No.
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!
Greg Inglis' boat says hi.
We can try and ship Matto to New Zealand this season, to get Mitch B early?
Yep, saves Lomax from suing Melbourne for recovering his lost legal costs, given Melbourne appeared to lead him down the garden path on this fool's errand to use the blowtorch" to get out of the terms of his contract release.
No I said he wouldn’t have had to go (present perfect tense, not present tense), assuming the hypothetical that they were “going to just pay him out and release him”.
He didn’t have to do anything. He doesn’t for us. Why would it be any different in Melbourne? More likely is that he wants a medical retirement and signing with a new club would jeopardise that.
Aww I feel sowwy for Melbourne. They twied so hard but those mean old Eels said no. Even though they could’ve spent the money to pay for some junior regos. And the Storm bent themselves over for Matterson but he was too gweedy.Inside Story: How one Ryan Matterson clause demand torpedoed Zac Lomax’s NRL return
Melbourne’s three month pursuit of Zac Lomax was ripped from its grasp in one fell swoop. This is the inside story of how a former teammate refused to budge on NRL star’s return.
Brent Read and Tyson Jackson
NRL: Jason Ryles spoke to the media right after learning the Zac Lomax court case verdict.
On Monday, Melbourne thought they had their man. Actually, they thought they had their men. The Storm were well on their way to striking a deal with Parramatta for Zac Lomax but the ball actually rested in the court of out-of-favour Eels forward Ryan Matterson.
The Storm had already offered a flat fee of $750,000 for Lomax but the deal had been rejected. Parramatta wanted an agreement that would help their football side and that meant creating salary cap space.
Enter Matterson, who had no future at Parramatta and was occupying significant space on the Eels’ cap. Melbourne were willing to take him off their hands if it meant securing Lomax.
Melbourne chair Matt Tripp had picked up the phone and personally spoken to Matterson. He also spoke to his agent Gavin Orr five or six times.
Melbourne insist they bent over backwards to convince Matterson to pack up and move south. The message was that he would be welcome at the Storm and given every chance to prove he wasn’t a spent force.
Melbourne were even willing to offer the option of a second year, giving Matterson the chance to prove he had some petrol left in the tank.
If he knuckled down and toed the line, the Storm were open to keeping him around. As they point out, some players come to Melbourne and get a new lease on life.
Matterson was in dire need of a change and the Storm were happy to come to the party. It would have meant paying the remainder of Matterson’s contract this year - believed to be around $416,000, which would have freed up the same amount on the Eels’ salary cap - and a transfer fee of $300,000.
In the background, Storm chief executive Justin Rodski was continuing talks with his Eels counterpart Jim Sarantinos. Storm officials thought Matterson was ready to make the move.
He certainly had no future at Parramatta - the former NSW forward hasn’t even cracked their top 22 for Thursday night’s game against the Eels at AAMI Park.
As the talks reached the pointy end, the Storm were finding it hard to get hold of Orr. He was travelling but when they eventually tied him down, the news wasn’t good.
Matterson wanted a guaranteed second year or the deal was off. The Storm were shocked. They had already bent over backwards for Matterson and weren’t prepared to give any guarantees regarding 2027.
Suddenly, the Lomax deal was dead. A three month chase had come to an end. Matterson was their last hope given Parramatta had already made it very clear that no amount of money would change their mind - a transfer fee would do nothing to help improve their football side.
Matterson’s contract requirements killed the deal. Picture: Mark Metcalfe/Getty Images
Others argue that isn’t the case. Although they couldn’t use a $750,000 fee on player signings, there is a view among some that the money could have been used for other purposes to help the club and create goodwill - there is an argument it could have been used in grassroots footy to supplement registrations.
As rich as Parramatta are thanks to their affluent leagues club, it was the sort of money that could have gone a long way in the battle to win hearts and minds in western Sydney.
There was little sympathy for the Storm though among Parramatta fans. It’s been well over a decade but they still haven’t forgotten the salary scandal and the 2009 premiership, when they were beaten by a side that was later found to be in breach of the rules.
That title was taken from the Storm but it was cold comfort for Eels fans. Nor was there much sympathy in the wider rugby league community given many rival supporters are sick of seeing the Storm be so successful.
They view one of the most successful clubs in Australian sport through a prism of envy and contempt. Parramatta knew they held sway in the court of public opinion.
As always in rugby league, there are conflicting opinions. Others are happy to point out that Lomax broke a deal to go to Parramatta in the first place and there is a touch of hypocrisy about demanding money now that he has done the same to the Eels.
V’landys had come to Lomax’s defence in recent weeks.
ARL Commission chair Peter V’landys had also championed Lomax’s cause, insisting that Lomax was a human being and that the last thing he wanted to see was him playing rugby union.
The Rugby League Players Association also went public with their sympathy for Lomax on Tuesday and warned that events involving the former NSW star did not create a precedent for future contract negotiations.
“It’s a sad and disappointing outcome for Zac, and one that should never have reached this point,” Newton said.
“This situation shines a spotlight on a concerning trend: the increasing use of ‘mutual termination’ clauses that undermine the free labour market outlined in the CBA.
“We’ve seen how clubs can exploit these clauses, leaving players in weaker positions and perpetuating issues like shoulder tapping.
