WAS SCOTT FOULED?

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 51, 1 March 1930, Page 9

WAS SCOTT FOULED?

WRITERS SAW LOW PUNCHES

VERDICT OF THE DOCTORS

United Press Association—Bf Eltctric Tele-

graph—Copyright. (Received Ist March, 11 a.m.)

VANCOUVEE, 28th February.

The sporting writer, Charles Smith, said that he went to Phil Scott's room with two doctors following the fight. They examined Scott as he lay still in great pain. ,' They agreed that Scott was suffering from the effects of a foul blow. An -examination revealed evidence of a foul blow in the groin.

British sports writers at the ringside gave their opinion that Sharkey used unnecessarily unfair tactics and struck Scott more than a few obviously 'foul punches. . They believed that Sharkey deserved disqualification.

Damon Runyan, a reporter for the Hearst newspapers', said that the referee did not see a low punch, but 10,000 eyes did. "I saw it, and a foul is a foul."

Gene Tunney, ex-champion of the world, and Young Stribbling, who witnessed the fight, gave as their verdict, "Scott quit." Charles Smith says that the fight was a veritable realisation of the presentiments that have been bothering the Scott camp for weeks. They feared and openly discussed the possibility of _ just what actually happened—that a niix-up would occur and with Magnolia in_ the ring Scott would get the worst of it.