The NRL is preparing to step in to resolve the Melbourne-Parramatta contract stand-off over Zac Lomax.
Lomax is eager to join the Storm after his proposed move to rebel rugby competition R360 was delayed when its start date was pushed back to 2028.
Lomax is in limbo after the Eels agreed to release him from the final three years of his contract. One of the terms of Lomax’s release was that he cannot play for a rival NRL club without their permission during that period.
The Eels have no interest in any transfer fees and are only prepared to entertain a player swap, with Storm stars Jack Howarth, Xavier Coates and Stefano Utoikamanu at the top of their wish list.
Melbourne have lost a number of players from last year’s losing grand final squad. Ryan Papenhuyzen and Nelson Asofa-Solomona were granted early releases, while Eli Katoa will also miss the entire 2026 campaign after emergency surgery following a series of head knocks while playing a Test for Tonga. The Storm cannot afford to lose any more representative players and have knocked back the Eels’ approach.
Sources with knowledge of the situation not authorised to speak publicly confirmed the Storm had offered Parramatta about $200,000 in compensation.
The transfer fee was considered reasonable, according to the same sources, especially given Canterbury paid Wests Tigers $165,000 in compensation for the mid-season arrival of promising playmaker Lachie Galvin last year.
Any financial compensation will not assist the Eels in the open market. Transfer fees assist clubs with football operations, including pathways, but are not factored into the salary cap.
Sources confirmed the NRL is prepared to intervene if the Eels are not prepared to budge and entertain any “reasonable offers” by the Storm, or any rival club in the market for the 26-year-old.
Lomax is a NSW Origin representative, was a part of the initial Kangaroos Ashes squad and the NRL does not want to lose a player of his calibre if it is possible to keep him.
Neither the Eels nor Lomax want a reunion. Since losing Lomax, Parramatta have signed Brian Kelly from the Gold Coast.
The NRL was contacted for comment, while the Eels and Storm said there had been no fresh developments on Monday. Lomax’s lawyer, Ramy Qutami, also declined to comment.
Some rival clubs made it clear during a phone hook-up of CEOs last Wednesday that they wanted the NRL to back Parramatta’s hardline stance on Lomax. During that meeting Storm chief executive Justin Rodski was forced to defend the club’s pursuit of the star outside back.
Lomax, who posted a photo of himself at what appeared to be a Melbourne Renegades Big Bash game over the weekend, has been trying to remain in tip-top physical shape while awaiting an outcome.
Any deal put forward by the Storm will be longer than one season. Lomax’s ability to play several positions in the back line has appeal, and he adds depth to a squad that includes winger Will Warbrick (who struggled with concussion symptoms for most of last season) and young No.1 Sua Faalogo (who is likely to need a physical and mental rest at some stage during the campaign).
Lomax’s management confirmed on a podcast late last week that ARL Commission chairman Peter V’landys was happy to welcome Lomax back to the NRL, and the threat of 10-year bans did not apply because the NSW Origin representative never signed a deal with R360.
Super Rugby clubs the Western Force and ACT Brumbies were keen to sign Lomax, only for the outside back to have a change of heart after Christmas.
Eels CEO Jim Sarantinos said last week: “As far as we’re concerned, we won’t be consenting to him signing with another club unless there’s an appropriate exchange of value.
“We have had a representative player leave our roster who now wants to join another club’s roster.”
Replies
V'Landys, despite his power in the game is not a court of law. Parra have a legally binding contract and would have very little trouble getting that contract enforced via the Courts. V'Landys can't deny a club their legal rights. The only way this gets resolved is by a negotitaion in good faith and, as Sarantinos says (as I'm sure his lawyer told him to say) "a fair exchange of value". End of.
Well they have 2 legally binding contracts
els CEO Jim Sarantinos said last week: “As far as we’re concerned, we won’t be consenting to him signing with another club unless there’s an appropriate exchange of value.
Get ready to go to war Jim don't let them off the hook if the nrl clubs are behind you PVL hasn't a leg to stand on.
We give 2 farks who and what Melbourne have lost that's not our problem and it's not the nrls problem either.Jims made our clubs position clear if they want Lomax pony up what we want not what's best for Melbourne if you really want Lomax there's a cost for that and don't think your getting it on your terms.PVL you talked loyalty you talked breaking contracts wasn't and isn't a good look for the game now stand the fark up and don't be a weak gutted prick and back the team in the right.
The easy road is backing Melbourne and forcing a perceived good deal that favours the mentioned.Show some farken legit leadership and draw a line in the sand on the subject.
I mean legally, nrl can't do anything really. Only way it happen is if a player swap happens as requested. Lomax still had 3 years on his deal this isn't like the Galvin situation
The bigger pictures is the opportunity to send a message saying to clubs PAs and alike this sought of agitation isn't acceptable in no shape or form.Thats more so where I'd be going if I'm PVL.
Back the club here that's shown good faith releasing Lomax not about face and back the player then when it happens again rinse wash repeat.Thats the line in the sand.
Thing is the NRL can't actually come out fully in support at that's means they support a player moving to Parra without consent. They don't want that.
What they can do is say we will work with Parramatta and Melbourne to get a deal that is fair. Where this message sounds we will interfere if you don't accept.
You don't want the nrl as a mediator you just don't I feel if they get to involved in this a negotiation between 2 clubs what's to stop them from doing it again down the track.IMO we'll lose out badly if the nrl deem what is fair and what isn't.I don't think it ends well for us.
If I'm Parra I don't want to lose the leverage we have remember Melbourne are wanting this more than us not the other way round.The only way we win out of this is if we get the same or better value than we've lost if we get less it just puts us to the sword going foward.
Well that's the thing. What can the NRL do? They have so many times strong armed with threats and every single one has no merits.
If we say no what can they actually do? Take points off us? That would go down well.
Find it truly disgusting that NRL are not backing Parra's decision to stand firm. Happy to read some clubs are backing parra but surprised it's not all really.
if Storm /Lomax do manage to get him in this year it will be absolute chaos with player contracts from here on...seriously what is the use of them. A player only has to verbalise he ain't 'all in' at club easy to do and then let go and moves to another etc etc like this
Parra should not have given them an opportunity to swap wish they didn't even do that. Glad it seems no one wanted to move to us to take the offer up really ha ...well so far
Hi Macy. At a recent executive meeting, the 15 other clubs not involved in this saga unanimously supported the Eels' stance regarding Lomax/Melbourne. They all confirmed that they agree with the Eels stance. The Eels need to use this support and let Slylandys the real feeling about town.
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
of 10 Next