Still think the Eels should have taken the cash when the Matterson option fell through. $750k (according to Brent Reed) plus the moral high ground for a player who broke a contract to join them and they had overpaid for isn't a bad result. Now they get nothing, and are offside with the NRL, PVL and the Storm, and I'm sure the Dragons haven't forgotten.
2026 Season
- Thread starter Celticman98
- Start date
krustykraz
Danny 'Bedsy' Buderus
So would you be happy if Fletcher Sharpe just chose to leave and sign with the Storm?
Then played for the Storm against us this year?
Contracts need to be enforced, they're a joke in the nrl ATM.
Also great to see that the Storm had to pay Parra's court costs.
Last edited:
Well, that's a strawman argument. I'm not supporting Lomax or what he's done. I'm just pointing out that the Eels refusal to be pragmatic hurts everyone.
The Eels had an opportunity to get something for a player who is no longer on their books and is not part of their current or future plans.
So they could have walked away with a win. Now they walk away with nothing, plus a lot more bad blood.
Also, what contract are they enforcing? They'd already released him. The issue was whether they could get something to walk away from his NRL non-compete clause. It's not like Lomax would be looking for an NRL gig if R360 hadn't fallen over.
Finally, it's all well and good to say contracts need to be enforced, but we all would have loved Jackson Hastings to have found a deal in the ESL at the start of last season rather than playing out the year in the reggies. It cuts both ways. Lomax was literally a player that the Eels realised they'd paid too much for and were happy to have off their books; otherwise, they would have said no.
The idea that players or clubs won't seek better deals for themselves following this fiasco is, at best, wishful thinking IMO.
PS. I support the Eels demanding compensation, refusing any sort of deal, though, so as not to be "steamrolled" makes no sense.
The Eels had an opportunity to get something for a player who is no longer on their books and is not part of their current or future plans.
So they could have walked away with a win. Now they walk away with nothing, plus a lot more bad blood.
Also, what contract are they enforcing? They'd already released him. The issue was whether they could get something to walk away from his NRL non-compete clause. It's not like Lomax would be looking for an NRL gig if R360 hadn't fallen over.
Finally, it's all well and good to say contracts need to be enforced, but we all would have loved Jackson Hastings to have found a deal in the ESL at the start of last season rather than playing out the year in the reggies. It cuts both ways. Lomax was literally a player that the Eels realised they'd paid too much for and were happy to have off their books; otherwise, they would have said no.
The idea that players or clubs won't seek better deals for themselves following this fiasco is, at best, wishful thinking IMO.
PS. I support the Eels demanding compensation, refusing any sort of deal, though, so as not to be "steamrolled" makes no sense.
By all reports, the other clubs, most if not all, were 100% behind Parra
I guess everyone is getting sick of the smaller clubs or rebuilding clubs being screwed by the bigger, more powerful clubs
The only one who lost out in this situation is Lomax and he brought it all on himself
I guess everyone is getting sick of the smaller clubs or rebuilding clubs being screwed by the bigger, more powerful clubs
The only one who lost out in this situation is Lomax and he brought it all on himself
Parra were literally the smaller club that benefited when the Dragons finally released Lomax so he could sign with them.
And again, supportive of what? Lomax had already been released; no one foresaw the collapse of R360.
As I've pointed out above, the Storm miss a player they need and lost money on the court battle, Parra get nothing, the NRL and PVL are pissed off, fans of the game and the Blues miss out on an Origin quality player, so it's not only Lomax who has lost.
I do agree, though, he has brought it on himself....so that's at least something.
And again, supportive of what? Lomax had already been released; no one foresaw the collapse of R360.
As I've pointed out above, the Storm miss a player they need and lost money on the court battle, Parra get nothing, the NRL and PVL are pissed off, fans of the game and the Blues miss out on an Origin quality player, so it's not only Lomax who has lost.
I do agree, though, he has brought it on himself....so that's at least something.
HarVeeGee13
Danny 'Bedsy' Buderus
The other clubs are behind them because from the start this whole process has been an attempt to strongarm Parra into sending Lomax to Melbourne *specifically*. You can’t say “Parra’s refusal to be pragmatic hurts everyone” where it’s quite clear that what they would prefer is an open process where other clubs who might want Lomax for whatever dumb reason will have to offer them better compensation than the chump change Melbourne offered. So good on them.
Also, yeah, it would have been great if Hastings found another club last year. Did anyone at any stage say that he wasn’t 100% within his rights to enforce his contract with us? Talk about a strawman.
Also have to say Zac Lomax is in about 117th in my rankings for “player I’m really excited to see as a neutral”, doesn’t feel like a great loss to me. When it comes to wingers, tell me when the game is about to lose Brian To’o, then I’ll be sad.
Also, yeah, it would have been great if Hastings found another club last year. Did anyone at any stage say that he wasn’t 100% within his rights to enforce his contract with us? Talk about a strawman.
