...a matter of technique?

In my overview of Slive-Chase (Round 2), I concluded by saying, "From then on it is simply a matter of technique". I came across an article by Steve Lopez where he takes exception to this phrase:

Another cop-out shortcut that chess writers use is to stop annotating a game someplace in the late middlegame and wrap it up by saying, "The rest is a matter of technique". Ripoff!!!! Be honest -- say that you haven't a clue why the endgame played out as it did. But don't just truncate the game by saying "the rest is a matter of technique"!

The sad part is that a lot of the best-played and best-annotated games end up this way. You're playing through a game from a book -- it's a real see-saw battle between the players and you're hanging on every move, riveted by each word of the expertly annotated game. Black offers a pawn on move 33, you turn the page for the next move...and see "The rest is a matter of technique". That's just plain wrong, man. It'd be like going to an X-rated cinema, watching a really great foreplay scene, seeing the screen go black with the phrase "The rest is a matter of technique" superimposed, and then it's straight on to the next scene. That'd be enough to make you just button up your raincoat and go home.

"Better is..." by Steve Lopez, ChessBase News (web), July 31, 2004