We've already said that CT's attack wasn't perfect, same for MYM's defense. Yes, CT was stronger and won regardless of that, but they would have won faster with a better attack, or MYM would have done better with a different use of the sweepbox (or a different def? i'm just saying it could have been done much better). The matches were long and exciting.
I thought we weren't discussing CT's victory, just the things that could have been done better (but we can do that too, of course - before it's getting too redundant) because some MYMs seemed to think it's wrong or a sign of dislike if people say that a tactic, however powerful it may could have been, was poorly executed.
The only lesson to be learned from the CT/MYM match is that the sweepbox can be conquered as easily as any other def with a solid team, yes, but once it gets even more simple to get around the sweepbox using intentional holes instead of sheer (im)patience to win, a good defender will again become more important (hopefully) and we then can get a definite answer to the question if INW is a good def (same for everyone else who underwent the 'anti-training' inside the sweepbox).
(It's strange that Ai, with this "Lincoln quote"-sig, agrees with your statement despite he left during the finals saying something alone the lines of "this is boring and takes too long, I'm out".)
