Why uncontested scrums?

[vermonter]

I was watching Super Rugby this weekend, and I saw a few uncontested scrums. What exactly are the point of them? Why would the defending team agree to do that?

Thanks.

 

[monkeypigeon]

Where due to injuries and/or sin-binned/sent-off players, one of the two teams is not in a position to field enough qualified front row players. This is because he a player who is not qualified to play in these positions would be in an unsafe position.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

I like the new rule whereby if a team runs out of frontrowers, it goes to uncontested scrums but they can't replace a frontrower with another player ie they're down to 14 men. What I don't like is that the other team can replace a frontrower with another player.

An example of this is during the u20 6 Nations. Ireland saw their tighthead and replacement tighthead go off injured/"injured". They weren't allowed replace their backup tighthead and went down to 14 men. That's the correct penalty since it negates fake injuries when a scrum is being battered like Ireland's was that day. However France were able to take off a frontrow voluntarily and replace him with a backrow for uncontested scrums after Ireland were down to 14 men already.