Agreed. People would have said that if Chelsea won 5-0 and Bayern didn't get a shot. It was decided before the game that Bayern were the better side. Chelsea had their periods of domination just as Bayern did and their penalties were technically excellent. That's why they won. That's isn't luck it was skill. Yeah, and give blank rounds to Snodgrass, Becchio and Brown ideally. I often think this. When you watch old footage of football from decades ago, what is supposedly a great goal is often just appalling defending or goalkeeping. I don't think it's quite appreciated just how much defending has improved over the years.
Why does it have to continue after Extra Time? You could have 120 minutes and then rather than go to penalties you just give the win to the team who've committed less fouls or something like that. No penalties and it promotes fair play. You'd have to worry about it being too much in the referee's hands then however.
I don't think the tackling player would be as likely to come steaming in though, making dives easier to spot and less likely to occur? Who knows. I just don't think it's realistic to replace penalties with something odd that would have the same amount of pressure attached to it anyways. If it's something that can be judged fairly and accurately that's already happened over the course of a game then you eliminte the over dramatization and need for penalties. It doesn't have to be fouls, could be "after 120 minutes most bookings lose" or "most attempts on target wins after 120 minutes" or something. The latter could make for exciting games!
