Replying at length to the critics of the large expenses connected with the conduct of college athletics, W. J. Bingham '16, Director of Athletics, undertakes a strong defense of the financial policies of the Harvard Athletic Association, in his annual report to President Lowell, made public yesterday.

"To conduct intercollegiate and intramural athletics on such a scale (as that at Harvard)", Mr. Bingham writes, "costs money and a great deal of money." He goes on to point out the enormous expansion of the "Athletics for All" program, declaring that "the whole scheme of athletics has changed," and that the new expenses "have added many hundred percent to our requirements." He takes special pains to reject the charge that coaches' salaries are too high.

Mr. Bingham examines the question of charges for the use of athletic facilities and arrives at the conclusion that it may be advisable, in lieu of the present charges for use, to set a fixed fee required of all students, regardless of whether they make use of the facilities or not. After pointing out that only five percent of the income of the Athletic Association is derived from the present charges on students, he says that "if our modest fees keep boys away from the buildings, then we have failed to accomplish our purpose."

In addition to the question of finances, Mr. Bingham discusses the working out of the program of House sports, the problem of non-House residents in athletics, and the scholastic records of intercollegiate athletics.

The important sections of his report follow:

During this year the development of the intramural athletic program has been extremely interesting and highly progressive. Just as Mr. Lowell has never doubted that the "House Plan" would be a scholastic success, because the central idea of the House is the Tutor, so the Athletic Association is equally certain that the success of an intramural program depends on its tutors--who in athletic parlance are called coaches.

Useful as the House buildings are, with easy access to libraries, and with dining halls and common rooms to foster a wholesome social influence, the nerve center of the House always will be the Tutors and the coordinating direction of the Masters. In the matter of intramural athletics it has been the aim of our department not merely to provide gymnasia, playing fields, rowing facilities, squash and tennis courts, and to attract as many students as possible, but to interest them in exercising regularly. It is here we too are satisfied that the answer is the coach. The coach of an intercollegiate team is almost always an expert in the sport he is teaching. The coach of less formal teams is usually a man trained in several sports, but who has not been outstanding in any one. If this man is a real leader, and these are the men we try to find, he stimulates an interest in the sport. The problem in the past was to understand why many boys reported for our intramural teams only to remain a few days and then drop out. We are now more than ever convinced that the spirit, guidance and teaching through properly se- lected coaches point to the right road of success for all intramural athletics.

Many educators are of the opinion that the ideal in athletics is intramural, and can see no benefits from intercollegiate competition, whereas it should be obvious that both have a very proper place in the College. With the experience I have had in athletic administration I am convinced that the essential difference between the two is only one of attitude. We have no purely intramural teams at Harvard, because our intramural teams enjoy numerous informal contests with other institutions. It is equally true that many of our intercollegiate teams look forward to games with teams within the college. But the attitude of each group is quite different. The intercollegiate group is composed of what we might call our "A" athletic students. Performing well is what thrills them most, and they, therefore, derive real pleasure from practice sessions. On the other hand, the intramural athlete does not want to practice. It matters little that he makes errors; his fun comes from playing, and on the days of a practice session he seldom appears. To interest the intramural athlete, then, you must schedule almost twice as many games for his teams as you arrange for the intercollegiate group, a practice commonly referred to as "overemphasis" in intercollegiate sport.

Athletic Autonomy of the Houses

Two years ago a committee of the Student Council presented a report on inter-House athletics. In general the conduct of inter-House athletics during the past year has followed the procedure recommended in that report. Even as the Houses were to be permitted to develop other extra-curricula activities in their own way, we in the Athletic Department were anxious to see as much autonomy as possible in the evolution of an inter-House athletic program. The changes in and the additions to the program, made necessary by experience, were affected not by the Harvard Athletic Association, but by the Inter-House Athletic Committee.

This committee, composed of one student representative from each of the seven Houses, formulated the policies used in the conduct of House athletics. During the fall this committee of seven supervised all sports, but the problems which arose were so numerous and so varied that it was agreed to organize Inter-House Sport Committees to attend to the details of the different sports.

The Role of the H.A.A.

To assure close cooperation between the House teams and the Harvard Athletic Association in such matters as equipment, playing area and coaches, and in accordance with the suggestion of the Student Council, I appointed the Director of Intra-mural Athletics, Adolph W. Samborski '25, to be Secretary of the House Athletic Committee. In the administration of House athletics Mr. Samborski has no instructions from us, other than to offer his experience to help the House Committee. On the other hand, he does not knowingly allow a House to default in athletics because of the improper selection of an unqualified representative of a particular House. When such a condition exists he calls it to the attention of the House Master or Head Tutor, and usually another man is named to the Committee. The important thing in that we have tried to have the Houses run their athletic programs as they want to run them.

Upperclassmen who are not residing in the Houses have found it difficult to adjust themselves to the inter-House athletic program. This group is represented in the various sports. Aptly named the "Ramblers" because of no definite House allegiance, the very question that at once arises is, should they be represented in the House leagues? The Houses which would exclude them point out that they are a different unit, and would disrupt the homogeneity of the House leagues. On the other hand, they are classmates of the men living in the Houses. Their numbers are not large enough to form an independent league, and often through no fault of their own they are deprived of House residence. After the Yale "College Plan" is under way perhaps we may find a mutual solution to obtain competition for the "Ramblers."

Competition With Yale