The West Virginian. [volume] (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1914-1974, 1922-10-17

story on the sport. page yesterday
afternoon In which they say Pitt
was given the best end OF the al
gument In regard to the West Viz.
ginia game. When the rain drove
US into the doorway for the final
period, explained that had not
written the story In the first place
and that to the best OF my knowi.
edge and belief it had been written
by man who was at the game,
saw every play and formed his own
diagnosis OF the situation and wrote
as he saw Il. the man who wrote
It is an ardent Wost Virginia root
ar. who lost his voice at The game.
and so far as know should have
no tendency TO color" the picture.
When | told him this morning OF
the raspberry party" at which 1
had been the guest Of honor last
night through mistaken identity,
and that the boys thought I was
trying TO cover up for Pitt, he said:
"T see no reason TO change the
stand took In the matter, and
you need have no hesitency iu.ioll-
ing the boys who wrote the story. =
In vlndicating his position in. the
matter. he pointed to certain sec.
tions of the review Of tho game
in the Morgantown Post Of yester.
day. written by Brooks Cottle, n
football expert who speaks with
practically an ''ex cathedra" voice.
One paragraph from the Morgan.
town Post story reads:
"The Pitt victory was "a great
victory and one In which every
West Virginia fan and supporter
can take keen delight apd great sat;
isfactlon. But 1t did not demon.
strate. that the Mountaineers nave
an unbeatable team by any means.
The West Virginia defense was
magnificent except on that one &C.
casion when Shuler made fifty.
one yard return Of a punt that per-
mitted Pitt to score its touch
down. From the press stands, 1t
looked like the Mountaineer ends
were boxed too easily and that the
secondary defence was slow in get
ting into action. The defense. how.
ever. was about as alert and tight
on the whole as one would wish to
see.
"on the offensive, West Virginia
didn't have much edge on the re.
constructed Pitt team, Mahrt and
Ekberg were the only Mountaineers
who could gain with any consls:
teRcy from scrimmage, and they
were frequently impotent. The
forward pass, attack was not sue.
cessful. 1t was not deceptive, ,ano
when It did come, the Pitt players
had no trouble in diagnosing It
Twice West Virginia had receivers
out in the open only to tumble the
ball."
Again the sage of Morgantown
says:
on the basis OF last Saturdays vic.
tory, that West Virginia is going t.
win all It's games! One may. proper.
ly conclude that itSis going to take
a mighty effective offensive to
puncture the West Virginia de.
Tense, but Doctor Spears has much
10 do in his offensive strategy.
There were no triple or double
threats presented by the Noun.
taineers, The plays were sound,
with interference good and running
strong, but that element OF decep.
tion was missing to a large de-
gree"
So there you are, esteemed, mem.
bers OF the royal rooters OF West
Virginia. 1t Is seldom that two
men, even sport writer's, see algaifnt
In the sane light in the matter of
the little details. The only interest
l have In the argument Is In putting
my readers right on one thing,
namely, that Y there was only dis,
satisfaction with the feYiewyof the
= r. 50 afI-s- p r tatfs ~