Ok so this is a hypothetical blog of 'what if?' since there is nothing much else to do til trials in about 6 weeks time. So with the news that Melbourne are after Zac Lomax. Firstly, why would Melbourne want Lomax? Well as a Centre it seems since Howarth had a shocker in the GF and then got hurt, plus he would be looking at transitioning into a back-rower with Blore looking at leaving. Meaney also is being heavily linked to Perth.
Next question, could he come back? Well of course he can but i think that lies on Parramatta and Ryles not so much Lomax. All well and good saying "Lomax should just come back" when we should be asking do we even want him back? I have mentioned numerous times about my connection and wont go through it again you can see it on the other blog. But though i have not heard of any unrest of big issues, there is a chance there was something that did not sit right with Ryles and maybe Lomax and him talked it out and managed to make it civil enough for the release. That part i do not know at this stage. But could he come back? Sure, why not.
Another question, can Melbourne ask Parramatta to sign him. Well yes they can and Parra have every right to say no or yes as they see fit. Can Melbourne talk to Lomax? Well technically no but it's the NRL teams, including Parramatta, talk to players before their contracts are near done. Whether they talk to Lomax or not, it doesn't change whether we agree to a deal or not for Melbourne to sign him. Melbourne can do what they like with him, we have to agree so it doesn't matter, i wont go down the route of moral highground as all clubs would do it and do it themselves.
One report suggests we are interested in a like for like trade. No sure how true but if an approach was made in November, makes sense we have a door open to talk. Ryles connections help bridge that gap to a civil negotiation.
Anyway, what happens next? There are three options. 1) We dig our heels in and say you are not playing in the NRL until 2029 the earliest. 2) We negotiate a player swap or two for positions that we need to boost our squad. 3) We let Lomax go for nothing. Now #3 is plain idiotic and everyone from Ryles, MON, Sarantinos, Rogers, Beach and you know what throw Sparkey in there cause why not, deserve to be sacked on the spot for agreeing to it.
We have leverage for a change and should use it. I said when he was released we are in a decent spot where we can demand something that we want to let him go.
Now what would i prefer? I am leaning on trading. Why? Well i feel a chance to make this squad stronger, in a time where it seems difficult to convince certain players to come here, might be a nice opportunity. Considering we get no value off Lomax collecting dust. I know you will say "We still need to convince players to agree to the trade" though one difference is we are not competing with other clubs for that player, we have a clear path. Had we only wanted KK, we get him. Why not use it to get a player or two?
On the other hand, does it sit right with me? No, it doesn't. Seeing him line up with a club like Melbourne, having a chance to win a comp, 2 months after agreeing to not go to another NRL club til 2029? Granted R360 was still a thing at time of release but still doesn't sit right with me. Rather him go to Wests. If there is any sense of optimism, Melbourne finally seem to be heading towards a mini rebuild of sorts and their rein could be over for now. GF this year seemed to be their last chance and Bellamy knew it.
Now, for fun, let's go through options shall we?
Will Warbrick: A popular choice for some, a logical one too in that he is off-contract this year. He is a NZ international, is a massive Winger who can score and rack up countless metres. Sounds great right? Well the issue is around him missing a big portion of 2025 with concussion. It is not like a torn ACL where once recovered he is more likely ready to go, concussions are unpredictable and players can have reoccurring problems later on. Is it less likely? Yeah but still a worry. But if we are fine with his medical, is he a worthy swap? I would say yes. Scary thing is, i do not think he is the finished product.
Shawn Blore: We are looking for a middle. Issue is, so are Melbourne. But why not go for an edge and use Williams as that middle? Blore had a nice 2025 season, coming into his own as a player. He had a decent 2024, taking his time to eventually get into the 17...once the Tigers scent was removed. Blore has also expressed a possible desire to return to Sydney. A concern for me is how much is it Blore being great and how much is it him being in the Melbourne system? Blore on the contrary was good but not amazing either. He is a steady, quality edge back-rower, though he is worth swapping one for one with Lomax? Nah.
Trent Loiero: This one is wishful thinking, however if we could pull it off what a coup he would be. Loiero would be perfect middle for us as he comes into his own as a leader and worker. Playing a full year in Origin would help as well. Issue is, Melbourne see him as a future captain and are having issues with middles themselves.
Xavier Coates: This one i would like but again i see this one as not happening. Mainly as i believe Coates is eyeing being the face of the PNG Chiefs. But if you can get him then great, just hope he can swap to the right Winger easily.
