Superior generalship won Yale the great game at Springfield on Saturday. This tells the whole story of defeat in as accurate and concise a form as possible. The score was 6 to 0, but while it suggests the closeness of the struggle, it tells little about the comparative merits of the teams.

The victorious Yale eleven was run with superb management on the part of Captain Hinkey. They followed out a well defined policy with perfect coolness and confidence. Their tactics were finely adapted to the conditions which were brought about by their luck in winning the toss. With the wind at their backs they played strictly a kicking game and gained enormously by it. Harvard was not able to punt more than half the distance against the strong wind, consequently she was put upon the offensive for the greater part of the first half.

In sharp distinction to this was Harvard's lack of generalship in the second half. It is a serious matter for a team to lose its captain and it is the exception under such a circumstance when demoralization does not set in. All that Harvard can say is that she deplores the unfortunate occurrence and hopes that future elevens may be spared so great a discouragement.

The advantage which Yale gained by winning the toss and her choice of goals certainly told largely in her favor, but it was purely the result of luck. Harvard cannot and will not lay either Yale's victory or Harvard's defeat to the toss of a coin, no matter what its significance may seem to be. Her sportsmanlike spirit will assert itself here as elsewhere and give to Yale the credit of having won fairly and squarely and purely on her merits.

A decidedly gratifying feature of the game was the utter absence of anything which could be interpreted as ungentlemanly playing. A true, manly spirit previled throughout and the game cannot fail to be raised in popular estimation as a direct result. Harvard and Yale in a way set the standard of all the college sports, and anything which in the contests between the two universities tends to raise this standard must be welcomed.

Yale's team as a whole gave perhaps the best exhibition of football seen in years. This was truer, however, in the first than in the second half. Brilliant individual work by Butterworth and Thorne was admirably combined with almost perfect team play; so perfect, in fact, that the few cases in which Harvard was individually supperior to Yale in the line, did not affect the result to any great extent. There was the same elock-like regularity in their movements and wonderful steadiness under all conditions which is one of the striking features of Yale elevens. The fierce, sudden onslaughts upon the line made particularly by Butterworth, although also by Thorne with fine effect, were irresistible, and to this persistent bucking of the line is due Yale's victory. It was an exact repetition of the Pennsylvania game in this respect, where Butterworth with his inimitable skill followed the same tactics and saved Yale from defeat. The evenness of Yale's play in both offensive and defensive work was one of the most striking features of the game. So equally balanced were they that in point of comparative strength it is hard to distinguish between the two.

Harvard's work in the first half was very satisfactory even to the most critical observer. She fought against odds with a splendid show of grit and determination and, if anything, outplayed Yale both in defensive and offensive work. It was a magnificent struggle and the fact that such strength can be showed should be incentive enough to the eleven to put a winning team into the field next Thursday. In the second half, however, Yale clearly outclassed Harvard in every respect. Harvard's great fault then, as before, was too deliberate playing. She was far too cautious considering the seriousness of the situation. More reckless dash and head-long impetuosity were the qualities which the occasion demanded, but Harvard had no captain to rally her men and infuse into them this winning spirit. A great mistake was made in not trying around the end plays oftener, and also in failing to take advantage of what little wind remained to play a punting game. It is also a question if Harvard's policy of playing her halfbacks fully five yards behind the line is as effective as Yale's, whose runners invariably are placed close to the rushers and are thus much quicker in striking the line, apparently too, with even more force.

Yale's centre was without a doubt stronger than Harvard's, although Lewis put up a superb game. Hickok and Beard also outclassed their men. It was by Yale's persistent massing of plays upon Acton and Manahan that she drove her way slowly but irresistibly through the rush line and to the longed for touchdown. Emmons, though at times pushed out of the play, repeatedly came to Manahan's support and saved dozens of yards of gains. On the other side Stevenson and Newell were about all that could be desired. Only occasionally, however, were Yale's attacks directed against them. Behind the line Harvard was outclassed, man for man, but in justice to the backs it should be said that they did not receive the support that was accorded Yale's runners.

For the fifth successive year Yale won the toss. On account of the heavy wind that was blowing, Captain Hinkey chose the side for the obvious advantage in kicking.

Harvard, with the ball, opened the play by a flying wedge, corresponding to the one used by the U. of P., all the men starting in a body. This play netted 23 yards.

The next play was an equal surprise. Four men, Newell, Stevenson, Wrightington and Brewer, lined up as if for a flying wedge, some five yards behind Emmons. At a signal from Beale they started for centre of Yale's line. The minute they struck the line, Waters got the ball on a pass and ran behind them between Emmons and Manahan, who had made an opening for them. Five yards were gained on this play.

Harvard continued to repeat this trick, following with one where the ends came back and Emmons ran with the ball. On the ninth down the ball was on Yale's 13 yard line. Here Harvard lost it on four downs.

Butterworth kicked to Yale's 43 yard line, but Harvard could not gain, and had to give Yale another chance. After two unsuccessful attempts, one being the interference used by Pennsylvania, where the tackle and end start before the ball is put in play, Butterworth again punted to Wrightington, at Harvard's 10 yard line.

Brewer returned the ball to the 30 yard line. Thorne made his first 5 yards by Manahan. On the next play Yale dropped the ball and Beale fell on it. Brewer kicked and followed up the ball, which Butterworth dropped, Brewer securing it on Harvard's 30 yard line. Then followed a succession of plays, including several repetitions of the new "fake" wedge used in the second play of the game. Finally Brewer was forced to punt on the third down. Thorne secured the ball on Yale's 39 yard line.

Butterworth immediately returned the ball to Wrightington at Harvard's 12 yard line.