The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1912-02-21
STRONGLY OPPOSED TO
 NEW FOOTBALL RULES
M. Y. Evening Pogt-l

Although Yale seems 10 be we'll pleased with the new football rules, that Princeton is not is evident from the attitude of both Roper and the Princeton Alumni Weekly of the cur rent week. William W. Roper a few days ago declared that the char ges teams, and the Weekly, which is the official organ of the graduates of the University, echoes the remark of the time director of athletics who re- signed his position on February l. The Weekly says that the giving of a greater advantage to the game as cd of play which was used all last fall, and through which the Tigers won from both Harvard and Yale. Con- tinuing, it says:
 of the onside kick, the changes In the football rules, it is announced, are made for the purpose of weakening the defence and strengthening the at tack There seems to be no doub[ that they will accomplish this purpose The addition of another down Is, in eff feet, reactionary legis' 'ation, because 1t will encourage continuous rushing and make the possession of the ball Of greater value
 With an average of only two and half yards to be gained to retain the ball, may expect a return of the old marches down the fled, with much less kicking. However, the commit tee wisely guarded against the return NA uluSS pldy Dy I1lS rue against helping the runner
 '"The increase in the value of the touchdown Is, in our opinion, bad leg islation- The depreciation of the field goal had already gone far enough, if not too far. It is to be remembered that all touchdowns are by no means the result Of continuous rushing; also that, in order to score a field goal, you have got to get within range, and that even then the chances are all against the kicker. In short, it is harder to get two field goals than one touch down This depreciation of goal kicking threatens the extinction of that very interesting and skilsul feat ure of the game-for no coach is go- ing to spend much valuable time on developing drop-kickers when their speciality is of so little relative value.
 '~The removal of the twenty-yard re- strictfon in the forward pass is good, but if the play is to be retained, 1t IS regretta ble that the committee did not go further and allow the pass to be made from any point behind the at has to staIV "a five yards back of the line, thus giving the play away, 1t can not become a dependable feature of a consistent and effective attack, but acts merely as a buffer on the defend backs to keep them from coming in to support their line. An even worse error-an error Of commission rather than Of omission-is the total aboli-
  tfTIctly a retrograde step for which we have heard no reason. The sue cessful execution of an onside kick has been regarded good football, whereas the forward pass, though in troduced for the Iaudable purpose of opening up the game, is not genuine Rugby. The ons,de kick has devel- oped skiIful kicking as to placing and distance; it has developed rapid cover ing of the ball, and 1t has put a. pre- mium on sure catching-an vital ele- ments in hrst-claSs football and de- sirable contribution to the open game.
 ''It is, of course impossible to pre- dict what effect these changes will have on the great college game. We shall have to wait til next fall to find out But, with the onside kick abolished, the forward pass still so restricted as to be of little value, and an additional down allowed to gain ten yards, 1t is hard to see how there is going to be anything In the game but continuous rushing. Even so, with the balances between the defence and the offence shifted so much in the lat ter'S favor, there will undoubtedly be great deal more scoring.''