Yesterday, Liverpool beat Chelsea on penalties in the Carabao Cup final at Wembley after Kepa Arrizabalaga skied his penalty in sudden death. The result finished 0-0 AET and 11-10 to Liverpool on penalties. The question is “should these important matches be determined by extra time and penalties or should a replay be played. The same debate has been introduced relating to the Champions League this year because they have abandoned the rule relating to away goals and that if the aggregate is equal after the two legs then the result will be determined by extra time and then penalties if necessary. Penalties seem very entertaining for fans ( at least for the fans who’s team has won it). In past years, a replay has been played regardless of the round. This seems like a slightly more reliable way of determining a result instead of relying on the unpredictability of penalties. The away goals rule had been seen as a benefit because it encouraged teams to play a more attacking brand of football away from home instead of playing defensively and then relying on winning back at home. Going to penalties seems unfair because if a team has dominated the whole game and then loses on penalties that should arguably not have been the result. When speaking to Bernard Osei he believes that ”penalties is necessary to a game to decide a final winner because it is quick and good for entertainment”