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