PLAY THE YALE FRESHMAN GAME SATURDAY MORNING.

The Freshman making his plans for next Saturday finds that it is impossible for him to see his own class team play Yale, and at the same time not miss part, if not all, of the Dartmouth game. The rest of the College and much of the football public would like to see the 1915 game, but, given the choice between the two matches that the athletic authorities so carefully schedule for the same afternoon, they naturally prefer the University game. If the Freshman game is fixed for next Saturday, why not play it in the morning, and so, at least, make it a possibility to see both?

Although prevalent at some of our sister institutions, Saturday morning games have not been the custom at Harvard. An objection against them may be raised in that they will mean the necessity of Saturday morning cuts for the team and perhaps tend to increase cuts that morning on the part of all students. Yet the Office is in the habit of excusing cuts when athletic teams play games away from home, and to a certain extent even when the games are in Cambridge, if early lunches are necessary.

There is certainly great enthusiasm and interest by the entire College in Freshman contests with Yale as a rule. It is only the conflict, year after year, with a most important University game that makes this contest the exception. If all concerned would rather have the Freshman game played in the morning: the Freshmen so that they can see the Dartmouth game, the rest of the College so that they can see the Freshman game, and the public so that they can see both, and incidentally increase the Athletic Association's receipts, should the one objection still determine the policy? The CRIMSON does not believe so. It seems hardly just to prevent the large majority of students who could see part, if not all, of the Freshman game and still keep their Saturday engagement, from the chance, because of the possibility that a few will misuse the opportunity. Let those who cut unjustifiably be treated according to their merits, but let not this possibility be responsible for preventing a change that is desirable from so many other points of view.