In a signed editorial which appeared in yesterday morning's CRIMSON, five members of the sports board expressed their unwillingness to cover regularly scheduled sports events during the strike, and urged Harvard athletes to boycott those events as well.

For reasons which I will outline briefly below, Wilson DuBose and I refused to sign the editorial. Furthermore. I have resigned from the CRIMSON for the duration of that policy, and urge those committed to athletic competition this spring to uphold that commitment in the spirit of the strike.

Yesterday's editorial, in part, inferred that athletic contests would waste valuable time better spent furthering the purposes of the strike, and that "if individuals on these teams feel strongly about the issues, and if they look at things in perspective, we feel that they will also decide that it is best if they refuse to participate ... and any athlete who has voted in favor of suspending academic work cannot justify athletic participation during this time."

Yet at least three Harvard varsity squads have looked at things in perspective. do feel strongly about the issues in question. and have decided to compete this weekend in the Heptagonals and the EARC Sprint championships. Quite obviously, those athletes have considered the validity of their participation as strongly, if not more so, than their fellow students, and have arrived at a conclusion that is dramatically different.

And the written statement of track captain Keith Colburn establishes. I believe, the only proper guideline for strike activity: "The policy of the Harvard track team has always been to respect the individual's right to decide whether or not to compete. The present situation will not alter this policy."

The basic force behind the strike exists in its justifiable rejection of moral tyranny on the part of one man over those under his power. It is therefore an ironic nullification of that spirit to force others to assume the same method of protest over an individual's privilege to choose his own means of dissent.

If the Sprints are disrupted, as they may be this weekend, if normal coverage is denied Harvard athletes who decide to compete, then this, in a very real sense. is the same sort of moral tyranny which Nixon has been perpetrating upon the American public.

The majority of the sportswriters on the CRIMSON staff feel that the athletic contests in question use up much time that can be spent working towards the stricke movement. But I contend that it is an individual's privilege to decide what his contribution, if any, should be towards that movement. The heavyweight crew will row in Harvard shirts and will make no formal protest. The light weight crew has established a number of options- strike shirts. black headbands etc. And the track team is leaving the decision entirely up to each member.

Yesterday afternoon, one of the signers of the majority sports editorial participated in a basketball game between the CRIMSON and the Nieman Fellows. Yet he did not feel that he was violating his time commitment to the movement Similarly, the athletes in question do not feel that their participation contradicts their commitment to the strike either. Their views must be respected.