So, the perennial underachievers who perennially underachieve didn’t perennially underachieve in a competition that perennial underachievers rarely achieve in. But as perennial underachievers against the strongest of final perennal achievers they achieved a great deal for perennial underachievers. In fact they achieved the ultimate achievement for underachievers; they achieved.
What are our perennially underachieving commentators gonna say about the perennial underachievers at the next tournament when as ex-perennial underachievers they can no longer be described as perennial underachievers?
If they win it, they might become perennial achievers but, of course, if they fail they will, once again, regain the perennial underachievers tag; principally because they’ll have entered the tournament as the most likely to achieve and have then underachieved.
It was a great game, a great tournament and, throughout, the perennial underachievers deserved to achieve.
Thank the lord that they did.
If, for no other reason than my sanity.