He does a lot of math and fancy talk, only to conclude that when a match ends in 3:2, it's not very conclusive who the better team was? No shit sherlock, it doe

He does a lot of math and fancy talk, only to conclude that when a match ends in 3:2, it's not very conclusive who the better team was? No shit sherlock, it doesn't take much of a genius to figure that out. It would be more interesting if he'd actually take the time to do it proper and calculate what the chance is that there is a team outside the top 3 that is actually a better team (whatever that means) than the world cup winner. I'd be surprised if that number was very high. Every soccer fan knows you need a healthy dose of luck to win a match, but every soccer fan also knows that you need a hell lot more luck when you play against a team that's known to be better than yours, and when you get lucky very often, maybe that's just a sign that your team is better than you thought it was.