This is a silly argument that completely ignores the very basics of how a market works.

Why because I've highlighted the obvious flaw in your argument?

If you increase or scrap the SC is it anymore likely that Roby would move to a rival or stay at Saints on an even better wage?

It's not really, it's just picked apart your extremely basic and naive 'if clubs can spend more they can buy who they want' whilst convientley forgetting the current clubs stand just as good a chance of keeping them.

no, because it is utterly, utterly idiotic.

If Roby is to move, someone needs to offer him a package which is attractive enough for him to reject any improved offer Saints may offer him. If nobody does that he wont move, whether we have a cap or not. It is pretty obvious, in fact its pretty much self-evident, that it is easier for a club to make an offer to Roby which is attractive for him to reject any improved Saints offer if that club is not restricted by a salary cap.

it is hilarious that you actually think that.

I want to buy a car. The person who owns the car might not necessarily want to sell it. There may be other buyers.

In one scenario I am limited to only spending 5k on cars.

In the other scenario i can spend whatever i deem correct on cars.

Which of those scenarios am i most likely to successfully complete the purchase of that car?

What an utterly ridiculous comparison to make with regards to player movement in sport.

It isnt, this is just the bit where you know you have lost the argument so just deny everything to hide it.

A market for a good works the same way as a market for a service.

But lets try it your way just to spell it out

I own an RL club, I want to sign James Roby, James Roby may not necessarily want to sign for me, there may be other bidders

In one scenario i am limited by the SC to only spending 1.8m on players including James Roby

in the other scenario i can spend whatever i deem correct on players including James Roby

In which of those scenarios am i more likely to successfully complete the signing of James Roby?

And it's pretty obvious Saints could offer a more attractive wage that makes it easier for Roby to turn down rival bids if they weren't restricted by a salary cap.

As pointed out you've not come up with any genuine reasons why an increased/scrapped SC would see more movement between top teams. For the reason that the buying club could offer more it can easily be offset by the players current club can offer more too.

In a way i miss the days pre SL when all the rumours started in the off season and several big names rolled in. Obviously it never worked out for us back then but the prospect/hope of a 150k big name coming in to help us through a wobble in the season was always there, It is all a bit sterile these days in that respect with pretty much just a contract needing sorting, and all happening early on so not much excitement on the transfer market front these days.

In one scenario Saints can only spend £1.8m on players including keeping James Roby

In another scenario they can spend what they want on players including keeping James Roby.

In what scenario are they likely to be able to keep James Roby.

Worked out the flaw in your argument yet? The buying club isn't the only team advantaged by an increased/scrapping of the SC.

Simple question, is it more or less likely that i can tempt James Roby to move from Saints and reject whatever improved offer saints make if i am

A) restricted in what i can offer.

or

B) not restricted in what i can offer

In the hope of providing a distraction, james roby suffers from acute cunninghamitis, a condition that renders the sufferer Unable to move out of suntelens. Even lots more money in Australia did not provide a hope of a cure.

The current Leeds CEO doesn't need a RL imposed salary cap to restrict expenditure on player's wages. It would be interesting to see how he'd react to its removal.

I remember the sport before the cap was adopted, I don't recall a sport in rude health outside or even within Wigan.

It isnt a flaw its an idiotic position which assumes that my valuation of James Roby isnt significantly higher than saints and forgets that differing valuations are the basis of all markets for anything, ever.

Ok, then. Let's look at a similar timeline as your football list, and a similar definition of "top clubs", so we get Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Wire and Huddersfield standing in for ManC, ManU, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool.

Ben Cross, Shaun Lunt, Brett Ferres, Bret Hodgson, Larne Patrick, Jack Hughes, Gareth O'Brien, Matt Russell, Anthony Mullally.

I'm sure you won't find this "useful" as it shows you haven't really being paying attention, but whatever.

I think that sums it up well - if you have unlimited funds your chances increase of buying anything

Sadly true, leeds virtually went bust trying to compete with Wigan. Wigan themselves who dominated for over a decade were £4m in debt despite all that success, 8 Wembley wins in a row etc. financially the game was cabbaged . I'm not sure the game would flourish with no cap, Warrington may do a modern day Wigan and the rest may get in a right mess chasing them. Most clubs are on the bones of their backsides now.

It is a bit idiotic to naturally assume you have a higher valuation of James Roby than the Saints club.

B

Now if Roby was already your player which scenario do you reckon gives you the best chance to keep him if not restricted.

See they cancel each other out.

lets be honest, thats not really a list that proves big players move from big sides to other big sides is it. Only really Ferres with his extenuating circumstances would qualify, the rest are bit parters or old imports who are pretty much done.

Patrick, O'brien and Lunt were only loans, Russell didnt go from Wigan to Wire,

i assume nothing. Im not saying that i definitely do. Im simply saying if i did, then it would make it easier to not be constricted by the SC

They dont cancel each other out because only one indulges differing valuations.

Whether there is a cap or not if Saints value Roby more than me im not likely to tempt him to leave.

if i do value Roby more than saints, the cap makes it harder for me to tempt him to leave.

This last post has finally made your point about the salary cap, make sense.
Up until then, I was with the other dissenters regarding your argument. If everyone has the same money, then surely, we are still on an even playing field.
Our valuations of each player is likely to be fairly consistent, but for a few quid here or there. (back to Kev's quote!!) But, if that 'few quid' becomes 'a lot of quids', then the player has a decision to make. (assuming the player's current club aren't willing to match the offer being made.)

Blah blah blah. I can't be bothered with your patronising pompous nonsense. RL doesn't get much media coverage because a large proportion of the country don't care. The international game is tiny in comparison to other sports, all the games top clubs are in the north and attendances of the top clubs are comparable to that of lower league football teams. A few transfers between top clubs isn't going to have much impact. Rl has had big news stories in the past with the change in structure, new teams being formed etc etc and no one really gave a sh*t.

If only we had Millward, Long and Gleeson to give us headlines. Maybe heatherington should flog watkins to Wigan so we can get a 5 line article on the BBC sport section, on the front page for 5 minutes until wayne rooney takes a dump.

surely its a steady stream of news - of which transfers are a part