Tripp of the tongue: Peter V’landys denies favouritism towards Melbourne Storm and Zac Lomax
The NRL boss has fired back at conspiracy theories linking him to Melbourne Storm’s Zac Lomax pursuit, citing a High Court battle that makes helping impossible.
Andrew Webster
Peter V'landys says he will not do Matt Tripp any favours over Zac Lomax, left
ARL Commission chairman
Peter V’landys has slammed
talk he wants rugby league outcast Zac Lomaxto join the Melbourne Storm as a favour to their chairman, bookmaker
Matt Tripp, declaring: “If there’s one person I wouldn’t help, it would be him.”
As Parramatta and the club-less winger hurtle towards a showdown in the NSW Supreme Court on March 2, all sorts of theories are getting around about why the NRL has seemingly pitted itself against the Eels.
One is looming broadcast negotiations. A strong Storm is critical. The other is V’landys helping Tripp because of their long-term relationship through racing. Eels officials are conscious of it, even if they haven’t expressed it publicly.
“Matt Tripp took me
all the way to the High Court in the race-fields case, which has generated billions of dollars for racing,” V’landys told his column in a lengthy interview this week. “He’s the last person I’d help.”
One of V’landys’ greatest victories as Racing NSW chief executive was convincing government regulators in 2012 to slug online bookies a percentage of betting turnover. Tripp, who at the time operated Betfair and had the financial backing of billionaire
James Packer, led the charge against the legislation.
The dispute went all the way to the highest court in the land and V’landys triumphed.
“Matt Tripp knows I wasn’t supporting him (over Lomax) because he knew my stance about (upholding) a contract,” V’landys said. “And
Matt Beach, the chairman of Parramatta, we had meetings with him. We tried to see if they could come to a resolution, and I was equally hard on both.
“There’s no way we ever took a side. We just tried to find a resolution. My aim was to find a resolution that satisfied both parties, and that, unfortunately, didn’t happen.”
The Eels are sceptical. They’re expected to argue in court that a phone hook-up involving V’landys, Tripp, Beach, and RLPA boss
Clint Newton was more “ambush” than mediation. They will also tell the court the Storm were privy to possible salary cap implications if they did not release Lomax – information that could only have come from the NRL.
Parramatta released Lomax last year so he could join rebel rugby competition R360 on the condition that he couldn’t join another NRL club without their permission.
From the very beginning of this dispute, their rich leagues club has told Beach and chief executive
Jim Sarantinos that it will back them until the bitter end.
That’s some undertaking considering it’s about to undergo a $330m redevelopment of its licenced premises.
Zac Lomax takes on the Storm last season. Picture: NRL Images
Why should they cave in? Lomax told them he wanted a release from the final three years of his deal to play in a competition that appears to have been conceived on the back of a beer coaster.
If Lomax was naive enough to walk away from one contract without any real certainty around the R360 competition, it’s on him.
V’landys this week told media outlets that he respected Lomax as a human, talking about his charity work with sick children and expressing concern about his mental health. Privately, the Eels are angry that he played those cards because they’re irrelevant to the case.
Yet V’landys bristles at the claim he’s sided with the Storm in this dispute.
“I’m not keen for Zac Lomax to join Melbourne,” he insisted. “He can join whatever club that wants him. If the Wests Tigers want him, I’d be just as happy for him to go them. Or if Manly want him. I just don’t want Zac Lomax to be lost to rugby league.”
www.nine.com.au
