Just now we are in the midst of a discussion about water polo, and the end is not yet in sight. Briefly, here are the facts: On December 17, the Dartmouth athletic council voted to abandon water polo as a sport for next year, but the news was not released until this month because the council did not want to put a damper on water polo for this season.
Then, to everyone's amazement, Dartmouth has to date an undefeated water polo team. The swimming team has lost meets to Yale, Columbia and Rutgers, but the water polo men have gone their merry way, first hanging a 50-17 defeat on Yale, who taught them the game, then defeating Columbia 31-30 and finally defeating Rutgers by a 46-33 contest. This amazing comeback in a sport which hitherto has gained little notice naturally took the attention of the writers.
Imagine then the sensation that was recorded when the announcement finally came out that Dartmouth was to abandon the sport. And to pile another fact on top of this announcement, it naturally followed that if Dartmouth was to drop water polo, the Green must also resign from the Eastern Intercollegiate Swimming Association, which supports both sports in conjunction with each other.
The Dartmouth athletic council, through Prof. Leslie Murch, contend that as a game, water polo is detrimental to the best interests of intercollegiate competition, inasmuch as serious injuries might occur to the ears as an aftermath of underwater competition.
This explanation was refuted by those close to the water polo team, whose names must be cloaked in anonymity because of the nature of their remarks. The team itself in a signed article for The Dartmouth refuted the argument that they did not enjoy the game, and one who knows water polo as a game intimately refuted the argument that it was detrimental to the health. In all this welter of discussion, the council has stood firm to date, and the final chapter has not yet been written. I believe that this discussion has been opened merely because Dartmouth has an undefeated team in this sport, and looking at it from a sane angle both sides seem to have ground for their arguments. Harry Heneage's only statement was "we don't like the game," but there is feeling that there is far more than that underlying the surface.