I would be interested to the hear case in favour of tie games.
If one sees sport as a metaphor of life itself, then an undefined outcome is perfectly acceptable.
All you need to do is look at how the NHL has completely hosed their points system to get rid of ties to see why there’s nothing wrong with a tie. If nobody can manage to win in regulation plus a little the game probably sucked anyway, call it a tie and everybody go home.
Tied games have relevance in league competition. the system is set up that you get 3 points for a win, 1 each for a draw (tie), 0 for a loss. In a league table, if two teams above you are playing each other in this week's fixtures, you may want the game to be draw (tied), that way they both drop two points which enables your team (if it wins) to close on both of them.
League position is determined by points accumulated, and while ties are not a great result, a point is often a valuable thing to obtain, especially if you are in the relegation zone and clawing to hang on to stay in your division.
If the bottom team in the division can go to the top team's venue and hang on to get a draw (tie) that is an achievement in itself, and it is to the great delight of the other top teams to see the leader "drop two points", especially in a game they should have won.
In knock-out Cup competition, drawn games lead to replays. The replay is at (original) visiting team's stadium. This rewards the away team with home advantage and creates additional revenues as well as prolong any grudge match sub plots. It used to be that they kept playing replays until their was a result, some games have gone to six or seven replays in the past, which in itself became a mini saga at the time.