What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Peter V'landys - New NRL/ARLC Chairman

Trifili13

Juniors
Messages
2,468
It can be many things, but Parra asking for a player in return is what the court will focus on, as it's something out of his control and he can't be held accountable for that.

We all get people don't like the choices Lomax made, but we also have to be realistic in that he gets one short career to set himself up for life. And Parra is denying that for him. Courts tend to err on the side of the player in this situation as life goes on for a club.
Short career to set himself up for life should not have anything to do with it. There is life after footy and he can go dig ditches and earn a living like the rest of us merkins. Just because they can play footy better than the majority of the population doesn't mean they should be set up for life when they finish playing.
 

Delboy

First Grade
Messages
8,949
That's one way to look at it. Another is that a current State of Origin player is unable to play Rugby League currently due to the contract, and PVL would like to see him playing our game, rather than go promote Rugby Union in Australia and Parra is holding him to a very high bar that he has no control over, and will be laughed out of court if Parra continue down that path. The key is that getting another player is something that Lomax has no control over. And PVL isn't silly that this could open up a can of worms that the game doesn't need. I still see this all being settled before any judgement is handed down.
He signed a LOI with R 360 to play union and signed a contract that did that to his advantage and break an current signed deal., and he has had offers to play from Waratahs and Force, so he can fulfill his wish in union

The club just protected themselves within the NRL, as I’m sure Gould would do. No surprise that the Storm try to take advantage, he can still earn and in a sense it’s not a restraint of trade as he’s a professional athlete, not simply a league player.
 

Vee

First Grade
Messages
5,976
It can be many things, but Parra asking for a player in return is what the court will focus on, as it's something out of his control and he can't be held accountable for that.

We all get people don't like the choices Lomax made, but we also have to be realistic in that he gets one short career to set himself up for life. And Parra is denying that for him. Courts tend to err on the side of the player in this situation as life goes on for a club.
He denied himself that chance by not thinking through the possibilities before he signed.
 

JokerEel

Referee
Messages
20,192
It can be many things, but Parra asking for a player in return is what the court will focus on, as it's something out of his control and he can't be held accountable for that.

We all get people don't like the choices Lomax made, but we also have to be realistic in that he gets one short career to set himself up for life. And Parra is denying that for him. Courts tend to err on the side of the player in this situation as life goes on for a club.


No they aren't he signed the contract.

No they dont they err on the side of the law.
 
Messages
3,605


 

Dogs Of War

Coach
Messages
13,822
No they aren't he signed the contract.

No they dont they err on the side of the law.

You can believe what you like. Money was offered to provide compensation to Parra, Parra have said no to that and want a player. This is why it's going to court which Parra will lose.
 
Messages
18,402
Yeah like I said. He did have control over it. He negotiated a release without thinking it through. That’s on him.

On him and his agents. His agents should have thought of that considering that's was a fundamental part of their job.

Shit you make a mistake, its on you, not anyone, else to fix it. Lomax = 0 accountability.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
19,193
If they have managed their salary caps better than other clubs then why shouldn't they get him?
Multiple reasons 1. Because Parra is saying no to Storm as a condition of the release which was kindness they have been slapped in the face for (by a big bully club) 2. The smaller clubs are over the bigger clubs getting advantages 3. Managing the cap better sounds like it means cheating tactics - like clever 3rd party stuff. 4. Neutral fans want to see the Storm struggle for a bit. 5. The Storm should be developing players from Melbourne - they aren't doing enough of this, the pinch the Dolphins, Titans, Auckland's best juniors. 6. More good players should be going to places like Auckland, Titans, Newcastle, Dolphins - it would be good to see Auckland win or in a final rather than Storm.
 
Messages
18,402
You can believe what you like. Money was offered to provide compensation to Parra, Parra have said no to that and want a player. This is why it's going to court which Parra will lose.

It's Parramatta taking court action to have the non-compete agreement enforced. It's not to get a player in compensation.
 

Delboy

First Grade
Messages
8,949
You can believe what you like. Money was offered to provide compensation to Parra, Parra have said no to that and want a player. This is why it's going to court which Parra will lose.
Even a Dogs supporter who obviously wouldn’t be on the Eels side would understand, that the money means little as all costs for players are met by the NRL grant.

So Crichton wants to break his contract and go to play for Japanese Rugby, signs a release and then realises that they don’t speak English. Then signs for Parra as its local to where he lives with plenty of Islanders around and needs money now he’s not going to get paid in Japan, no doubt where your sympathies would lie.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
19,193
You can believe what you like. Money was offered to provide compensation to Parra, Parra have said no to that and want a player. This is why it's going to court
True. I think also the Eels don't want him going to Melbourne at all (or the Roosters or any other club that are highly likely to be top 4ish over the next 3 years) so that's another reason it is going.
which Parra will lose.
What makes you say that?

