Evening journal., 1909-04-24
POLO
BASKETBALL
BASE BALL
TO PLAY POLO
GAME AGAIN
Whitehurst, Arbitrator, Makes
Suggestion to Manager
Coward

Manager Cloward of the Eleventh
Street Rink to-day made public DR.
NJ NJ. Whitehurst's decision in the
Wilmington Baltimore polo game play
ed here on April Q, which ended in Will
mingtor's favor after a protested goal
had been counted for Wilmington. DR..
Whitehurst suggests that as the game
came 70 Wilmington on a nuke that
IL be played over. Arrangements will
be made to play off the game If it af-
fects the final standing OF the teams
entered in the Tri-City polo series.
Following is Mr.. Whitehurst's deci-
sion:
Baltimore, Md, April q, 1909
Mr. n. .. Coward, Wilmington, Del
Dear Mr.. Coward: In reference to
the disputed game, Wilmington VS..
Baltimore. April 9th.
had Mr.. Griffin. the offending goal
tender, come TO my Office and give in
detail circumstances of tho alleged
foul. ] then called up Mr.. Jaekens.
getting his version. Mr.. Jaekens said
number Of persons at the game
agreed with him. as did number of
the Wilmington players that no goal
should he declared l depended on the
statements of Mr.. Taylor and Mr.. Crit
fin. both of whom are gentlemen Of
integrity and are the only ones that
should bo considered in the con-
troversy. Mr.. Taylor, as referee, was
put on the floor TO watch for unfair
play MIR. Griffith was in the best
position 20 judge for his own actions.
Rule %, Sec. /. Spalding Rules. 1T
the referee decides that a foul is made
in the goal by the goal-tender or by
any player taking his place that pre-
vents a goal being made. n goal shall
be declared for the opposing team"
Rule %, Sec. B. "If any player stop.
hat or catch the ball with his hands
or arms, it shall be declared a foul
Referring to rule %. Mr.. Griffin most
undoubtedly made a foul. An inten-
tional foul is questionable because the
Baltimore Polo League rules have con-
coded the right Of face protection u
our goal tends Mr.. Griffin states that
he was protecting his-face and I'm doing
so, did deliberately and Intentionally
do SO But he was not deliberately
and Intentionally committing a foul t.
the best of his knowledge and belief
Just the same he fouled according to
Wilmingtons playing rules, and as
Baltimore was playing under those
rules VIC must declare It a foul.
The question arises-did that foul
prevent a goal? Mr.. Griffin and Mr.
Taylor both declare the ball about
even with the goal tends head. Mr.
TAYLOR declares to the left Of The goal
tends face. but sufficiently to be on a
line with the foremost part Of his
/ body. Mr.. Griffin declares the ball II
front of the left side of his face. H'
/ struck at II and lodged out of the way
NJ the same time Now If, as Mr.
TAYLOR declares. the bah was sufiicient
| ly'in front to be on line with the fore
most part of the goal-tend's body,
am quite sure that the ball not beins
/ interfered with had dropped to thu
/ foor che bounce would have carried
] II directly into the goal tends body
/ blocking the ball and not allowing d
| to enter the cage. ! cannot see how
any one could foretell the course O
this particular ball. however. In my
mind a foul should be given agains
Mr.. Griffin. unintentional as it was
but I 40 think a goal should be de
clared. Under the existing circum
stances / feel that under a secon'
thought by Wilmington, they woul'
not want tho game and would be onl'
too glad to play it over, which cours
is tho only one l see open. Bot
teams are in the game for the low
of il. Neither desires 70 take an un
fair advantage, and for the sake of tn
good fellowship existing between tn
respective. teams it is my desire 70 Sc
IL played over.
Very cordially yours.
} DR.. NJ Whltehurst.