Ah!!! I see it differently from your perspective and for Madrid to win doesn't mean Man City didn't do well. Wait a minute, did you mean a club that scored twice didn't do well, I mean with better possession in addition? I doubt that, they even played so well in my view except that you guys only praise the winner. Man City scored in both halves while Madrid only scored in the second half and the last one that delivered the winner to them was luckily scored at the injury time. This shouldn't call for undermining the brilliant effort of Man City, and needless to say, Real Madrid is not a lesser club, Man City played with a strong club, so Man City did well in my opinion but fate only decided the winner to be Madrid.
But that is the reality. People always praise the team that won and behave like the opposition played too badly even though the match was tight. The excitement is more in cricket. A team plays for a whole day, the opposition does the same, and a single wicket or two runs decides who is the match-winner. It happened a lot of times that a team scored their winning runs in the last ball of the match.
The opposition lost the match, but that does not mean they did not play well. They forced their opponent to play the last ball of the match which means they played really well. Real Madrid won the match, credit to them. But that does not mean Man City played too bad.