“Let me be clear, this outcome does not set a precedent for other clubs. We will collaborate with the NRL to ensure that such practices are not emboldened.”
Just as there was little sympathy for the Storm in clubland, the popular opinion among fans was that Lomax made his bed and was now lying in it. He flirted with R360 when others warned it was a house built on sand.
When will we next see Zac Lomax in the NRL?
Lomax has every right to question the advice he was given by those close to him. They have let him down.
“It’s quite sad for Zac, but it’s exactly how many of us predicted the whole R360 circus would end for those seduced by the ridiculous promises,” South Sydney boss Blake Solly said.
“NRL players have the best terms, conditions and security of any “rugby” players in the world (under their CBA).
“R360 was always a massive leap into the unknown. It’s a reminder to all players the risks with these pirate competitions.”
Lomax is now expected to look at rugby union, although Parramatta haven’t closed the door on him joining another NRL club.
They just want something in return that strengthens their football side. The Storm may come knocking again at some point this season, although there is every chance that Lomax will have found a home by then.
It sets up a tantalising game later this week at AAMI Park as both clubs open their season. On Tuesday, the Eels got one back on their arch enemies ahead of that game.
As a result, they won’t have a lot of friends in Melbourne on Thursday night. The atmosphere will be electric. Lomax would have fitted right in.
Maybe if they wanted to pay us a couple of million and we could fully fund the Zac Lomax memorial centre for youth development. That how we build 'good will' out west.
Mate Denis Denuto would’ve had this sewn up.
Danny DeVito
where to now for Zach ?
super rugby
Japan Rugby
European rugby
ESL super league England
bring back Semi.Radradra
make a Deal
make EELS Great again
It wasn’t the judge, Parra agreed to it they weren’t pushed
After a long and costly saga, Zac Lomax remains in limbo. But one side came out on top
At 6:20pm on Sunday night, on the eve of the first hearing in the Zac Lomax court case, Melbourne finally sharpened their pencil.
Storm chief executive Justin Rodski picked up the phone, rang Parramatta counterpart Jim Sarantinos and made an offer that seemingly couldn’t be refused. In exchange for the Eels releasing Lomax, Melbourne would pay out the remainder of Ryan Matterson’s contract – all $416,000 of it.
https://forums.leagueunlimited.com/javascript:null
Zac Lomax has settled a bitter legal dispute with his former club just hours before it was due to hit the NSW Supreme Court.
And as a further sweetener to end the stalemate – and to prevent everyone’s dirty laundry being aired in the Supreme Court – the Storm even threw in an extra $300,000 transfer fee.
To afford such a move and remain under the salary cap, the Storm had to be creative. That meant delaying Lomax’s debut until later in the season, paying him less than originally agreed or a combination of the two. It was a price everyone was willing to pay.
Finally, after months of argy-bargy and hundreds of thousands of wasted legal fees, everyone was on the same page. Except for Matterson.
To be fair, this was not a mess of Matterson’s making. Nor should he have been responsible for solving it. But at about 10:30am on Monday, after the first of three hearing adjournments that day, news filtered through that Matterson wouldn’t shift unless Melbourne would take him for 2027 as well. The deal was dead.
Zac Lomax leaves the Supreme Court on Monday.Credit:AAP
In a last-minute bid to salvage the situation, the Storm offered Parramatta a $750,000 transfer. Coincidentally, that was the same sum Sonny Bill Williams paid to be released from his Canterbury contract to join French rugby club Toulon in 2008. However, the Eels were never going to countenance any proposal that didn’t strengthen their roster.
“We’ve always maintained that if we get the right football outcome out of a deal, then we will do that deal,” Sarantinos said.
“It just so happens that the Storm is probably not the right counterparty because they don’t have, or they’re not prepared to offer, what we need to get that deal done up.”
At 9:10am on Tuesday – less than an hour before Parramatta’s legal lead, Arthur Moses SC, was scheduled to make his opening remarks – a settlement was reached. Melbourne would pay $250,000 of Parramatta’s legal fees in exchange for Lomax being able to return to the NRL in 2028. That’s 12 months earlier than the original agreement that Lomax struck with Parramatta, but still leaves him in league limbo.
So who, lawyers aside, are the winners from the arrangement?
Melbourne are no better off. They have to pay a big portion of Parramatta’s legal fees, as well as their own, as well of those of Lomax. Legal experts estimate the total spend could exceed $600,000 – money that’s been torched given it didn’t ultimately lead to Lomax’s signature.
The figure could be higher still if the NRL deems the cost of indemnifying Lomax, an inducement to sign with the Storm, should be added to their salary cap. Rival clubs, who sided with Parramatta during the imbroglio, are watching with interest.
Lomax has fared little better. While the court case hasn’t left him out of pocket, the Eels still effectively control whether he can return to rugby league. The winger could belatedly make a switch to rugby union, with still enough time to press claims for a Wallabies jersey ahead of the 2027 World Cup.
After a long and costly saga, Zac Lomax remains in limbo. But one side came out on top
The legal stoush over winger’s Parramatta release dominated headlines through the summer and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees. Lawyers aside, who are the winners from the arrangement?www.smh.com.au
