The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1911-05-29
ST. JOHNS EXPLAINS.

To The Forum: That a misunder-
standing concerning the st. Johns
Fargo college game must have arisen,
since Coach Watkins tried to explain,
cannot be doubted. Hence st. Johns
asks The Fargo Forum to publish their
side Of the question that the public
might get a fair view of the matter
Mr.. Watkins explanation is not only
one-sided. but positively at variance
with facts. Watkins says: Forth
was at bat and Catlin on second.
The ST Johns shortstop was playing
about four feet back of the line. For
tin drove a grounder directly at the
shortstop, and in running from second
to third, Catlin jumped over the ball.
but did not touch it," So far he is
correct nor did Catlin collide with the
fielder, but we deny that he in no way
interfered with the shortstop A care
full persual of rule SIS, sections 7 and
Of Spaulding's Baseball Guide will
explain. When the umpire explained
to the Fargo college captain, the cap
tain wanted to continue the game and
called on his teammates to take the
field, but Coach Watkins refused to
permit them, ordering his players off
the field.
Coach Flynn of ST. Johns wished to
finish the game and made a PROPOSE
ton, but Watkins refused to listen.
After the game Mr.. watkins publicly
said that IL he had not been too angry
to listen to Coach Flynns proposition.
the game would have continued.
That he admitted that Fargo was
right is denied by Coach Flynn. He
was occupied with the crowd along the
first base line, and not getting a good
view OF the play, thought the two play
ers had come in contact with each
other. In this he admitted to be wrong
and nothing more.
Mr. Watkins claimed that the vice.
president of the college asked the UNI
pire to compromise. Where he got
this piece of information Ia a mystery
to u.s. AS a matter Of fact, the vice.
president was not on the grounds at
the time, and knew nothing about the
whole affair.
The Fargo coach did offer to finish
the game after supper, and ST. Johns
refused to do so. Correct. But even
ii there were no other reasons which
there were, why st. Johns declined to
complete the game after supper. Coach
Watkins has no reason for complaint.
He was asked to do so at the proper
time, but refused We leave IT to any
fair-minded person IL st. Johns did
not do the right thing. Coach Watkins
wished TO finish the. game. but he
should not have ordered his men off
the field. At the time he refused point
blank, and would not listen to any ar
guments or compromise. Besides, the
umpire had declared the game finished
when Coach Watkins refused to allow
his men to take the field. and instead
of FORGETTING the game to st. Johns as
he might have done, simply declared
the game over, leaving the score as It
stood at the beginning Of the sixth in
ming, 30 in favor OF st. Johns
Coach Flynn objects to the write
up" in The Fargo Forum Of May %
for another reason. IT Is this: After
the game, Coach Watkins asked Coach
Flynn--yes. begged him not to put
anything about the game In the twin
city papers, and Of his own accord
promised not to say word about it in
the Fargo papers. We wonder why, II
he was so sure OF his point.
We are very glad that the Fargo
college boys appreciated the treatment
they received at st. Johns. Every
body tried his best not to let them feel
that we were very much dispieased
with Mr.. watkins mode of acting.
There is no hard feeling. only dis
pleasure with the unfair explanation
Mr.. watkins gave Of tho game and the
umpire. Mr.. Watkins said the umpire
gave the Fargo team dirt all the way
through, Here's q sample In the
fourth inning, Thayer was on third
base. The coacher made two fake
dashes for home. Both OF these the
umpire overlooked and allowed the
runner who should have bean ruled
out. to score shortly after on passed
ball If this IL dirt" st. Johns is
sorry they did not get some or it.
L. Weelworth.
Moderator Akheltfc Asmocfa tsofr