College football fans watched Texas pull off a dramatic comeback against Ohio State. Then Steve Sarkisian walked away from an interview with ESPN reporter Holly Rowe.
Naturally, the internet decided the real crisis was Rowe’s facial expression.
The Longhorns erased a massive deficit to beat Ohio State, 24-23, on Sept. 12. Sarkisian delivered a brief statement before turning toward his celebrating players, leaving Rowe without the postgame interview she had been assigned to conduct.
Rowe looked visibly frustrated. She had every reason to be.
But apparently, a reporter showing the slightest hint of human emotion is now a five-alarm media controversy.
A Coach Walks Away. Somehow, the Reporter Is on Trial.
Sarkisian was caught up in an enormous victory. Texas had just completed a stunning comeback, and his players were waiting to celebrate.
That context matters. So does the fact that Rowe was working.
She was not a random person trying to interrupt a private family dinner. She was an ESPN reporter doing her job during a nationally televised broadcast.
Sarkisian eventually explained that earlier technical difficulties had disrupted ESPN’s interview process during the game. He also said he had communicated with ESPN colleague Laura Rutledge about the situation.
It happened again vs. Ole Miss on Saturday night.
That helps explain the chaotic circumstances. It does not mean Rowe was wrong to look disappointed when her interview ended almost before it began.
Some critics sided with Sarkisian. Others argued that Rowe should have smiled, tossed to the broadcast and moved along.
Apparently, the ideal sideline reporter must be able to absorb a live television snub with the emotional range of a parking meter.
The Sideline Reporter Is Not the Main Character. Neither Is Your Outrage.
Here is the funny part about the criticism.
Sports fans routinely complain that postgame interviews are boring. They complain about generic questions, rehearsed answers and reporters asking coaches how it feels to win.
Then an interview goes sideways, and suddenly everyone becomes an expert in sideline journalism.
Should Rowe have handled the moment differently? That is a fair question. Professionals can be evaluated without being treated as villains.
But the reaction went far beyond a reasonable discussion about broadcast etiquette. Some critics attacked Rowe personally, while others used the moment to revisit old grievances about her personality.
The internet can turn a two-second facial expression into a national referendum faster than a defensive coordinator can blow a fourth-quarter lead.
And it often forgets that the people involved are human beings.
Rowe has spent decades covering college football and other sports. She has built relationships with athletes and coaches while reporting from some of the biggest stages in sports.
One awkward moment does not erase that career.
The Internet Needs a Flag on the Play
There is a reasonable debate to have about live postgame interviews. Coaches are emotional, players want to celebrate, and broadcasters want usable television.
Maybe the format needs adjusting. Maybe coaches should be given more flexibility after dramatic finishes. Maybe networks need clearer plans when technical problems disrupt interviews.
Those are actual discussions worth having.
Blaming Rowe for appearing annoyed after a coach walked away is a much less compelling argument.
The reporter did not lose the game. She did not call the plays. She did not ask Texas to fall behind before mounting a comeback.
She showed up to work, and the interview did not go as planned.
If that is the biggest controversy college football can manufacture after one of the season’s most dramatic games, the sport may be doing just fine.
The rest of us might need to log off.
Slug: holly-rowe-steve-sarkisian-critics-texas-postgame-interview
