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

exactly.

Transfer deadline day gets more ad time than we do for gods sake. Lets get some transfers then find a way to make as big a deal as we can about them.

Won't get into the transfer bit but completely agree the game needs to find ways of pumping out more stories and getting more personalities known of best players. I am sure much easier said than done

The last one was probably Fielden to Wigan in 2006 (although Wigan were WBSLR at the time).

I think the big difference is Chairmen are less willing to shell out a transfer fee - probably because they are all skint. Most of the best players are tied into long-term contracts - I guvess the fear their form will drop and will get shipped out so enjoy the safety net of 4 year contracts. It's only a short career tbf.

Transfer fees were a regularity in the late 80s and 90s for the top players - Schoey, Hanley, Offiah, Lydon, Newlove, Scully etc. all top players that went for big money between big clubs. They are much rarer these days and the only recent (last few years), "considerable" ones I can recall are Westerman and Lineham to Wire, Ferres to Leeds, Salford signing rabble like Hock and Hansen and S.Tomkins, Bateman, Taylor and Green to Wigan. None really between top clubs though as the OP says.

Players switching between SL clubs was APs spec, not "top" players and not transfers. Apparently it doesn't happen, which is why RL doesn't get press.

Stand corrected on Russell - forgot he briefly went to Aus.

OK then, one and all. We all know that our beloved sport generally has a poor following, and would benefit from more supporters. So.... what would make it appeal more?
Some suggest more headline stories...(But, given that fishing and gymnastics seem more mainstream sports than RL, would any newspapers run any headlines??)
Nobody in the South, (where I have lived for 30 years), have a clue what RL is. Many don't even realise there are 2 codes of rugby.
Transfers wouldn't make any impact as yet, as the general public wouldn't have a clue who was being transferred.. With the possible exception of Sinfield, I bet 99% of the population couldn't name a single RL player. Even names like Peacock, Roby, Tomkins, O'Loughlin, mean zero to most people.

I have no problem with someone like Koukash coming onboard and spending whatever the heck he likes. It's his money after all. Let him spend big on star players. The game is crying out for that kind of generated publicity.

We currently have a poor product on the pitch desperately lacking in star quality brought about by a salary cap regime producing a non-existent transfer market for players between the top clubs. The very best marketing team in the world would struggle to sell nothing in particular.

Stick to what you enjoy then.

Go fondle some spandex down at the gym.

The unfortunate thing is that, until we entice a wider following, and stop being a 'Northern' game, then we a bit scuppered!
I'd love to hear what opinions people would have to break that thought process.... (But i'm pretty sure the directors of the clubs have been working on that for some time. After all, they are all generally successful businessmen)

Spot on. Can't recall Sky Sports going crazy when the aforementioned by the OP move of Higham from Saints to Wigan took place or even the Peacock to Leeds move.

If we scrap or increase the SC, we MIGHT see a big name player switch between big clubs but we might also see it buried away on the news without hardly any mention if it falls on the same day of a footballer getting jailed for trying it on with a 15 year old, or a legendary player dying, or a sex equality row in tennis, or drugs issues in athletics etc.

What will definatley happen though regardless is the "big boys" will take the better players from the "lesser" clubs and those same posters arguing for a scrapping of the cap will complain about the same teams at the top and gap between them and the "rabble" ever increasing and complain about how ever increasing one-sided scores look bad when reported on the same news/press in which they were hoping to get some positive coverage from with their "lets have some big name moves" idea.

We can't increase the salary cap until the sport generates enough money to pay it's way. Otherwise we will end up with the sport having a cycle of bankruptcy for clubs that don't have a wealthy benefactor..... And there aren't a large stream of Saudi oil billionaires queueing up just yet....

And that's a decade ago, though IIRC a number of salary cap hurdles had to be removed along with a specifically arranged salary payment schedule for that transfer to take place. Wigan and Bradford were both desperate for the deal for very different reasons. One to avoid relegation and the other to offset financial distress which they hadn't owned up to at that stage.

Think you are right about chairmen and transfer fees. There are more moves in aus which has a larger cap. I don' t buy all the culture club staying forever stuff but it seems to apply a it more here than down under ( albeit more coin to tempt the movers). Perhaps another factor is that a small set of teams have won titles here, whereas down under honours are spread round a bit more.

even accepting that as the spec, that list is hardly a great dismissal of his point. It happens rarely and on the fringes isnt really a a great repudiation.

GH is the biggest supporter of the SC, In his opinion it levels out the field and makes the competition tighter