The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1911-12-09
BLAME THE RULES
But Poor Playing Prevented
Scores, Whitney Says.
Yale and Harvard Players
Roasted for Showing.
EIGHT CHANCES LOST
Yale Could Have Scored on
Princeton Many Times.
Penalty of Poor Play Shown by
YaIe'S Work.


side down in the football world when
Yale and Harvard are beaten has
come to be an accepted process and
| the gridirCn followers are expecting
enough pressure to be brought to bear
to cause some rule changes for the
season of 1912.
The loudest complaint is in regard
to the present handicap on the ofenSe.
The past season found it very hard for
| teams to make ten yards in three
| downs without resorting to the for
ward pass or the short kick which en-
| tail SO much danger of losing posses
| sion of the ball A remedy is sought
both in making the yards to be gained
4 five as it formerly was or by increas-
ing the downs to four instead of three.
With four downs a quarter could
spare another chance at a deception
/ before playing safe or would stand a
/ greater show of winning his distance
! on old style football which has given
way to punting duals in the attempts
of teams to play the game safe.
| While a number of authorities,
! principally coaches, are clamoring for
radical changes, Caspar Whitney In
the following article predicts little
enough now but that these coaches
are not getting out of the new style
game what there is in it:
I'VE are about to engage in the an
nua1 pastime, finding fault with the
football rules. In this 1t is inconceiv
able that the Yale-Harvard 90 game
should be the logical result of poor
play-for such a contretemps the
rules must be at fault So the dis
gruntled shout More attacking power
81 have been asked what changes
are necessary, and 1 answer: None
that are radical
BIames Rules for Loss.
ITO fundamentally disturb the game
would be a mistake from any view
point save that of coaches unable to
take advantage of opportunities Of
fered.
Football is now more interesting
and nearer sport; it's strategic posi-
bilities are greater than ever. Players
do not ask revision. Nor the public.
1t is the coaches, but not the best
majority Of them.
1.-The rules open the game. admit of
loose ball, give speed. brilliance and
strategy. Coaches have failed to make
good and the majority turned out
teams playing old football.
Or Harry Williams of Minnesota
last year produced, from ancient his
tory, rejuvenated formation-the |
shift" This year no team so 1owly |
as not to have a variation of his sim |
pie. over-rated lineup.
Two seasons have passed and this
is about the only new thing in forma- |
tons Of original development of the |
forward pass and onside kick. as little |
may be said
bearing this in mind, it is easy to
understand why many elevens are
stronger on defense than in attack. |
The loose ball DOGGY has been a |
coach's nightmare.
"Complaint is made that the rules
produce scoreless games. Against
Princeton, Yale had eight chances to
score by field goals and realized once.
Harvard had three chances against /
Yale and Yale had two. but both
failed to count. Princeton had one
chance against Yale and two against
Harvard and realized against BOTH
Wants Onside Kick Changed.
Glenn S. Warner, the Carlisle In
dian football coach, says: 1.-The only
rules that need revision are those gov
erning the forward pass and the on
side kick. 1t has been demonstrated
that practically the only good thing
about these plays is that they scatter
the secondary defense and make it
easier for the team having the ball to
gain ground by regular running plays.
The objection to the rules governing
these plays is that they make it nee
assaTy to have so-calIed 5-yard and 20
yard zones, which cause a lot of trOu-
Die, dissatisfaction and controversy
Upon the part of officials and players.
Forward Pass Must Go.
That the forward pass will have to
90 is indicated by the statements which
rave been made by both DIR. Williams
md Mr.. Haughton, who were RESPONSE
Die for it's retention, that the play is a |
a allure