You’re all narrative merchants who want to attribute essentially random events to something more solid, as you think the sport you love is somehow devalued if you admit it wasn’t all destiny and that if the ball had bounced 10cm in the other direction one time, a team in blue would be lifting a trophy instead of a team in red.
So even when team A batters team B, hits the post eight times and then concedes a last minute deflected winner, they weren’t unlucky, but Team B had a better mentality, or Team A’s manager always bottles things in Europe so this was inevitable, or it was actually the genius of dropping player X into a false 9 rather than playing a traditional striker that made the difference.
The fact the best team doesn’t always win is what makes football interesting. Winning any big cup competition requires being both really good and really lucky. People should embrace that.
Why do everyone act as if OP said that only luck is involved in football? Of course being the best team will make you win most of the time. But on one match, luck can take its toll. That’s why it’s easier to predict the winner of the league than it is to predict a playoff style cup such as the WC or the carabao. Numbers thin out the luck.
That’s why a team such as PSG, which is non arguably the best french club, doesn’t dominate the national cup as much as ligue 1.
It’s also well documented that sports with low scoring are harder to predict than sports such as basketball or baseball. Again, numbers thin out luck. If you have a high number of scoring, you can luck out sometimes on a score opportunity, and luck in at another time, in the same match. In football, you have way less goal opportunities, so lucking in on one goal, or lucking out, will probably have a huge impact on the end result of one particular game.