Look, mate, if you enjoyed the spectacle of that idiot Poite destroying our chances because the other side was better at cheating than us, and he was not able to realise it, fine. And there have been many, many other examples.
The vast majority of our actual and potential audience for the game just do not want this. Former Test greats have been calling for reform. Northern Hemisphere greats, by the way.
Fortunately the game's governing body seems to understand this, even if you don't.
Another couple of points, if I may. Firstly, I am not calling for uncontested scrums. What I am in favour of is returning the scrum to the status that it had until relatively recently. A bit like a lineout, now that you mention lineouts. The side putting the ball in has an advantage, and should be able to clear the ball cleanly and quickly if they want to. Frankly, I believe the game would be a far better spectacle of teams that win the ball in either should be required to use it. You know, give it to the backs. Radical, eh?
Secondly, I would bet that none of the current crop of match officials has ever put his head into a scrum in his life. And yet they are empowered with the right to make arbitrary and unskilled decisions in an area of the game where chicanery and skulduggery are par for the course. And there is no use of technology, even though we know that overhead shots can reveal a lot. (I am not suggesting the use of technology like this, because it could only be made available at a few venues, but the point is valid, and supports my basic thesis that the game has outgrown the "dominant" scrum).
And the result can be yellow cards and worse for the side being "dominated". Where else in the game does the side being "dominated" lose players in such an ad hoc fashion?
And I could go on and on and on and on about the amount of time wasted with resets. This age is an age of instant gratification. Imagine what the first time viewer thinks when he/she watches a few of those.
