A question of perspective

Yesterday I heard and read something, from two people both in the business of informing sports followers about sports- in this case cricket. One was at a point when India was still in with a good shot at saving the Test, and the other when defeat loomed rather more ominously.
Both opinions were about Sachin Tendulkar’s batting on the final day of the Test. With India more or less giving up any ideas of the eminently improbable victory, he walked in with both openers back in the hut, and Dravid soon followed. Of course he could have chosen to play his so called natural game and go for his shots, or he could choose to be circumspect. Either way, he would attract flak, the way things are these days. But that is my two=pie bit, and not what I set to say here.

Wat I was saying was this:
One media person used these phrases in his description of Sachin's innings:
"...Tendulkar batted magisterially..."
"...majestic poses in defence..."
and, in an earlier bulletin

“If ever there was a case of a batsman being in complete control without scoring, this was it”, or something pretty close to that.

Not much later, another media person, also in the business of bringing sports to the masses, said this:
“Sachin? He just plodded on, and he looked completely at sea, couldn’t play any shots”

Different perspectives enriching an opinion... or coloring it?