Today's Wisconsin State Journal included a commentary by Andy Baggot,
the State Journal's hockey beat reporter.
I will not reproduce the article in full, for a variety of reasons. I
will also tell you in advance that I don't particularly like Baggot's
reporting style or his style in past commentary columns, although he
usually has his facts rights.
In his column, he criticises Wisconsin Coach Jeff Sauer for not
disciplining individual players earlier in the season for various
incidents.
Baggot compared Sauer favorably to Indiana basketball coach Bobby
Knight, and then went on:
"But there is an element of Knight's fiery personality that
Sauer lacks, and given the events of the recently complete
hockey season, it is one he could have and should have used.
By definition, Sauer is not a disciplinarian. He is not a
taskmaster who grabs sweaters or facemasks to get one's
attention. He is not known for reprimanding playes who give in
to their emotions and become loose cannons on the ice. He does
not rant, rave, or carry one.
Despite mounting evidence that his young team needed a firmer
hand, Sauer did not deviate from this approach during the
recent season. As a result, what many feel was his finest
coaching job has been overshadowed by the unsavory conduct of
some of his players ....
[Baggot goes on to mention some specific incidents during the
season]
Because occurrences like these were allowed to go largely
unchecked, a message was sent. A message that blew up in
Sauer's dface in Albany, NY.
...
In the postgame press conference, Sauer was tghe model of
decorum. He did not criticize referr Tim McConaghy. He credited
Lake Superior State. He thanked the people at Knickerbocker
Arena for staging a well-run tournament.
What he also should have done is decry the actions of the
offending players and taken responsibility for them. He should
have said that no matter how frustrating the circumstances,
sportsmanship and dignity must have the highest priority. He
should have admitted his team failed in that regard.
Maybe then Sauer and his program wouldn't be in so muich
trouble right now.
I have the following problems with this column. I invite your
commentary on them:
1. It sure seems like 20/20 hindsight. Baggot never wrote a
single line all season long about player discipline, nor
did he when he reported on the game.
2. While I agree with the sentiment he expresses, I don't know
what Sauer knew or thought at the time of the post-game press
conference. I am speculating here, but trying to avoid
criticizing the refs may have had a lot to do with his actions.
Once again, with 20/20 hindsight two weeks later, it is easy to
criticize.
3. In a section I didn't quote, he mentioned three players by
name, and described some things he says they did during the
season. I didn't quote it because this bothers me a lot. I wasn't
there, I don't know what happened. I never heard a single bit of
reporting about any of their alleged actions.
Is it fair for a reporter, after the season, to single out
players like that? I know (despite how they sometimes act) that
the players are not children, to be protected. But coming as it
does now, it seems like a cheap shot.
--david
|