Also have to say Zac Lomax is in about 117th in my rankings for “player I’m really excited to see as a neutral”, doesn’t feel like a great loss to me. When it comes to wingers, tell me when the game is about to lose Brian To’o, then I’ll be sad.
krustykraz
Danny 'Bedsy' Buderus
Lomax signed an agreement (contract) when he left Parramatta that stated that he would not play for another NRL club.
He chose to sign it.
He can't just change clubs whenever he wants.
The Storms cash offer doesn't actually help Parramatta salary cap or replace him.
HarVeeGee13
Danny 'Bedsy' Buderus
What Parra really needs is a forward. There’s probably a club somewhere with **** outside backs but a lot of forwards, who think a winger who thinks he’s a centre is the solution to their problems.
" You can’t say “Parra’s refusal to be pragmatic hurts everyone”"....I clearly mean everyone in that negotiation, not everyone in the game.
I don't think this changes anything in contract space at all...except maybe if R360 comes knocking again agents/lawyers will need to come up with more creative ways to ensure players don't get left in limbo between contracts.
Not that it matters, Trump has probably already killed R360 for 28.
"...offer them better compensation than the chump change Melbourne offered. So good on them."...the Storm offered them a cash settlement and to take over Matterson's contract but Matterson didn't want to go to Melbourne...they then offered more cash....for a player they'd already released. They didn't get interested in Lomax until after 360 fell through, and they had to release Pappi to retirement.
"Also, yeah, it would have been great if Hastings found another club last year. Did anyone at any stage say that he wasn’t 100% within his rights to enforce his contract with us? Talk about a strawman."
Geez, I'm not saying that at all Harv...I'm just pointing out that it cuts both ways, clubs love to nudge players out the door when it suits them.
I don't think this changes anything in contract space at all...except maybe if R360 comes knocking again agents/lawyers will need to come up with more creative ways to ensure players don't get left in limbo between contracts.
Not that it matters, Trump has probably already killed R360 for 28.
"...offer them better compensation than the chump change Melbourne offered. So good on them."...the Storm offered them a cash settlement and to take over Matterson's contract but Matterson didn't want to go to Melbourne...they then offered more cash....for a player they'd already released. They didn't get interested in Lomax until after 360 fell through, and they had to release Pappi to retirement.
"Also, yeah, it would have been great if Hastings found another club last year. Did anyone at any stage say that he wasn’t 100% within his rights to enforce his contract with us? Talk about a strawman."
Geez, I'm not saying that at all Harv...I'm just pointing out that it cuts both ways, clubs love to nudge players out the door when it suits them.
None of this is in dispute. Not by me anyway.
They were literally willing to release Matterson to the Storm, but Matterson didn't want to go.
KPGreatness
Todd Bates
Gotta agree with Seano on this one especially when a club forces players out it’s convenient that no one bats an eye.
I think this Lomax situation is more spoken with emotion rather than reasonable thinking.
I think this Lomax situation is more spoken with emotion rather than reasonable thinking.
Lomax agreed not to play for another club when he left the Eels, he can hardly complain that they're enforcing that agreement. Only got himself to blame. Good on the Eels for sticking to their guns.
Circumstances change.
If it was a ruse and Lomax didn't sign with R360 just so that he could move to another club, then fair enough. But that's not what's happened, R360 didn't go ahead.
Kudos to the Eels if they can get a player of their liking from another club for walking away from the non-compete clause. I hope they do.
But at this stage, the Storm are one of the few clubs, due to their unexpected off-season losses of Papi and Nelson, plus Katoa out of the season (and likely career over), who can fit Lomax into their cap and top 30
The Eels are getting nothing and changing little for sticking to their guns over a player they'd already released and could have kept if they thought he was worth the huge contract he was signed to.
If it was a ruse and Lomax didn't sign with R360 just so that he could move to another club, then fair enough. But that's not what's happened, R360 didn't go ahead.
Kudos to the Eels if they can get a player of their liking from another club for walking away from the non-compete clause. I hope they do.
But at this stage, the Storm are one of the few clubs, due to their unexpected off-season losses of Papi and Nelson, plus Katoa out of the season (and likely career over), who can fit Lomax into their cap and top 30
The Eels are getting nothing and changing little for sticking to their guns over a player they'd already released and could have kept if they thought he was worth the huge contract he was signed to.
They make 100m in revenue from their leagues clubs a year. Don’t think the 750k is really changing anything for them
Plus they still have leverage from Zac’s contract
Because it would never hold up and make the NRL the laughing stock. The NRLs threat moreso then any threat of a competition that isnt even close to starting up.
Defence wins games
Todd Bates
Sounds very reasonable and right to me.
HarVeeGee13
Danny 'Bedsy' Buderus
I reckon the Eels are probably going to try to turn the Lomax thing into a swap for Mitch Barnett. We might be off them then 