Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1909-09-05
MANY POSSIBILITIES
IN FORWARD PASS
Foot Ball Authorities May
Have to Restrict Develop
ments of Play.
By Edward r. Bushnell.

Foot ball coaches and others who have
been following closely The modern trend
OF the game are unanimous IN the peHel
that the coming season viii witness some
radical changes in the use Of the for"aid
pass, and that the perfectinS OF TINS play
will either revoutionize the game or Will
cause the Introduction of radically he"
miles This conclusion is based on the
fact that last year was the first since the
coming of the forward pass that coaches'
in the east at least. really selzed ana
worked out the possibilities of TINS play.
When the forward pass was frst lesal-
lied eastern coaches were almost unanl-
nous in their opinion that the play had
no future beyond its use as an occasional
trick pIay AS a result the new oHense
was almost totally disregarded and during
the first two years there were not a re"
,bampionship games in which the play
was used no more than once IN Single
half So risky it considered tndt
coaches refused to try IT in any iorHduoll
until they had seen 1t successfully opeia
ed by some other team -
Another evidence of this spirit was 'Hat
until last year the forward pass wae
operated by only one player. But during
The past season there was an awakening
TO its possibilities. Coaches endeaSoreu
10 have at least two men who could tnro"
the ball, with the result that the oHense
was greatly varied. This variation Is
certain TO be widely extended this fall for
nov the tendency will be to employ at
least four men in handling the forward
pass And III this connection 1t may De
stated that other things being equai, any
team that has combination OF Sood
running backs all of whom can operate
tho forward pass in variety of plays,
will have an offense that will raise havoc
with pretty nearly any defense.
The perfection in this sort of forward
passing game is bound to bring about a
condition of affairs similar to that
which first resulted In the lesahz-
ing of the play. The forward pass
was made legal in order to weaken the
defensive side of the game, which had
grown too strong. When this condltlol
becomes a reality the foot ball rules com
mittee will have another problem on ITS
hands And If the signs are read aTlsht
the time is not far distant when they VIII
he confronted once more with the silud-
ton of three wears ago. A. A. StagS.
coach of the University of Chicago, ana
a member of the rules committee has
already gone on record as OF the OPINION
that the working out of new poSslplntleS
with the forward pass will Ultimately re-
suit in some new rules that will restrict
the play in question.
Changes in the Rules.
Although the changes in the rules under
which the game will be played this fall
are not very radical compared with some
Of previous years they are nevertheless
OF extreme Importance. These changes,
rather than being alterations in the game
tend to eliminate unfairness in the rules
and TO make the offense and defense more
equal The following are the important
changes in the 1909 rules:
L. The value of goal from field, wheth-
er place or drop kick, is reduced from
4 10 . points.
> The side having a kick out has the
option of making the kick. as under the
old rules or putting the ball down for a
sc-immage on their o5-yard line.
=. IN case an end rush of the offending
side stands more than one foot back OF
The line of scrimmage but less than yard
back, he is not eligible to receive a for
ward pass.
Of these three changes the first two are
probably of the most Importance. There
is already wide divergence of opinion
as to the wisdom of the committee in re-
ducing the value of a goal from field. 1t
will be noticed that the rules committee
acts on this point at regular intervals,
usually after a season in which two or
three big teams have developed a star
goal kicker Several years ago they re
.uced the value of such a goal from ) to
points. Now they have decided that it
is worth only :; points. They argue from
the standpoint that a touchdown is at
least equal TO two neid goals, and that
the latter method of scoring places d
premium on chance.
On the other hand the advocates of the
kicking game claim that the chief criti-
cism against the field goals come from
those teams which persistently neglect
this method of scoring. For instance
Glenn Warner of the Carlisle Indians in
sists with good reason that field goal
kicking is something that can be de-
reloped with the same certainty as other
scoring devices, and that if other colleges
would devote more attention TO coaching
men for goal kicking no team would have
that the kicking game is sadly neglected
Indeed, il would be pertinent to ask if the
committee would not be doing the game
Il service If il increased rather than de-
creased the value of the field goal.
Fairness to the Defending Side.
No student of the game can have any
thing but praise for the action OF the
rule makers in giving the defending side
the option of kick out or putting the
hal! in play by scrimmage on its twenty
Vineyard line. A single instance of the
injustice of the old rule compelling the
kick out will illustrate the improvement
this change Will make In the game be-
tween Pennsylvania and Cornell in 1906
very strong wind was sweeping down
The field. Just before the close of the
game Cornell worked the ball down in