And even if they do it will have been worth it. It is already worth it just so that he isnt playing on Thursday night.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
19,193
It's Parramatta taking court action to have the non-compete agreement enforced. It's not to get a player in compensation.
Well yeah but I think it all settles out of court if Melbourne gives Parra a decent player - which they aren't prepared to do because they expect to get their way via the NRL pressuring Parra and this is their cheaty way to get straight back up into GF contention (smart).
 

Dogs Of War

Coach
Messages
13,822
Even a Dogs supporter who obviously wouldn’t be on the Eels side would understand, that the money means little as all costs for players are met by the NRL grant.

So Crichton wants to break his contract and go to play for Japanese Rugby, signs a release and then realises that they don’t speak English. Then signs for Parra as its local to where he lives with plenty of Islanders around and needs money now he’s not going to get paid in Japan, no doubt where your sympathies would lie.

If they don't want to play for my club, so be it.

But in this this case it's a little different cause Parra couldn't afford to put him in their salary cap if they wanted to take him back anyway. So his only recourse that he has control over is offering money. Offering players is out of his hands, he has no control over 3rd parties and what there contract looks like, what Parra can afford or not afford under there cap, which I suspect it's part of the issue with the player trade, that they want Melbourne to be paying some of the freight of whatever player they get, cause they don't have the cap room to take on anything decent contract wise. This is the sort of stuff that will come out in the wash in a court room. Parra should be careful what they wish for. The old bird in the hand type scenario.
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
48,837
It can be many things, but Parra asking for a player in return is what the court will focus on, as it's something out of his control and he can't be held accountable for that.

We all get people don't like the choices Lomax made, but we also have to be realistic in that he gets one short career to set himself up for life. And Parra is denying that for him. Courts tend to err on the side of the player in this situation as life goes on for a club.
Dunno why parra have to agree to anything

Lomax requested a release and has independent legal advice on the clause that was agreed upon

What’s he going to argue as to why he should get out ?

Just go play union till the 3 years are up like he said he wanted too
 

Dogs Of War

Coach
Messages
13,822
Dunno why parra have to agree to anything

Lomax requested a release and has independent legal advice on the clause that was agreed upon

What’s he going to argue as to why he should get out ?

Just go play union till the 3 years are up like he said he wanted too

Cause he has a limited earning window, and as a union player he won't be great. That's not his skillset. Really doesn't matter. Seems like they are coming to an agreement soon, so we will see that outcome shortly with the news articles coming out. Lomax fest is coming to a close.

West Tigers will be back on the menu.
 
Last edited:

Dogs Of War

Coach
Messages
13,822
I believe what can ne proved..

Ah so the proof is that Parra are holding him to a condition he has no control over. The requirement for a different player is one that he can't do. Just so we are on the same page. But go look at the news, I believe they are coming to an agreement, so we will see the details soon. Probably can't play against Parra next week.
 

Delboy

First Grade
Messages
8,949
Cause he has a limited earning window, and as a union player he won't be great. That's not his skillset. Really doesn't matter. Seems like they are coming to an agreement soon, so we will see that outcome shortly with the news articles coming out. Lomax fest is coming to a close.

West Tigers will be back on the menu.
Your dislike of the Eels is shown as only Brent Read, a Dogs supporter, PVL, A betting supremo used to getting his own way, and the Storm CEO believe breaking a signed contract under legal advice is ok. Given how player managers and some clubs behave if they believe there’s a weakness they can use and would open moves and opportunities to void deals , prepare for contract anarchy.
 

Dogs Of War

Coach
Messages
13,822
Your dislike of the Eels is shown as only Brent Read, a Dogs supporter, PVL, A betting supremo used to getting his own way, and the Storm CEO believe breaking a signed contract under legal advice is ok. Given how player managers and some clubs behave if they believe there’s a weakness they can use and would open moves and opportunities to void deals , prepare for contract anarchy.

It's got nothing to do with the Eels and I don't dislike them, I enjoy watching them having a longer period now between their first premiership than their last one. Keep on eeling.

What is happening is that most people's dislike of Lomax, which is why people are having trouble taking a step back and looking at the bigger picture. PVL wants the best players to play in the NRL, as most of us should. Even if he made a poor choice with R360. As well as ignoring that what Parra are asking of him is impossible for him to deliver (player in return). I don't particularly like Lomax, and wouldn't want him at the Bulldogs, but he is better than the average winger so I can understand why clubs would be chasing him.
 
Top