Pittsburg earlier in the month was men
toned as explaining O'Day's care in no.
ticing the play. and the decision contin-
ues:
1--WE. therefore, find that the ruling as
made by the umpires was in accordance
/ In I'm
with what happened on the field at the
time. To set aside an umpire's decision
on 4 judgment Of play by evidence from
| the persons in attendance at any game
would. in our mind. be establishing a bad
and dangerous precedent. and one that
the base ball public would condemn In a
very short time. In this case. however.
| there is not a single line or word of testl-
| mony offered by the New York club THAI
could even by Inference be construed to
mean that Merkle reached second base at
any time. excepting the affidavit OF the
player himself, which. however, was not
made until after Mr.. Pulliam had passed
on the case. We can. therefore. come to
no other conclusion than that the New
York club lost a well earned victory as
the result of a stupid play OF one OF its
members. We sustain the president in up
| holding the report of the umpireS with
reference to this game.
The directors state that they do not
think any consideration should have been
| given to the protest of the Chicago club.
| It is stated that 1.-The evidence shows that
on the night of the game in question the
| Chicago club filed a claim with Mr.. Pull
liam for forfeiture of the game. This
claim on Chicago's part tied the hands Of
the president and prevented the playing
off of the tie game on the following day.
| The evidence also shows that on the day
following the game in question the New
York club conferred with Mr.. Pulliam and
inquired of him whether they would be re-
quired to play off the tie game and were
Informed by him that they would not be
required to do so. To make an award Of
| the game against the New York club I'M
der these conditions would be absurd. We
therefore sustain the finding Of the presi-
dent with reference to the appeal filed by
the Chicago club.
Only Way Out.
''In reviewing this entire matter We
realize the great Importance that the
game in question may have in determining
as to what club is to be declared the win
ner of the championship in the National
League. In considering the same the
thought has occurred to us as to whether
Or not the New York club can be deprived
Of their rights to play OF the tie game