Certainly, perspectives on sporting events can differ. One observer may view a game and come away with an impression of what transpired that is completely different than another observer's take on events.
Often times, this difference in perspective is predicated on the viewer's rooting interest. A fan of one team will most definitely have a different point of view on events than the fan of the opposition.
Take, let's say, a close football game.
A game possibly decided by turnovers or maybe a bad call or two by the officials.
The fan of the team that won may say that the turnovers were 'forced' or that the winning team made those plays happen.
The fan of the losing team might believe that the turnovers resulted from mistakes his team made. And, thusly, the game was given away.
As sports fans, we understand that perspective often times dictates how the game is viewed.
So, as sports fans, we also understand that perspective dictates how writers report the game.
And that is why we can't understand ESPN's coverage of the North Carolina-Notre Dame game this past weekend.
One account of the game was titled "Tar Heels take big step with win".
But on the first play of the first drive of the second half, all of that changed. An interception by linebacker Quan Sturdivant got the Tar Heels back in the game, and a forced fumble and recovery by Aleric Mullins late in the third quarter swayed momentum for good.
The implication being that the Tar Heels made some big plays, forced turnovers and took charge of the momentum, proving that they are a legit team and taking the game.
A second ESPN account of the game was titled, "Irish handle tough loss to North Carolina".
Notre Dame knows it let one get away against North Carolina, and the Irish aren't happy about it.
The piece essentially documented the turnover margin in the game as the reason for the Irish loss. But it was the portrayal of the turnovers as mistakes, and that the Irish dominated the rest of the game that was interesting.
One piece, validating the legitimacy of North Carolina's team. The other piece, contending the Irish dominated and the loss was due to unfortunate mistakes.
We reiterate that it is not uncommon to have oppositional perspectives on the same event.
However, we do find ESPN's accounts of the game troubling, all the same.
We find the differing takes troubling because.........they were written by the same person.
Someone named Graham Watson wrote both pieces.
Clearly, Watson had some conflicting feelings after watching the game. The writer clearly came away feeling that the victory gave some credence to UNC's ranking. But, at the same time that ND performed well and were a few miscues from going back to South Bend with a 5-1 record.
Our complaint: Stand by one perspective or the other. Either ND gave the game away. Or UNC took it from them.
You can't have it both ways as a writer. How can one writer submit separate accounts with veritably diametrically oppositional views of the same game?
We believe that we in the Nation are reasonable, open minded, and truth seeking.
Truth seeking being the definitive quality. We find the truth, then relay it to you in our teachings.
A win-win situation for all of us.
Sometimes, we must search high and low for the truth. Other times, we must search near and far.
But this time, the truth hit us squarely in the face in the form of the writer that wants it both ways:
Women should not be writing about sports.
The opportunity to exercise the age old notion of a 'female's prerogative' (aka: changing your mind on a dime without explanation or rationality) is far too rife.
So, we shall request of Ms. Watson the same as we do of our wives:
Make up your damn mind and get back to us when you know what you want!!! (Or in this case you know how you feel about the game.)
And ESPN, unless you are going to turn into Women's Day or Redbook, you better think twice about accepting multiple entries on the same sporting event from your writers.
Your married male readers get enough schizophrenia at home, we don't need it on the WWL!