when the enemy jungler goes to help a losing lane aka Riven's lane (aka the wrong play to make), it opens up the ability of the jungler. The Riven player explained in the video exactly how that was able to happen.
Amumu didn't win the game for his team, the enemy jungler lost it. You can't watch this video and say, "Amumu carried the game for the team". That is just a blatant mis-characterization. Amumu executes to Krug's! But you are trying to say that the video endorses Amumu's excellent decision making.
When the enemy jungler showed up in lane to gank the winning Riven, the Riven player explained that by doing so, the enemy jungler wasted his time and then ended up feeding the Riven. You seem to feel that the other lanes were losing, but they really weren't doing badly. Amumu wasn't making plays into a losing situation (which would've been fundamentally wrong). The enemy jungler messed up and if he had payed attention to other lanes that had the potential to actually carry the game, he might've done better for his team. Instead, he made the low probability play against the strong Riven. This sort of move is classic in low ranked play. The Gnar is never going to win his lane, is never going to do well, is only going to feed (not intentionally like you might say), but the jungler shows up to his lane thinking he's going to turn things around and gets killed. It's because he doesn't understand how to assess his lanes properly. The Gnar-Riven matchup isn't even a matchup that he needs to show up in to give the Gnar breathing room. Gnar should be able to play safer and be relevant later without a gank. So it isn't even the correct move in that regard. When the Wukong goes top lane, the Riven player explains, "He's level 3; I'm level 5. I already bought the pick-axe... so no way I would lose that." He says, "These things come down to experience... I can stand there and tell, ok, I am not going to lose to him, so if he comes at me, I'm just going to kill him."
He says, "So many players even Silver and Gold make so many mistakes in the early laning phase... so if you win lanes really hard and snowball them then the other people on the opponent team just don't have a chance against you.... like Akali and Vayne and Wukong, they all just don't have a chance fighting me cause I snowballed from top lane."
Maybe they would've been able to do something if Wukong had payed attention to Akali and Vayne, instead of going to Gnar's lane to "help" a losing lane.
You seem to think that the video endorses Amumu. Guess what... it doesn't. Wukong makes a straight up bad decision to gank the losing lane instead of a potentially winning lane and the Riven player explains why Wukong's decision to come at him was wrong.
And what I'm saying is that Wukong's team ends up with no winning lanes and the Riven becomes an unkillable 33-0... not even one death because no one on Wukong's team is strong enough to make a play against the super-fed Riven.
I've played low-ranked games where an enemy laner just goes off and gets like 13 kills - games with a Riven out of control. The games I've won haven't been from ganking these out-of-control snowballing enemy laners who are happy to score double or triple kills on whoever comes to gank them (as the Riven from the video is happy to do)!
I don't see how you can watch this video and say, "Wukong made the right choice to gank Riven but was just 'unlucky'. Meanwhile, Amumu was the star of the show with his intelligent ganking strategy". It's like you are watching a completely different video from the one I posted!
So, I don't know what you are thinking. Maybe, you are thinking that if you were in that game, you would've played Eve instead of Wukong and camped the Riven on your Diamond smurf account but lost anyways because the Amumu that executed to Krugs made such intelligent ganking decisions.
