"finals win and don't play," 

I disagree with the phrase "finals win and don't play," which is a superficial saying that always takes hold at every final scene

until I become inherited in public tongues without understanding or explaining enough of that sentence, and just as a trainer can win without playing his team well

he may choose a specific tactical strategy in which to take the game or play right, but no trainer believes rationally that, in order to win, we shouldn't play!

 But, if the aim here is efficacy, there's no trainer who can score targets; he's just attempting to raise the possibility of winning it, either by conducting

 workouts or analyzing the opponent's vulnerabilities and acting on them, shifting the position of a specific player ,for a specific and other purpose, the coach may succeed and fail, and both of them may be the reason and he may be out of cash. 

For example, Terzic studied very well Real Madrid and came up with how to limit the keys to competing play, a distinctive closing of the pass lines, a priority for the depth and then a shift to face the end, a combination of individual control and zone control

at the point of acquiring the ball, Aiden's thinking of entering Matsen as a reverseback and Ameri's descent was in the hearts of the defense, surprised Achilletti in the pressure structure

but in the end he lost not because Real Madrid didn't play, but even the Reals played especially in the second half, he was just more exploited for moments of power than Borusia!

It's more accurate for me to say the finals play on the small details and they're decided by the fractions, just like the difference between a single human being and a half a private Vinnie, the easiest lost and the hardest recorded and so on.