A draw of one goal each was the result of the visit of Hampstead Town to the ground of Summerstown at Earlsfield on Saturday, and taking the run of the play no one could cavil at the figures. Hampstead Town, who were without the services of F.G. Young, played V.F. Rowe at centre-forward, Kenneth Seabrooke, after a week's absence through illness, filling Young's position at inside-right. Wardlaw, with his proverbial luck when he is presented with the captaincy, lost the toss, but the only disadvantage suffered was that for some time Hampstead had a troublesome sun in their eyes. In the first half the visitors played brilliant football, almost equal to that shown against Redhill the previous week, but unfortunately it did not bring so many goals. Summerstown had a good defence, but the visiting forwards did not make the best use of opportunities open to them. Hampstead's first and only goal came at the end of twelve minutes, during which time some remarkably good work was done by the side. Seabrooke looked to have a good chance of notching an early goal from Irwin's pass, and after Wise had attempted to head the ball into the net, Rowe hit the side of the rigging. Then came the goal, a timely pass by Wise enabling the new centre-forward to give Hampstead the lead. The remainder of the play in the first forty-five minutes was largely in Hampstead's favour, the nearest chance Summerstown had being a free kick just outside the penalty line. The ball was sent over the bar. Summerstown played dashing football, and in Cobb, at outside-right, they had a player with a rare turn of speed, but in scientific work they were streets behind Hampstead. Unfortunately the visitors' cleverness had no material value. From a pass by Wardlaw, Seabrooke hit the bar, Rowe made an equally good effort, and Irwin made a desperate attempt to add No. 2 by running in from the wing, thinking that policy was of better service than placing the ball to a colleague. A corner resulted, but, like many others, it was abortive. The teams crossed over with Hampstead leading by one goal to nil, and those who could pronounce impartial judgment were of opinion that the visitors had only obtained 50 per cent. value for energy and skill presented.

Of the second half a different story has to be told. Hampstead fell away sadly - not the first time, by the way, this has occurred - and the only goal was obtained by Summerstown. It came from a free kick close to goal, it being alleged that Goodwin, the goalkeeper, had taken more than the prescribed number of steps before getting rid of the ball. His contention was that he had no chance of doing so before he was hugged by an opponent. The referee's decision was accepted without any undue protest, but it was nevertheless felt that Hampstead had not received justice. This goal came at the end of fourteen minutes. The remainder of the game was remarkably fast, and for the most part it went in Summertown's favour. Cole and Lockwood tested Goodwin with capital shots, while Pease, the veteran centre-half, who played one of his best games, piut in a surprise shot which with a little bit of luck would have scored. Goodwin did well to save at the expense of a corner. Harris, the visitors' right-half, was off the field for a time, and with Summerstown in a desperate mood, a good deal of work fell upon the Hampstead backs, but they played in unison, Iles, despite a tendency now and again to adopt methods which a back should be slow to cultivate, showing good judgment and kicking powerfully. Towards the end Cobb almost ran clean through for Summerstown, and two corners fell to them, but at the end honours were easy.

It was a clean and well-contested game. Hampstead were somewhat disappointed that they did not bring home full League points, having regard to the defeat of Summerstown by 5-1 at Cricklewood-lane, but this partial failure must be put in the scales against the result of the match on the previous Wednesday, when, with a weakened team, at Southall, they extracted a point.