“You talk tough. Ten-year bans. Is that still how you stand?” Danny Weidler asked Peter V’landys on Nine, the day after Zac Lomax was conditionally released by the Parramatta Eels on 16 November 2025.
“Absolutely,” V’landys replied.
“I have to act in the best interests of the fans. If I don’t take swift action and protect the game, I shouldn’t be there.”
He didn’t stop there.
"I’ve got a very important position. I’m the custodian of the game."
"We’re the regulator, and what we say goes. And if it’s a ten-year ban, it’s a ten-year ban.”
That same day, V’landys took the message to 7NEWS. Different network. Same tone. Same authority.
“I feel very sorry for Zac,” he said. “He’s been very ill-advised.”
The hypothetical followed. If players signed with R360 and the venture collapsed, would they be allowed back into the NRL?
“No,” V’landys replied.
“If they go there open-eyed, take the gamble and take the risk, well you’re taking a massive risk with the NRL.”
There was talk of compassion. Exceptional circumstances. Being “totally hoodwinked.” But the underlying warning was unmistakable.
“Don’t gamble your future.”
“So you’re putting all NRL players on notice, essentially?” 7NEWS asked.
“Exactly,” he replied.
Stay Loyal
“Stay loyal. Stay loyal to the junior competition you came through. Stay loyal to the investment we’ve made in you.”
Across multiple networks in one day, the warnings could not have been louder. Players were on notice. The Big Boss had spoken, with a scent of Judge Dredd: I am the Law.
What nobody knew at the time was that one of the central figures in this soap opera, Zachary John Lomax, had already signed a contract with R360 before the Eels granted him a conditional release. That inconvenient fact sat quietly in the background while the warning sirens blared.
Image: V'ladys invited US President Trump, but didn't think to invite the Eels to the transparency table, remaining in radio silence recently.
Barely a month later, on 2 January 2026, the NRL announced tougher anti-tampering laws effective 1 February to protect the sanctity of registered contracts.
Once again, V’landys was decisive. Uncompromising. Public. Showing the NRL world exactly who is in charge.
What again was concealed from prying public eyes was that sometime after that, in January, Melbourne had already entered into a contractual arrangement with Lomax, uploaded it into the NRL portal, and awaited approval by V'landys, pending Parramatta’s consent. The issue is Parramatta already had its own registered NRL contract restraining Lomax from playing for another club last November months ago.
But V’landys and NRL HQ said nothing.
And when Parramatta announced it was commencing legal proceedings on contract sanctity to enforce its registered agreement with Lomax they also said nothing.
When persistent rumours emerged that V’landys was privately urging Parramatta to accept a settlement, there was still no public comment.
It was oddly out of character. But a pattern was emerging.
MIA
And when Supreme Court-ordered discoveries forced some facts into the open, things are starting to unravel.
Eels barrister Arthur Moses SC noted the documents produced under subpoena showed two things. Lomax had "entered into a provisional contract with R360" before being conditionally released from the Eels. And also Lomax and the Storm had entered into a "contract" that was placed on the NRL portal ready for V'landys to rubber stamp its approval. That was despite the Eels also having a registered contract with Lomax.
But V'landys and HQ's silence only deepened.
The cracks were on clear public display and bravado replaced by a deathly silence. One wonders what HQ sounds like behind closed doors.
Parramatta had followed the system exactly as designed. Its restraint agreement was clear, written, conditional, legally advised, and registered with the NRL. The club also made clear it would be reasonable and release Lomax if fairly compensated via a player swap.
NRL HQ, however, remains silent. For now.
No clarification.
No public backing.
No defence of the very mechanisms it had approved.
Silence on Lomax, his R360 contract and ten-year bans.
Silence on the Storm contract, contract sanctity or anti-tampering.
Silence on the integrity questions raised by it all.
The contrast between what was said, what was done, and what was not said and not done is difficult to ignore. And it stinks.
Peter V’landys said he was the custodian of the game. But when the game desperately needed one to stand tall and walk the talk, he was nowhere to be found.
Replies
Horse man is full.of hot air. Can't stand him or that south african dope in abdo
Hey Bert! Great summary!
to me and sounds like yourself and thousands of others, this is as much us vs Lomax and managers, as Storm n NRL's total audacity! So proud of our club no matter what happens in courts 🤞
Im totally engrossed in this one!
Per his own management response to R360 not going ahead,
“Zac has options,” Scifcoske said. “Zac has always been interested in other things so he can pick and choose now. There’s no shortage of interest. We’ll make a final decision shortly."
article mentions interests MMA, boxing(which was a big reason he supposedly left saints ha) and os rugby etc
What Im totally not understanding is Lomax's 'Restraint of Trade' argument at all . That's total bs when his termination agreement states rugby is included as an option to apply his trade not just R360. His manager reaffirmed that and Zac reportedly tells club, ' he wants to leave nrl'.
stick it too them Arthur Moses 🤞
https://au.news.yahoo.com/parramatta-tipped-to-make-brutal-call-on-...
Good summary Bert and well researched - thank you.
In my mind, this case is all about V'Landy's integrity and what the NRL stands for. I don't really care much about the outcome of the legal proceedings. If he doesn't make a statement about Lomax signing with R360 then his standing in the game will take a big hit. He needs to take action before Vegas, otherwise the journos will make sure this saga takes centre stage over there.
The pattern is not just that V'Landys talked tough about defectors to R360 and then has been MIA, but that V'Landys has shown himself to be a complete hypocrit. Does anyone seriously think it is coincidence that V'Landys' underlying hypocrisy has emerged to the benefit of the Melbourne Storm? The Storm's capacity to display no inegrity when it comes to either contracts or playing tactics is legendary and only matched by the capacity of the NRL to turn a blind eye.
V'Landys' hypocrisy is four-fold. One, he said the problem with R360 is that it is unsanctioned and pirating the NRL product. So, if the general issue there is R360 gaining a competitive advantage at the expense of an asset controlled by the NRL, Lomax is behaving the same way. Lomax is an asset controlled by an Eels contract. The Storm are attempting to gain a competitive advantage at the expense of an asset controlled by the Eels. Two, V'Landys said a 10-year ban was to ensure players did their due diligence. Yet Lomax has not done his due diligence on what it means to make a contract with the Eels, have a request to be released from that obligation honoured with new secondary obligations/conditions, and then desire to break even those secondary obligations/conditions. None of that is due diligence by Lomax, yet the Eels have followed due diligence, yet V'Landys is crying in public over losing Lomax? Three, V'Landys said that minimizing defections to R360 was about being a custodian of the game. How is it game stewardship to have a star run off chasing money and, when it does not pan out, that star is treated as the one to protect and not the team ands their fans screwed over by that star? Fourth, V'Landys explicitly said he would not let a star return if R360 folded, because players are not irreplaceable. Now V'Landys pretends the game will fall over without Lomax.
HYPOCRISY HYPOCRISY HYPOCRISY HYPOCRISY Mr V'Landys
Ugly Pete's Hypocrisy Wholesalers...we have pallets & pallets of Hyprocrisy ready for delivery to you...Right Now.
Vlandy is only MIA because it mainly involves Storms, one of the protected NRL teams. He ate his own words that any NRL player signing with RL 360 gets a ten year ban.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next