Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-03-03
GRID CODE SHOULD
STAND, SAYS COACH
Princeton Mentor Defends
Recent Revision Made
by Committee.
BY ii. C. BYRD.

few, if any, according to Bill Roper
i Princeton's gridiron coach. In a
recent communication to the writer
Roper included several remarks anent
the changes recently made, and con-
cluded his expressions with the opinion
that the rules as they now stand seem
to be about what is wanted and that
few new rules are needed.
AT each meeting of the committee, ="
says Roper, ut is becoming more and
more evident that few new rules are
needed. and think there will be very
few, If any, important changes in the
foot ball rules for many years to come"
And another interesting point brought
out in Ropers communication is that
the rules committee was influenced 10
change the much discussed tumble RULE
because Of the almost unanimous senti-
ment of the coaches themselves as ex-
pressed in their annual meeting at New
Orleans.
Roper after pointing out that the
tumble rule does not apply TO backward
passes. 20 forward passes intercepted
before hitting the ground nor to blocked
kicks went on to say that the rule was
deliberately passed to aid the ohense
and to prevent a team voiding fine Of
fensive work by q stronger opponent
BY picking up a tumble and running
half the length of the field, or pos
sibly the whole length of the field, and
then wound up his statement about this
change by saying that the committee,
in adopting this rule, took favorable
action on the resolution adopted by the
Coaches Association at its annual meet
ing in New Orleans
Coaches Sought Change.
In other words, despite the criticisms
that have come because of this change,
it is a fact that the best foot ball minds,
those making their living out OF teach
ing the game thought that the change
was for the best interests of all con-
cerned and recommended it.
Another point Roper lays emphasis on
is the Qualification of the forward pass
rule. which by some press reports
seemed to throw so much responsibility
on the eligible men going down field to
receive a forward pass by saying that
no player should interpose himself be-
tween a defensive man and the man
who was TO catch the ball. That seemed
unfair to the offense, as it placed on the
eligible player burden of watching to
prevent contact with defensive player
as well as watching for the ball.
1t develops, however, that it is an in
eligible man who goes down the field
who must not interpose himself between
a man eligible to make a catch and
defensive player, and that makes good
deal of difference in the actual running
OF forward pass play. Under this
regulation an eligible man may 90 down
the field, giving no attention to any
thing other than catching the hall, and
fensive player except In an actual at
ten1pt to catch the hall
Likes Rule Revision.
Here is what Roper has TO say con-
corning the change which applies the
rule regarding no player running with
n1uffed punt to all kicks:
THE committee simplified the rules
IN regard to kicked balls, providing the
kicking side on any kicked ball cannot
advance the ball when recovered. This
rule will apply to free kicks, kick-offs
and kicks after a fair catch as well
as to punts. Under the 1928 rules
muffed punt could be recovered by the
kicking side, but the man recovering
1t could not run with the ball. This
rule did not apply to free kicks. The
kicking side could here recover the ball
and run with it, as in the case Of
kickoff. Here, again, recovery of the
ball by the kicking side is advantage
enough.
las an instance, I have seen cases
of high, short kickoff muffed by
guard or tackle recovered by the kick
ing side, followed by run by the man
recovering the ball. If fumbled punt
can only be recovered by the kicking
side, why should not fumbled kick
of be covered by the same ruling?"
Holds 2-Yard Line Better.
Roper's comment on placing the ball
on the 2-yard line instead of on the
3-yard line for the try for point after
touchdown also is interesting:
Last Fall the try for point proved
very unsatisfactory Many more at
tempts at goal were blocked than were
successful. In many instances the de-
fensive team put nine men on the line
of scrimmsge and rushed the kicker
with irresistible force
THE committee felt more protection
should be given the kicking side. so they
decided to advance the try for point
from the 3 to the yard line. This
was done 10 encourage rush or pass
on the try for point. II the defensive
side puts nine men on the line to block
the supposed kick it will not be difficult
to gain 2 yards by rushing the ball.
believe this rule will help the try for
point and the defensive side will not
be quite so eager to think only of block
ing the kick"