Former Wests Tigers coach Jason Taylor. Credit:Getty Images Player power could give us more entertaining rugby league Presumably, most players don't like five hit-ups and a kick – certainly not at Wests Tigers. The players successfully lobbied Jason Taylor to change their match plans and and this, in turn, kept him gainfully employed for another 18 months. What if all 16 teams decided they just wanted to have fun and bugger any clipboard carrier who tried to stop them. We'd be in for quite a series of spectacles. Players could become less fit Regardless of the truth of the Jarryd Hayne/Anthony Milford lazy trainer kerfuffles, both narratives involve players being "brought into line" by their leadership groups. The leadership groups, in turn, are at least partially overseen by Neil Henry and Wayne Bennett. If the leadership groups were to decide they didn't like Neil Henry and Wayne Bennett, would they stop enforcing rules? Could they simultaneously mount an insurrection and discipline wayward foot soldiers? Would we have entire squads of Haynes and Milfords, precocious talents who chose to do just what they need to (according the the rather two dimensional narrative that has currency)?

Player power could be increasingly exerted through the media NRL players may not like being pinned down by reporters but that does not make them incapable of Machiavellian campaigns. And they have the perfect mouthpieces now – former teammates who dominate radio and TV coverage. A word or two to them and suddenly you can pressure a coach's position with impunity. The retired player gets kudos from his employer for the "inside mail" and the current players' fingerprints are nowhere near the execution. Player agents become even more powerful It has been well documented that Isaac Moses manages James Tedesco, Aaron Woods, Luke Brooks and Mitchell Moses. 'Player power' could easily translate to Manager Might – whomever the agent backs is in a strong position and vice versa. It makes sense that the more powerful players get, the more influence their agents can exert. Could we see player agents being 'bought out' by clubs, paid to change jobs and bring their clients with them? A shortened season and better player welfare

These are more obvious impacts of players wielding political might as a group rather than within clubs. The Collective Bargaining Agreement is bubbling away. The season is too long. The players want a bigger share of the media rights pie. Their power within the clubs also means that the new club appointees to the Commission are more likely to do their bidding than before. A challenge to club sponsorships It's all well and good to say the players should be able to promote themselves while wearing club gear and NRL insignia but how much sponsorship can the market support? If I have a choice between backing the Titans and they make Jarryd Hayne available once a year, or backing Hayne directly and he's always available, which one would I chose? Surely some of the new finance generated by changes to the IP regulations will come off clubs' bottom lines. In conclusion, player power is as good or bad for the game as the players' intentions are good or bad. Perhaps they have more interest in expanding the sport than the denizens of League Central do. Or perhaps they'll be even more motivated by short termism and the bottom line than the NRL is. A charter listing the RLPA's vision for the competition and the sport would be a masterful piece of PR.

But either way, it's hard to see the continuing growth in the influence of the game's stars as a good thing for one besieged group: coaches. And the point is ...? Canberra were beaten by one point last round. Canterbury were beaten by 36. Yet why didn't we have anyone saying it was unfair they both got no competition points? On current form, had Jordan Kahu landed his field goal in golden point, there would have been howls of protest that the Raiders deserved someone from the evening. Discord doesn't really see the difference as all that significant.