December 15, 1943. My, Ralph Cannon, Esquire Magazine 919 Nee Michigam Avec, Chieage, Illineis. Dear Ralphs I was interested in your Sports Pell, and there sre some things that I would like te say about it. First, I have never recemended a 12 feet geal fer high seheel players. This is always the way when you de recommend something for cellege players - there is always an erreneous impression that carries ever in seme ether field of sectivity. But fer ecellege players, mon of maturity, when they reach such heights as the tall player new pessesses, then I can see nothing sacred abeut the height ef a 10 feet basket. There is me reason in the werld why it should met be changed. I was rather interested im the AP article eut ef New Yerk last night in whieh Hemry Iba, the coach ef Oklahoma A. & M., with his 7 feet Beb Kurland, and Jee Lapehick, eoach of St. John's College, ' with his 6 feet mine inch Harry Beykeff, came out against the geal- tending type of defense. Sure, beth coaches used this style ef play because it is prefitable. But the goal-tending is only half of the stery; the geal-dumking is the ether half ef the stery, and that is whete the rule-makers have made an unconstitutional rule according te any law im the lend. It is diserimimatory and therefore could net held in a court of law ner should it held in a court of fair reasoning. The diserimination I speak of is discrimination in faver ef the offense. If the ball is om the rim ef the basket the offensive man may push it in, strike the ball, bat it in, or strike the rim when he dunks his arm about eight imehes threugh the rim with the ball, and the geal counts im all of these situations. But a defensive man guarding the goal may net tap the ball er reach ever the perpendicular plane ef the basket im knocking the ball away from the heep. Again, if the ball sheuld be en the edge ef the basket andthe defensive mam should kmeck it off er teueh the goal twe peints are scered fer the effensive side. De you net agree with me that that is diserimination for - im the one case, and against in the ether?