Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-07-22
BY j. ED GRILLO.

u ia remarkable how successful man.
ager can lose caste just as soon as his
team lacks tho material 10 make it
winner. The clubs failure is always
blamed on its leader, be he ever so ca
pable though. of course, it is seldom
that he is in any way TO blame for the
failure.
Last year Griffith was failure al Gin
Z cinuati simply because he lacked the ma
ierial 10 have winner. He was just as
capable 10 handle that team then as he
has proved himself here, but he did not
have the team. and the responsibility for
the failure of the Reds was placed on his
shoulders.
When Hughey Jennings was winning
pennants-and he won three of them in
q row-he was heralded as one of the
greatest leaders the game could boast Of
Hugney had a ball team then. With
time this same team has deteriorated
Efforts TO recruit il have not been sue
cessful TO the ey .ent of keeping it up TO
the old standard. and naturally enough
the team has fallen down in the present
race
Now Jennings is being blamed. Some of
his critics have come to the conclusion
that he is not a manager a ALL though
they were loud in his praise when he
had a good ball team
Jennings surely has not gone back. He
Il Just as capable as he ever was and has
not forgotten anything which he ought
10 know. But he hasn't "A winner and a
manager VINO is not so blessed is nat
urally failure in the eyes of the aver
age fan.
Frank Hough. the Old Sport of the
Philadelphia Inquirer. refers to the good
wonders OF base ball Here is what he
has to say:
1t is doubtful If a parallel can be found
for the extraordinary showing OF the
Washington team this year. Surprises
have not been uncommon in base ball
races The most ponderous deductions
of the dopesters have been knocked into
a cooked hat by some club upon which
they did not figure at ALL beating out the
favorites. But as rule even those clubs
have shown something during the season
before they made their sensational show
ing. Take the old Baltimore Orioles
They did not finish very high up in 1873
but they showed enough to the discerning
critic to warrant the belief that they
, would ABOUT do the next year. and they
did, and for the next two years in addi-
ton. II Was the same way with the Chi
cago Cubs. In 1905, toward the close of
the season. they began 10 show. and in
1906 they hung up a record-ll6 games
won-which will probably stand for long
up and COP II out this year. They lost
the worlds series 10 the White Sox but
again winning the National League cham
pionship in % and rs. they annexed two
worlds pennants from Detroit There
have been other instances in which clubs
have shown surprising improvement from
one season 10 another, but the Orioles
and the Cubs furnish the most striking
examples that the Old Sport can recall
But In their case a chance was given
the dopeSters to get d line on them by
figuring on their possible Improvement
and the probable decadence of the other
acknowledged contenders
With the Nationals of this season
however, there was no such opportuni-
~. Everybody knew that they were
particularly strong in the box and
we'll equipped behind the bat but.
with the exception of Mcbride in the
infield and Milan in the outfeld that
III the team Of 1871 had remained in
tact the able dopcsters could have ng-
ured 10 nicely as to where the Ma
tionals would pull up in 1912. but
when Griffith sprang a new regular
team outside of Mcbride and Milan
the energetic tipsters had nothing TO
work on, but, going on the principle
that the man you know is better tlAn
the msSl you don't know. they did not
figure them 10 do much better this
year than they did last. although the
possibilities of the team. in view of its
admitted strength in the pitching de-
partment. were always recognized
What the one-time lowly Nationals
have done this year is a matter OF
base ball history. Their record Of sew