To sum up the present consequences of the idiotic rules:--Instead of football's fundamental feature, rushing and passing, being used to gain ground, we have forward passing. Games may be won only by forward passing, or fumbling. The game requires masses of opposing players to meet at a point running at full speed in opposite directions and is therefore dangerous to life and limb. The game has become commercialized and so dominated by paid coaches that they oppose any changes which might interfere with their vested interests.

Remedy; Abolish Penalty for Fumbling

The whole trouble is the extreme, illogical, vicious penalty for fumbling. This penalty, like a cancer, has catein the life (rushing) out of the game.

Why is it that the defence can mass at full speed against all running plays? Because the man with the ball can not pass it for fear of fumbling. Why can not rushes get started? For the same reason.

Why can the coaches direct every move on offence and defence? For the same reason, making the game so stereotyped with one rusher, one rush, at one point in the line.

Why do the players play? Because they know no other game, and what is left of the game is beter than nothing.

Let Fumble be Only Loss of Down

What is, then, the logical and sufficient penalty for fumbling? Fumbling, divesting it of the arbitrary terrors attached to it by the aforesaid Solons in 1879, is a simple misplay and logically the only penalty is what naturally results form the misplay. By a fumble the chance to rush is practically lost or ended, but the hall is not dead and the opponents may capture it and rush with it, even making a score. Anything that may happen on the play in which the fumble occurs should stand as the result of it.

The crime of football is the rule giving the ball to the opponents if recovered by them, for the next rush. The ball has been stopped and that is all; the fumble is no reason for interrupting the series of downs, or innings. The abject fear of a fumble interrupting the series is the reason for all the bad features of play enumerated, and for almost all injuries.

Remedy Simple and Easy

Without changing a single rule of actual play the game could be emancipated by the following simple provision:--"The series of downs shall not be interrupted by a fumble recovered by the other side, unless exhausted by the rush; but either side fumbling shall not be allowed to gain ground thereby. The punt could be left as it is, giving enough chance for misplay.

With some such rule improvement in play and rules would be immediate and continuous. Instead of one rusher taking the ball for a hopeless plunge he would be disgraced to be tackled before passing it. Coaches would work out a multitude of outlets for passing combinations using all line men to carry the ball. This would put an end to the brutal line duels, as all line men would be needed both on offence and defence to follow the ball. It would be an infinitely more elastic game, yet with the old American idea of team play and signals; the same game with the lid off. Coaches have tried to raise the lid, as did Hinckey, and failed on account of the fumbling bug-bear.

Effect of Reform Certain

I am not guessing as to the effect of the proposed rule. In 1879 with the open scrimmage and no penalty for fumbling, Parke Davis, Esq., in his book on American Football, describes the play as most scientific. In passing, when about to be tackled the players developed remarkable skill, throwing and catching with the speed and accuracy of baseball and forming backing up groups very cleverly.

I can, however, predict a change in the forward pass rule to permit no passes beyond the line of scrimmage but to allow any number behind it without restriction as to receivers or passers, and every pass to be played whether caught or not.