Explosive courtroom documents obtained by The Sydney Morning Herald has revealed that the Melbourne Storm asked the NRL to "apply the blow torch" to Parramatta to release Zac Lomax.
A slew of documents released in the Supreme Court revealed that during a phone call between Storm chair Matt Tripp and Eels supremo Matthew Beach on January 13, that the Eels again rejected a $200,000 release fee.
“During the telephone call, Mr Tripp referred to the possibility of punitive steps being taken by the NRL against Parramatta Eels in relation to its salary cap if Parramatta Eels did not agree to the proposal being put forward by the Melbourne Storm,” according to a document the Eels tendered to the court.
“This assertion by the Melbourne Storm was intended or had the tendency to exert pressure on the Parramatta Eels in circumstances where the NRL had never communicated such a stance to the Parramatta Eels.”
It was further revealed that an alleged text from Storm CEO Justin Rodski to NRL CEO Andrew Abdo on January 21 was used to try and have the NRL pressure the Eels into a release.
“Hi Andrew, not getting anywhere at this point, can you apply the blow torch on parramatta [sic] to get this done.
Rodski added: “Lomax staying in the NRL is obviously a win for the game.”
It's what we always suspected. The Storm trying to bully their way into a deal that would favour them. They should be expelled from the competition.
Replies
We are taking on a Cabal...we need allies in this fight and the coming revelations are how we gather them
Let's not forget the NRL just enacted new anti-tampering rules, effective 1 February. They're specifically designed to prohibit direct and indirect inducement when a player is not yet free to negotiate. In Lomax's case, he was feee to negotiate but only with the Eels' consent. One for the lawyers but does that mean the Eels had to give consent prior to Lomax negotiating? If that is the case, if Lomax was not free to negotiate unless the Eels had given consent, anti-tampering applies? With its sanctions including fines, salary cap penalties and deregistration.
What absolute grubs the Storm are and the NRL for letting them get away with it. Im sure all fans from other clubs are right behind Parramatta and their stance and even more so if we win the court case
Nothing on Foxsport yet.
Reckon there'd be a bit of "keeping this all under wraps' pressure being applied Hoe ... once nrl fans hear about this they ain't gonna like it either. Though perhaps they'll be some fans and clubs that would rather stay out ie those with huge spends aspect ie Roosters, Broncos Storm etc.
afterall, we all know the nrl is split into two comps those that have (huge amount to spend) and those that don't. It's fact. As I've already said Im glad thst right now our club is absolutely by the book and I now see why we don't have obvious huge TPAs set up, judging by our roster vs broncos storm or roosters.
Macy, it sure is a PR disaster. Crawley has been an inspired daily Foxsport voice covering this matter, and on our side. If he doesn't comment on this, we'll know why.
Yes he has been Hoe speaking up for what is clearly right! It's good to see journos with guts for a change.
looking like their guts will be made to shrink by nrl after this one.
wonder what dirt they are hoping to dish up on us soon I'd reckon to sway narrative in media perhaps? Thank God we are obviously abiding by salary cap rules re TPAs these days...see why we are clearly from this kinda convo between a (top) club and nrl
Macy,
Foxsport has just published an article on it, but not by Crawls.
Our club told us they wouldn't roll over on this, and they would fight the good fight.
Boy, did they mean what they said.
In Arthur Moses, we trust
There could be far more to come.
The SMH pointed out,"The documents (via court discovery) don’t reveal how the $211,000 would result in salary cap relief."
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
of 6 Next