It'll eliminate a role for stocky, relatively slow moving 18 stone players specialising in scrum technique, and create more roles for fast, athletic 17 stone players specialised in blasting opponents out the way. It'll also mean the ball's in play for longer, resulting in more impacts overall.
As a League fan I'd love it - I don't care what it's called I'd just like more people to play and watch Rugby League.
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
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.
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...