The Predictor
Bench
- Messages
- 3,485
Yes I understand but it has to b favourable to both partiesMy post was referring out an out-of-court settlement.
Yes I understand but it has to b favourable to both partiesMy post was referring out an out-of-court settlement.
I’m betting no.does that 250k go on the Storms cap??
Wow![]()
‘Disappointing for rugby league’: Storm ‘haven’t ruled out’ another Lomax play after limbo bombshell
‘Disappointing for rugby league’: Storm ‘haven’t ruled out’ another Lomax play after limbo bombshellwww.foxsports.com.au
"Zac Lomax has sensationally settled his legal fight with Parramatta and agreed to not return to the NRL without the Eels’ consent before the 2028 season."
What?
"The court was told on Tuesday morning the two sides had come to an agreement.
As part of the settlement, the Storm must also pay $250,000 in the Eels’ legal costs."
I think so too OR we allow him to go next year. Something along those lines.I still think we will come to an agreement with the Storm or another club during the season with Lomax...
Those agreement today was to get it out of the courts as I have said the NRL and the Storm have done the dodgy and dont want it to come out during the court case...
So we still lost 150k after doing absolutely nothing wrong and all it cost the Storm was a little money. I’m proud of the club for standing their ground but as usual the Scum get off lightly.I’m betting no.
We already get a raw deal.Now let's watch our judiciary cases and on field infringements. I am expecting some blowtorch on us.

