Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-05-29
KEPT FORWARD PASS
Penn and Harvard Worked To-
gether for Its Retention.
YALE IDEA VOTED DOWN
Percy Haughton and Carl Williams
Chiefly Responsible for Another
Trial of Clever Play.
BY Edward R. Bushnell,

Underneath the final revision Of the
FOOT ball rules was combination Of
FORCES, as unexpected as it was power
ful, and whose existence has just come
TO light. There has been a great deal
OF speculation among foot ball and college
men as to why the rules committee at
It's New York session so completely revers
ed itself on the question of the forward
pass This play, by the way, consumed
about nine-tenths of the committees time
from its first to its last session. One
element wanted it limited to back OF the
line of scrimmage. which meant its vir-
tual elimination. while the other wanted
II not only retained, but practically all
Its restrictions removed
When the committee met in Philadel-
phia the advocates of the forward pass
were making a hard fight for the reten-
ton of the play. but its opponents
thought they had shown that the play
could not be operated safely. Those who
wanted the forward pass limited to be-
hind the line of sCrimmage succeeded i'm
getting a majority vote and they prac-
tically voted the play out of existence
and then Offset this weakening of the
attack by reducing the distance to be
gained in three downs from ten yards to
eight yards.
Here were introduced the factors which
brought about the combination by which
the forward pass was saved. 1t was
nothing else than a combination between
the representatives of the University of
Pennsylvania and Harvard. as opposed
to the Yale idea, supported by Walter
Camp, which was 10 do away with the
forward pass. The Harvard and Penn
sylvania representatives on the committee
were Crawford. Blagden and John c. Bell.
But at the Philadelphia meeting they had
olx
Haughton and DR.. Carl Williams. the two
men all-powerful in The coaching at the
two institutions. DIR. Williams had at
tended some of the earlier sessions with
Mr.. Bell and had persistently opposed
those who wanted to eliminate the for
ward pass.
When Mr.. Haughton came to Philadel-
phia he and Or. Williams tried to prove
that the forward pass could be operated
safely. They lost out on the final vote,
but received another chance when DR..
Williams and Mr.. Blagden were appoint
ed members Of a subcommittee, with E.
X. Hall of Dartmouth, to codify the rules
then determined upon Immediately after
this session DR.. Williams and Mr.. Haugh-
ton held a conference by themselves, and
after several hours worked out plan by
which they believed the forward pass
could be saved. Then Dr. Williams, Mr..
Hall and Mr.. Haughton. the latter as the
substitute for Mr.. Blagden. attempted to
work out some form of game from the
rules agreed upon at the Philadelphia
meeting. With two members opposed to
the changes and believing that they were
fmpracticabie there was majority of the
committee in opposition to the new rules.
The subcommittee however, did its work,
prepared its report and then told the COM
mittee that the game thus planned would
be failure.
In the meantime DIR. William and Mr..
Haughton sent to each member of the big
committee An outline of the plan they
hud lyads ind flx-f for no L..
walton of the forward pass. The two re-
ports went out together and when the
committee reconvened In New YORK
enough of the members Of the committee
had been convinced of the practicability
Of the Williams-Haughton plan to bring
about a reconsideration of the vote by
which the forward pass had been limited
to behind the line of scrimmage- 1t was
then an easy matter to get enough votes
for the new idea, because the western
representatives We're so anxious to retain
tho forward pass that they were willing
to vote for any sort of a plan that looked
operative.
The acceptance of the new plan meant
the complete rejection of the scheme in
PRODUCED by Walter Camp for the limiting
of the defense to the width of the Of
Tense. While there were no personalities
introduced into the discussions and the
best of feeling prevailed, it is significant
Just the same that the Yale position was
not sustained in either of the important
OF even more significance was the fact
that Harvard and Pennsylvania, hitherto
supposedly opposed to each other. sup
piled the combination which OutvOted the
Yale plan and preserved the forward
pass. The small majority which the new
plan received accounts for the criti5esms
made against the rules by certain mem
bers of the committee. Mr.. Camp has
Of the officials will be doubled and that
there Is likely to be more wrangling than
usual over violation of the rules. This
point Is undoubtedly well taken, and it
which select officials 30 exercise unusual
care in those they appoint.
The forward pass will have one more
trial and IL it fails this fall. or If any
injuries or fatalities that may occur can
be traced to it, those who are determined
to see it abolished will probably have
little opposition another year.
Harvard's Great Rowing.
Just now Harvard Is contesting with
Cornell the right to be ranked as Ameri-
cas- great rowing university. Harvard
has done remarkably we'll this year. Her
varsity crew decisively defeated Annapo-
lis, whose crew has since beaten both
Georgetown and Syracuse Furthermore,
there have come from Cambridge reports
SCOUT record-breaking time trials rowed
by the Crimson eight.
Harvard's latest achievement OF which
she had reason to be proud was her
double victory i'm the American regatta on
the Schuyikill last week. The Crimson s
junior eight, composed of men who had
never rowed in a varsity shell at New
London. administered a decisive defeat
10 Columbia and Pennsylvania
Then, with hardly an hours rest the
Crimson youngsters turned out again
and defeated the Georgetown varsity
and a picked All-Philadelphia crew. The
ease with which they held the early
advantage they gained over Georgetown
was most impressive. and speaks volumes
for what Harvard should do against
Yale at New London.
Outside OF Harvards excellent rowing.
the regatta emphasized the skill with
which the stewards conducted 1t. 1t was
an object lesson to nearly every rowing
association which attempts to promote
fsgattas- BY use of the double referee
system the races were rowed on schedule
time This was accomplished largely by
impressing upon the crews the necessity
ar getting to the starting line on time.
All Of the races We're evenly contested,
and the whole regatta was conducted
with such dispatch and lack of confusion
that II should be an example to other
rowing bodies.