GREAT GAME ENDED IN TIE

The fighting spirit of the 1911 University football team, in which had been placed the confidence of all Harvard supporters, proved in the Yale game Saturday afternoon that it was worthy of that confidence. The Blue had many anxious moments and in the last few minutes of play seemed face to face with defeat at the hands of the ever strengthening Harvard eleven. But a try for a goal from the field just missed, and in two plays the ball was punted out of danger to the middle of the field. Time was called before either team had a further chance to win.

All who saw the game must have left it dissatisfied, whether Harvard or Yale supporters; they had come to see one or the other team carry off the glory of the day and could not help being disappointed at a scoreless tie. That Harvard was Yale's superior in nearly every department of the game and that the Blue was saved from defeat by the excellent individual work of Howe, Philbin, and Ketcham is the general concensus of opinion. And in great contrast to this brilliancy of individuals was the united team-play which characterized Harvard's work throughout the game.

Yale started the game with a rush which brought the spectators to their feet. On the third play Francis recovered a fumbled punt on Harvard's 18-yard line, from where two plays placed the ball on the 10-yard line. Howe dropped back to try for a goal from the field, but a poor pass from the centre delayed him so that he could not get the kick off but was tackled for a loss of eight yards. The University team received the ball on downs and immediately Felton punted out of danger. After two rushes Yale again punted, losing five yards on the exchange. This kicking game continued straight through until the final whistle, and in it Felton's long, high spirals far and away excelled the low, hurried, and sometimes short kicks which Howe and Camp got off. Before the game began it had been expected that it would develop into a punting duel, but few had dared to hope that Harvard would so clearly have the advantage. Of course Felton was greatly aided by the wonderful defence which surrounded him and protected him from the Yale forwards giving him plenty of time to do his best; but it was not due to this that even his hurried kicks sailed down the field with the same accuracy and perfection that marked the others. Not one of Felton's kicks went off the field, while two of Howe's in the last period crossed the side-line before they had travelled 20 yards.

The Harvard defence, which so hurried the Yale punters, seldom broke before the Yale charge. On nearly every kick several of the forwards were through the line, and while they did not succeed in blocking the ball, they forced the Yale player to kick hurriedly or be thrown for a loss. When the Blue was rushing the ball, the runner was often tackled by so many Crimson players that it was sometimes hard to tell who really had made the tackle. On the other hand, when Harvard was rushing, it was usually only one Yale man who could break through and stop the play. It must not, however, be thought that Yale showed a weak defence. As far as the utility of the tackle goes it was as good to have one make it as to have three, provided that one man could stop the play completely. Yale showed her slight inferiority on the defence in allowing the Harvard players to get better started before the forwards began to interfere with the advance of the ball. Ketcham was Yale's mainstay in the line, but among his opponents it is hard to choose. Captain Fisher and Leslie never failed to stop plays aimed at them, and almost the same thing can be said of the rest of the line. Storer and Hitchcock, both of whose experience on a University team has been limited to this year, were nearly as strong; and on the ends Smith played his usual game and Felton played a game that it would be hard to find fault with. The rushing average and total of the Yale men were larger than those of the Harvard players chiefly on account of one long run made by Philbin in the second quarter. Taking the ball on his 18-yard line he tore down the field for forty yards and was finally stopped by Potter. This was the only time that the University defence weakened perceptibly.

The offence of each team showed weakness inside its opponents' danger zone. Harvard had four chances to score and plainly showed the need of either a sure drop-kicker or a heavier offence. Yale had two good chances, lost the first through inability to force Harvard's line followed by a poor pass when Howe was about to kick, and lost the second because Howe's drop-kick failed to go over the goal posts. It has been suggested that the new rules were largely responsible for these failures, but perhaps they should reflect more to the credit of the defence of the teams. Many times under the old rules teams could not score from the five or even the one yard line.

It was largely due to the generalship and steadiness of Captain Howe that Yale displayed as good a game as she did. True, he handled two or three punts badly, but he was the only man on the field who could make any considerable gain on running back a punt, and it was he who instilled a snap into the Yale team which contrasted with the rather slow preparation of the Harvard men. He could not, however, instill a snap in the starting of his men, whereas the Crimson backs started with a rush that was sure to advance the ball a little.

The last period furnished the spectators with the best football of the day from the spectacular point of view and from that of the Harvard men. During that time the ball was in Yale's possession in Harvard territory but once, and even then Howe was immediately forced to punt. The Crimson players started a march down the field that seemed to presage a victory. Starting on their 45-yard line, Reynolds and Wendell made furious rushes to Yale's 25-yard line where Potter tried his last drop-kick. During the entire period it seemed as if the Harvard attack was growing stronger as the Yale team weakened. The substitution of fresh men on the Blue team made no difference, and once Smith got away for a run that brought the stands to their feet. Potter received the ball on a fake kick formation and drew back his arm for a forward pass. He did not pass the ball, however, and in a moment two Yale players were on him. But just as the Yale men tackled, Smith came running around from right end, took the ball from Potter's hand, and dashed around left end behind splendid interference. There was one Yale man to stop him, and he dove through the interference, missing Smith by a good margin. Then in attempting to turn in, Smith slipped, tripped over the prostrate Yale tackler and fell forward having covered about 15 yards. He had a bad fall but was not injured.

Yale suffered more from penalties than did Harvard, a thing which is encouraging to Harvard men. Crimson teams have often been at fault in this respect, but in Saturday's game the team played a hard and eager game without this detriment.

The only forward pass to succeed was one from Gardner to Felton which netted twenty yards and was one of the best seen on Soldiers Field this year. Several others were tried by both teams but were unsuccessful.

The summary:HARVARD.  YALE.Felton, l.e.  r.e., Bomeisler, SheldonHitchcock, l.t.  r.t., Gallauer, Paul, TomlinsonLeslie, l.g.  r.g., McDevittParmenter, c.  c., KetchamFisher, r.g.  l.g., Francis, LoreeStorer, r.t.  l.t., Scully, PerrySmith, r.e.  l.e., AveryGardner, Potter, q.b.  q.b., HoweCampbell, Reynolds, Frothingham, l.h.b.  r.h.b., Spalding, ReillyWendell, r.h.b.  l.h.b., Camp, Freeman, MerrittHuntington, f.b.  f.b., Philbin, Dun