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
Yep Badger, that sounds about right. If the Eels hold Zac's legal registered rights 2006-2008 to play NRL, then the Storm contract would be considered invalid as it goes against the strict conditions of the Eels release contract.
If the court was to rule the Eels contract as restraint of trade then the storm contract probably holds.
In essence Another club could meet the Eels and Zac's conditions, but as it's now a very messy situation that a court has been asked to rule on, i can't see any other club entering the fray till a decision has been made by the court.
Bluey, Badger and Macey,
The NSW Supreme Court could uphold the restraint and still trim it. So we'd win in principle, but Lomax could be cleared to play earlier than 31 October 2028.
A pivot issue could be how the court see our 'alleged rejection' of Lomax’s attempts to return, and the weight it gives to what appears, prima facie, to be a series of bad-faith actions by the Lomax camp (as demonstrated by Moses SC through discovery and the chronology of events).
Despite this PR disaster all this is and noise, the court won't be litigating Abdo, V’landys, or the Storm or the mess. They'll narrow to how reasonable the restraint is.
Im surprised that the court could actually uphold our release contract as valid and then request the terms in the contract be altered Hoe. If the courts do deem the signed terms as legit, wouldn't that mean we'd then have to have a new release contract between both parties redrawn up vs a deemed valid one, and that would mean storm get what they want despite acting wrongly. Tough luck us :( Bit awkward I would've thought since he already released ...thought it would be a black, white situ not grey :( little disappointed to hear that.
also, in respect the Melbourne Lomax contract, (and if court rules in our favour) that would not be valid from what Badger and BE say above. Melb haven't got anyone of the three willing to come to us and it's a little late in season I guess for an unwanted swap etc with them. As Beach stated, " there's fifteen other clubs". So, why can't another club come forward with an offer if Storm Lomax acted without our permission re our valid contract terms? We would then owe storm nothing I thought? Shouldn't have got to the contract point between storm and Lomax anyway. Their own mistake I would've thought (of course if court rules re validity of our release contract)
like ive always said, for me it's how the court views " adequate compensation" ie money only v player swap. that's key and the cheating storm can just say no player willing ...Im just worried about that bit.
it is so very interesting and the court's decision in this has such huge ramifications phew
Ps funny thing is since Gus has had absolutely nothing to say about it all all, wonder if he is too busy packing someone’s suit cases at the ready ;) would not surprise ha
Gus is being coy as he has his own "blowtorch hotline"
Surely the Australian Rugby League Commissioners being Wayne Pearce OAM, Kate Jones, Allan Sullivan , Tony McGrath, Dr Gary Weiss and Professor Megan Davis must now follow their charter and question their Chairman in Peter V'Landys. and there NRL CEO Abdo.
THISTHISTHISTHISTHIS
Pops, some realistic points.
The PR optics are disastrous, yet the wider transcript is missing. Without that we’re inferring and guessing what the NRL actually said in reply to the Storm.
Still, HQ, PLV, Abdo, the Storm heads, broadcasters and key stakeholders will be sweating on March 2nd. D-Day. If it happens. It is when more details are likely to emerge after this warning shot. Things could get nuclear.
Just playing Devils' advocate here. Hypothetically, in the best-case scenario for HQ, the response to the Storm might have been something along the lines of: “I understand your frustration, and emotionality, but we can’t intervene in that manner. While we clearly want Lomax playing and don't want him crucified as he's human and made a mistake, we have to act fairly and respect Parramatta’s position too, their registered agreement and let this play out in court."
The point is we don't actually know. Yet. We only know what the Storm said during those communications, at least in part.
Regardless of how the case pans out legally, or if a swap deal ever eventuates, we have won the majority of the battles and stood our ground, fighting the good fight.
Helluva warning shot.
Thet was not a dummy round
I see what you're saying and I generally agree. We need to tread carefully but decisively too. The real bombshell is making this known to all NRL fans. That's the win.
Nrl is corrupt plain and simple. This case will finally confirm what most fans have been thinking.
Is this a start of a revolution? Will the little man now feel empowered to dictate more fairness?
I remember someone saying the NRL will punish us by having games fixed against us, though fans will click on. We are not dumb, though they believe we are.
-
11
-
12
-
13
-
14
-
15
of 19 Next