~2-
We have heard a great deal about raising the baskets out of reach of the tall college
players, while leaving them at the present height for high schools. May we suggest that
IF the rules need correeting in order to limit the advantage the abnormally tall player
now enjoys, there is need for a similar limitation on the activities of the high school
player of unusual altitude, IF the proponents of a “statute of limitations” are really
concerned a change that will more nearly provide equality of opportunity for all
players on the basketball court, then merely raising the basket for college players is
just as much a subterfuge as the temporary aspirinetablet renedy the rules committee has
concocted this years i
/ Hone a thes high school basketball leaders, to our kmewledge, have attempted to carry
the torch for higher baskets or any other major changes in order to curb the performances
of the altitudinous youngsters, but we have never thought that the boys who object to
changing the height of the basket on the grounds that we do not limit the weight of foot=
bell players or the speed of rumners on the track, could possibly take themselves very
seriously. After all, there is a particular principle involved which is not related to
those sports in which the players have almost unlimited space for their operations and no
goal restrictions such as prevail in basketball. Superficial and prejudiced opinion will
not provide an answer to the problem which, now that the rules committee has started
whittling, has been thrown inte cur laps, Basketball under the present regulations has
grown inte the greatest interscholastic sport in the nation, and before any ¢hanges in
the fundamental principles of the game sre made, here are a few of the questions that
should be answered:

le Is it desirable that the game of basketball provide, as nearly as possible,
equality of opportunity for all players?

%. Does the present 10-foot basket give the extra tall boy an abnormal advantage
over hia opponents of reasonable and average height?

3. Is there anything sacred about the 10-foot basket now in uset If so, how was it
desided that ten feet ia the proper height?

4, Would those who oppose a higher basket also oppose a lower basket? If so, would
theiy objection be that it would give the tall players too much advantage? (It —
should be observed that the 10-foot basket provides more advantage to the tall
player now than a basket nine fect, six inches high would have provided twenty-

way to do it except to raise the basket to a height that will not permit inter= ~~"?
ference with opponents’ bona fide shots and will not permit tall players to ‘sump —
up and drop it in" without any chance of interference by shorter opponents t 4

6. Will it remove the albmormal advantage to the tall player if the baskets are raiséd
so that every goal seored will aoe so be the pani ult of a “shot” whereby the
"shooter must theow the ball at the basket and not morely “lay it in"?

7. WALL the raising of the baskets take away from the game some of the spectacular :
plays now enjeyed by players and spectators? “

& Does the rules comaittee have in mind further changes that will curb the offensive
activities of the long, tall beys in order to compensate for curtailment of poss-
ible defensive denonstrations?