Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1913-11-24
A DIAGNOSIS.
Continued from Page onc)

| of the Harvard team Of 1918. Every
member of the Crimson combination
| regular or substitute, WIS but n per
feet fitting and well-oilcd cog in the
mechanism that was built up to bring
ferth a Harvard victory over Yale In
| tine Stadium. after weary years of
waiting Such few lapscs in team play
as developed. during the hard game
were due to temporary breaks in the
machine when individuality rose for
the moment above coaching system
and instruction. And it may he said
tina; 60 well grounded are the methods
at Cambridge that almost without eX-
ccption, these breaks" resulted in lost
ground rather than the expected gains.
Well Planned Attacks
! In punting. field goal kicking, tack
ling, interference, attack and defence.
! aud other developments ef play which
! go to make the modern football team,
| Harvard was unqucstionably superior
/ to Vale. Her play was better timed and
! selected than that of the Blue and each
| attack was so planned that one of sex
/ cral moves was always open as Sc
Qrenc". II. after a punting duel, Har-
I ward reached to within striking dis
: lance TO the Yale goal. the Crimson
j never found il difficult to advance the
i E1ll by modern, Yet conservative foot
/ bail methods 10 4 point where Erickiey
could be called upon to try for a field
/ goal with reasonable chance of sue
cess.
HarVard's Conservatism.
! In fret. the only fault found with The
F.. Harvard play was that expressed by
several radical Crimson alumni after
the game when they acclaimed against
I tho MISREPRESENTATION of the attack at
| certain points in the game According
to these graduates, one of whom Nnn
his II some Years ago. Harvard re-
fused t. take IN excellent chance fol
/ \ touchdown whom with Il big lead in
| points, RriCkIey WIS called uPcn for
another kick. The claim WAS made that
I the Crimson victory would have been
far moro impressive Lad a touchdown
| been scored 10 the credit of the team
| as 4 whole.
That Briclleys birh was successful
| In each Of tNa such eds5S takes much
| of the effectiveness out of the contcn-
| zion. but the fact remains that such Il
| machine as Harvard developed, this
| fall. should have scored one touchdown
on Yale and probably would have ac-
! comllished that feat had the puzzling
fake Kick attack formation been used
at the point specified. That it was not
called into action at the time was due
in all probability. 10 the coaching sys-
tenn aud instruction. Since Harvard
3 ID. + a,tt .,f 4
| own selection, few will care t. qucs-
| ton seriously the right Of the Crimson
| on TIE premises.
Yale Not Perfected.
Viewed from the other angle, Yale S
defeat can be accounted for along reverse
lines. The Blue came to Cambridge with
a team composed of players equal phys
ically to the Harvard representatives.
Beyond that point the comparison fails
to show the Blue at equal advantage
T Individually and collectively. they were
| not coached to the stage of perfection
, reached by Capt. Storer's men and the
| system of attack failed to take advan-
| tage of the wide range of plays open
| under the modern rules of the game
| The interference, accorded runner aud
h'tNii, Nti1 lIOA siF1 toiliptttt. oltipOLh VI
effective as that built up at Cambridge
and the offence. as a rule. was both am
| tiquated and haphaZard
Several occasions developed when the
men played together effectively and al
| these moments Harvard adherents held
| their BREATH but the attack was mol
| sustained and the ground thus gained
| was soon lost again. II may be said
| that injuries and other rcvcrsals have
| seriously handicapped her seasons play
| Cold analysis. however fails to sh w
| that old time Yale football strategy and
definite idea of attack and defence that
| made the Blue elevens so feared. Il few
years back. Apparently much the same
| conditions exist in the Yale football sit
uation at New Haven as was evidenced
| In rowing at New London, last June. Al
present there can be no comparison Will
| the business like and effective methods
in vogue at Cambridge.
! The Finishing Games.
| Next IN Importance to tho Yalc-IIar.
| yard game WAS the play of the Army
and Navy teams. which meet in this city
| next Saturday for their annual cham
| pionslip contest. The Navy had New
| York University as opponents and The
| Army finished its preliminary season bS
| facing the Springfield y NJ. G. y
| Training School team. Both the aead
| envy teams won, but little in the way o
useful information bearing ON the out
| come of the big game at the Pol
| grounds is available as "a result The
| New York University team proved SC
| weak In comparison to the sailors thai
| the score of IS to 0 is of no value 70,
| comparative purposes. The soldict S
however. found Springfield n fast play.
ing, strong combination as was expect
ed. but the Army victory Ii to-. indi.
| Gates nothing beyond the fact that the
| Cadets must be reckoned a real factor ii
| the battle. ON Nov. % The real sur,
| prise of the day came in n minor college
| game, Syracuse, who defeated Carlisle
| running up the largest score of the sea.
SON against the Indians.