New-York tribune., 1911-12-28

rule leaving seven men on the line OF scrim
mage and six players eligible to receive ant
make the pass as formerly. Abolish the on
side kick and permit Of body checking any
where in the field Of play which is no
dangerous to life and limb and is honestl!
designed to further the interests Of or checl
the actual play.
3. The teams should exchange goals aftel
each score and before each quarter. Un
less a score is made. the ball should not b'
kicked off between halves or before scor'
is made, but should be placed In the rela
tive position at the other end Of the helc
with the number of downs etc, to remair
the same In case of failure at try a
goal from the field or a touchback, the bal
should be brought back to the last line o.
scrimmage, with possession passing to th'
opponents.
With such a system Of play each team
will get one-half Of the playing time anc
every inch IT has gained at any time ove1
the sixty minutes of play. Weather con
ditlons will be equalized the three arms o
the offence will be made applicable undel
all conditions over the entire playing fielC
and expressed in full, free and unrestricted
effort. This will make the game simple
natural, just and free from dangers.
The fact that the player with the bal
will have the right to pass, kick or run II
any part OF the field will cast a doubt into
the minds of the defensive team as 10 his
purpose, and naturally eliminate the deadly
tackle and body check, since they will prove
unscientific and fruitless. Two officials
the referee, who should have jurisdiction
over the ball and time, and the umpire
who should have jurisdiction over the play
! ers-are all that are necessary.
| The only way the continuity of five
downs, or any number Of downs that the
rule makers determine upon, can be broken
! is by tumble the incompletion. tumble OF
A., interception of the forward pass or by vol
| unfairly kicking the ball before the fifth
down. The penalty for the failure of the
! forward pass should be possession to the
| opponents.
The only mark within the field of play
would be TO designate the centre. This
will make the game as strong as the rock
| of Gibraltar and free from further attack
Of would-be reformers. Such rules will abb
| solutely determine under free conditions
| the point at issue-the question of personal
| equation.
These suggestions may be open TO argu-
ment. If so, the writer invites open crit
| icism-not Indifference ! fail to see that
| either team is Disseminated against under
J these rules, or has not an absolute and
just right to express its natural powers OF
| offence and defence. The defence Will be
| left entirely elastic as to its alignments,
| while the offence will be free and unshack-
led. with the goal line as the objective
point.
The impossibility of determining a just
distance-say, ten. eight or five yards-to be
gained on any number of downs is clearly
recognized when you attempt to ascer-
tain on what grounds to base calcu-
lations. The number of unnatural restric-
tions that have been imposed in order &c
discover the impossible and the continual
changes and piecemeal legislation that have
been enacted throughout the history OF
football should prove ample evidence that
| this ruling has been based on one of the
fundamental misconceptions Of the rule
makers. What is the weight Of the team
and what are its powers as allowed under
| the rules TO express its offensive and de
/ fensive strength, on which the rule makers
base their conclusion Of any number ofdownS
10 any distance TO be made? The trouble
is that they are working with variable
quantity and attempting TO produce a con
start. So long as they continue looking
for the Impossible so long Will vari-
Gus groups Of college representatives seek
unfair advantages in the construction of
these unfair and unjust rules and so long
i Mill ha OBJ -,
rules themselves BY eliminating the ques-
tion Of a certain distance 10 be made with
IN the goal lines and leaving the goal line
as the distance 10 be made and by giving
the offence fun and free use Of its three
| arms Of service-the kick, the pass and the
rush-all fruitless and contentious discus
sions will be obviated and leave the game
! simple, just, natural and free. BY allow
ing each team five or six downs alternate
~ until score is made these purposes Will
be accomplished.
Some will decry these suggestions as rad
ical and revolutionary, but attention may
! be called 10 the fact that there is nothing
irrational about the game Of intercollegiate
football save the artificial restrictions inn
posed the attempt TO do the impossible, in
!
number of downs. the gross discrimination
of the time element, and the unnecessary
roughness that II has engineered.
Some will say that the unlimited use of
the forward pass will increase scoring. All
right increase the scoring Both sides
will have an equal opportunity in this re-
spect They also viii contend that II Will
; decrease the number of kicks in favor of
the pass Well and good 1t seems to me
| that the pass is as spectacular and far more
! cOntrollable tnan the kick. The kick at it's
/ best is a defensive factor, and will be used
! greatly by the weaker eleven near it's own
/ goal line. If the game is TO have the pass
| let us have ii without restrictions
Reduce these objections 10 their last
analysis and you will find that the oppos-
/ ton will in all likelihood come from the
larger institutions, since the pass is a
/ wicked play when used scientifically by
/ the weaker eleven against the greater
/ strength OF the larger institutions This is
one reason why the small schools in many
/ cases defeat the larger ones in basketball
/ The forward pass does not depend upon
/ physical but rather upon mental ability.
| However. pass or no pass, at least let us
have done with artificial restrictions which
are designed 10 accomplish the impossible
and open the way for unfair advantages
and centre our attention on the number OF
downs 10 be used alternately with the goal
line TO gain.
I MADAM