[smcl]

Yep. They've been tinkering with the scrum ever since I was a kid, but to me it feels like they result in a collapse, a penalty[0] or one side being totally steamrolled 90% of the time. I wish I had stats at hand to back this up, but I feel like even though they're technically "contested" they're rarely actually contested.

If it's not enjoyable for spectators, doesn't really do much for the game and is dangerous then I can see why it could get phased out in the long run.

[0] = or multiple collapses then a penalty

[dmurray]

I don't think this is accurate. The majority of scrums at every level lead either to possession for the team with the put-in, or a penalty in their favour. If the weaker team has the put-in, they can pretty much roll the ball straight back to the number 8 and get it away (possibly not in the rules but completely never policed).

It's exciting when either side gets a shove on and that there's at least the possibility to win one against the head, but I agree the game wouldn't lose that much for anyone but the purists and the front row specialists if we just moved to uncontested scrums.

[crateless]

In theory, the weaker team can "try" to get the ball out the back as fast as possible but in practice, I see penalties for teams getting steamrolled in the scrum quite often which would suggest that the tactic is not entirely effective.

I don't understand much of what goes on in the scrum, but I love watching the battle for dominance over the course of a game. Are there collapsed scrums frequently? Yes. But it is an aspect of the sport that gives a chance for the heavies to shine. The increasing use of mauls on the other hand...

[smcl]

Like I said I don’t have the data, so maybe take 90% with a grain of salt :-) But some 6 Nations games in recent years have been pretty frustrating wrt scrum, and I don’t see it getting any more interesting or safe