I found it hard to listen to the conversation about the Hound vs Brienne fight, since it sounded less like criticism and more like nitpicking and fan-wank. I don't understand this attitude of "the Hound should've won, it makes no sense for Brienne to win". It's not Dragon Ball Z, it's not like every fighter in Westeros is on some rigid hierarchy of skill, where outcomes are all based on power level. We already saw that in "The Mountain & The Viper' where the man who 'should' have won the fight lost because being the better duellist did not make him immune to human error (in that case, arrogance and having soft, squishy eyeballs).
The evidence is all on there the screen; they were evenly matched for most of it, so it could have easily gone one way or another. In fact, that's what I liked about the fight; unlike Oberyn v Gregor, I didn't know how it was going to turn out and was genuinely excited not knowing who would win, or who I wanted to win.
Also, they only touched on it briefly, but I really liked the conversation between Jon & Mance at the start of the final episode. While the wildlings were portrayed inconsistently, I think Mance has been really well characterised as a charismatic leader.
