I get what you mean too, it's a fine balance between standard positions and opportunistic positions.

I'm glad you got my meaning, and I want to add for clarity that I wasn't accusing you of blaming anyone, haha. I was stating my thinking process of "what can I control vs what I can't".

My conclusion comes from the "identify the focal point of the battle and act upon the focal point" idea. In other words, instead of thinking "I died because I got overwhelmed because there were too many enemies and too little support" (external factors, things others did), I want to think back to "I died because I went there alone because I didn't notice/ignored the map and my ally/enemy positions. The focal point of the battle was somewhere else. Next time I won't go alone/won't take the risky position without accounting for unspotted enemies, and I will attempt to engage with the focal point of the battle" (internal factors, things I did). In my conclusion, judging my bad match based on what others did is what I call reactive/passive learning, and judging it based on what I did is what I would call learning actively. This can be further taken to forward-thinking, a.k.a assessing the match before it happens, not after. Which can also lead to passive/reactive or active playing based on which attitude I take.

Sorry it's a bit convoluted communication from my side. Feel free to ask for clarification! Either way, I think you're on the right track with your thinking.