People who, when a tactic who's giving a team success against most types of rivals fails against one kind of rival/tactic, hear that is a matter of tactics think "it's tactical matter" means "your tactic is **** (like you)". As if a tactic that's generally bringing success could be considered poor! No, "It's matter of tactics" just means "it's a matter of tactics": That the tactic, which may be a masterpiece, has a certain set of weaknesses that are exploited by that type of team/tactic and that perhaps its strengths find in that rival/tactic the answers to deny them. It just means it's great for other matches, but for those it needs changing to address that. Because no tactic wins every game or every type of rival tactic. And top it by pretending there's a personal insult even if someone said a tactic is not the best.
Normally it would be in terms of RPG: I've done the Uberfullplate of Crushing Giants. +10 finding space, +10 ball attraction, -10 countercounterattack penalty. It beats everyone until it finds the Halfling with his chainmail of +10 counterattacking, +15 negating space, +10 piece setting -10 ball finding penalty. And when the first player is told "the problem is your armor, you should shift to the Plain Hinfoe: +10 countercounterattack +10 who needs space, +10 unsetting pieces -10 vs giant foes" he goes "THEY SAY MY Uberfullplate of Crushing Giants IS **** AND THEY'RE INSULTING ME!".
(That doesn't mean there may have some not wording things the best way, but that's still not enough as saying you're **** and your tactic is **** too)
((And it doesn't mean losing against the hin with the Fullplate of Giant Slaying can't be frustrating))
(((Plus, of course, someone actually saying a tactic that brings consistent success, winning trophies or simply competing consistently for them or beating more than one type of rival and tactic is bad, isn't quite right)))