Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-11-27


up the game ana make 1t more lntelligiDl'
10 the spectators. There is no doubt tina
the game justified in some measure thu
expectations of the committee, but 1t i:
certain that the committee will profit by
the experiences of this season and remed,
some of the defects in the game.
According TO statistics gathered from
all over the United States there were
about dozen deaths which have beer
attributed to foot ball. But the fact
should be noted that not more than one
or TWO occurred i'll games which came
under the supervision of those colleges
represented on the foot ball rules commit
tee. In the main they were confined tt
school and club teams, where there was
little or no training. Not one of the big
universities had any sort of an accident
of serious or fatal nature. Further
more. the minor injuries were reduced Z,
per cent
The rule which had this beneficial
effect of reducing injuries was that
which prohibited the man carrying the
ball from being pulled or pushed by
impossible and further made it neces-
sary that the ball should be in sight
all the time.
Will Forward Pass Be Retainedp
There is much speculation as to what
will happen to the forward pass next
year. 1t cannot be said that this play
was a success in the big games. 1t is
TOO easily defended against to become
liable ground gamer. In the Har-
vard-Yale game Yale did not once at
tempt it, and the few times Harvard en-
ployed it, it resulted in failure. Rather
oddly. Yale used it in her game with
Princeton, and 1t won the contest for
her. 1t was also worthy Of note that
after being somewhat of a failure in
the Michigan Minnesota game, two
successful forward passes worked sue
cessively made 'Michigan's winning
touchdown possible.
Concerning the value Of the forward
pass. good many Of its opponents
claim it is directly responsible for the
falling of in attendance at all the big
games this year With the exception
Of the Harvard-Yale game at New
Haven the attendance at all the cham
pionship contests was smaller than last
year and the foot ball receipts for
every big university have fallen below
the usual standard OF course. 1t is
hardly fair to blame the forward pass
for all of this. The changes in the
rules were SO many that the impression
prevailed in many quarters that the
new game would not be Ineligible to
the spectators The falling off in at
tendance figures was most noticeable
in the preliminary games. Where here
tofore there had been many people who
attended the early games because OF
their love of foot ball, this year that
very we'll known that the forward pass
has to Justify it's existence this year or
he eliminated The rules committee
thought il had the play killed last
sylvania and Percy Haughton Of Har-
ward secured a reconsideration Of the
motion which limited it to back of the
line Of scrimmage. and the play was
say whether or not it has made good
this fall. That will be determined by
the rules committee. The chances are
that it will have a harder fight this
year than ever. and it need not be sur
rr;sng if it is cut out altogether. OF
E at least restricted to behind the line OF
d. scrimmage.
Yale's Peculiar Season.
The Yale season was the most peculiar
In the history of the game at New
Haven. Yale's 1910 eleven will Away:
:. be known as the Comeback" team
When Yale was beaten 21-O by Brown
&. the college world concluded that this wa.
e indeed an of year for Yale and rele
gated the Ellis for the time being to thu
. minor college class But the critics
g. most of them at least, failed TO consider
. what wonderful spirit existed at New
e Haven. Prior to the Brown game Yal'
had been beaten by West Point 9-3 ant
. held to scoreless tie by Vanderbilt. Ac
cordingiy after the Brown disaster ther'
hundred that Yale could beat Princeton
But Yale net only beat the Tigers, blu
outpiayed them every minute of the
:ame. That game demonstrated that tn
Tigers were not nearly as strong as thei
clean record indicated.
Even after Yale's wonderful stan,
against Princeton few critics thought tn
Ellis had any kind of chance agains
thought that Yale could even proven
Harvard from scoring. Since the Har
vard-Yale game foot ball critics hav
been trying to explain the result. Thos
who are partisans OF Harvard have a.
tempted to explain the draw by pointin
out the mistakes in judgment which Har
ward made and costly fumbles Of he
backs. Probably three-quarters of tn
critics contend that Harvard should hav
won that game on the ground that tn
Crimson gained two yards to every on
for Yale.
The writer does not admit the justic
OF this conclusion. There is altogethe
too much of an inclination to measur
the strength Of two teams by the numbe
OF yards they gain. Such persons forge
that there are other elements just as In
portant in deciding the superiority of tw
teams There were three such factors
the Yale-Harvard game One was I'll
onense and the second a combination
"eneralship and physical courage and III
third. defense. Harvard was superior
Yale only in her attack The Crinso
headway by their line punging. but II
ends we're outpiayed as far as generalshi
and defense are concerned. Howe, I'll
Yale quarterback. was worth any tw
men that Harvard had. He ran the teal
I'm splendid fashion. kicked we'll I'm
handled punts faultleSsly.
There has been altogether too much Ell
pi'ass laid on the frmbing of Harvar
in the back field Any foot ball ma
knows that we'll trained team does M
tumble without some cause. In this gan
Harvards fumblinc of punts was due
the wonderful tackling of Fitzpatrick an
Brooke. the Yale ends. These two me
swooped down on the Harvard backs
fercely and tackled with such yiciousne.
that Harvard hardly ever had chan,
to return kicks. This is why the Ha
ward backs were worried every time How
punted. That they fumbled is due mo,
to Yale's playing than to their own veal
ness.
Toward the end of the game Howe hs
the ball on Yales 1O-yard line when Co
bett dropped II. Here again Yale's ma
relous defense and sharp tackling we
responsible for Harvard's weakness. tt
writer makes the point that Yale shou
receive credit for this II cerfainlv- 81 yut