Jack Howarth: Melbourne have spent years developing him, his future is on an edge but for some reason he has just not broken out as intended. He is 24 this year and already played in two GF's. If Melbourne cannot get the potential out of him, can Ryles? If he is one we get, do you persevere with him at Centre or bite the bullet and fast track his progression to the edge? Howarth is talented and a future QLD Origin player if all things go as planned, but his defence in the GF, before his injury, was woeful. Is that something that needs a proper pre-season to fix further on top of getting to know a new team quickly?
Now i want to list players if there is a two for one, meaning if we cannot agree on one great player how about a decent with another decent like Blore and another for example. I know unlikely Melbourne give up a second player.
Lazarus Vaalepu: He is a big boy, 27 this year so he is older while not as experienced. Is he a type that can play a role off the bench? Yeah he can. Played in the 2024 NRL GF off the bench. Though if he is to have a boom year, it has to be this year. But is he worth a gamble? Perhaps.
Moses Leo: Since Meaney is going, seems likely he will be the other Centre. But if we can nab him, what a nice pick-up. Impressed in his limited minute for Melbourne last year.
Josaiah Pahulu: A kid with loads of potential. Fell out of GC with the whole bonus situation where he didn't get his bonus as he needed to play 20 games and Hasler rested him in the final game. Talk was he was off to the Dogs but then ended up in Melbourne. Is he worth it? Well he didn't get a game with Melbourne despite their issues with middles. Plus we have some decent middles in the likes of Tuivaiti, Talagi, Brown etc coming through lower grades. I mean give him a go but seems he is not the real deal, well not yet.
Ryles knows these players, that helps. But Parramatta can use this to their advantage to improve their squad, which is never a mistake to do. Could we trade Matto too? I mean that would make a two player trade palatable, particularly if Melbourne want another middle.
Again this is a bit of fun to form discussion.
Replies
Firstly, LB, well done. This is exactly the sort of discussion that will bring me back to the site. I enjoyed reading it and can see the time, thought and effort you have put into the post. I rarely post but I will here simply to be part of this conversation.
Ok, let's talk Parra...
Is a swap in our interests? I would argue no. Is there a player that we really want/need that WANTS to play for us? Doesn't look like it. When I talk Parra with my mates, I like to use the word staunch. Great word. Staunch. Go on, say it out loud a few times. I dare you. I use it in the sense of 'being uncompromising'. Staunch players WILL NOT take a backward step. If opposition forwards are in our face, then show me who in our pack is going to be staunch and go toe to toe with them. Football games are won and lost in players minds. A player stepping up, being staunch, being uncompromising inspires those around him and can be the difference between winning and losing. Over the years, I've often heard coaches talk about how their team only needs to find a few percent to go from also-rans to winners. The '1% efforts' saying also reflects this attitude. Now, while we need players to have this attitude, we also need the CLUB to have this attitude. Leadership attitudes filter down through the staff and players. I see this as a perfect opportunity for the club to be STAUNCH. I don't see any player swap that really works for us. Namely because the player's heart isn't in joing us. That's the exact attitude that I see being behind Lomax told he can go. i.e. You're not fully committed, you want to play R360 for more money, 4 year contract with us isn't significant to you? OK pack up your kit bag and see ya.
Now the club needs to back that up. There was a reason Ryles agreed to the release with a clause about not playing for a rival NRL team. There was a deal in place and Lomax didn't want to honour it. OK but if you change your mind or if things don't work out then the club is going to be protected. Players, both ours and opposition, are going to see that Parra as a club are staunch. Player agents are going to see it. It proclaims to the NRL world that Parramatta are not going to take a backward step. And again, this attitude will filter through to players. I've often thought that Storm are consistenly hard to beat because the play with the same attitude that Bellamy consistenly shows - stubborness and commitment. Or uncompromising or, dare I say it, STAUNCH.
So what can we get out of this situation? Respect. Respect from the NRL clubs as well as within our own ranks and player agents. Even if in some cases it is a grudging respect. Players will see a club that is strong and interested only in players who are fully committed to the cause. That attitude then develops early in emerging players and is constantly strengened as they progress through our systems until, when they reach 1st grade, their mindset is strongly committed to our cause and unwilling to take a backward step, on or off the field. i.e. Staunch!
Of course, if Ryles can see a player swap that would work for us then I would have faith in him in light of his (brief) track record and inside knowledge he would have on storm players.
Agreed with what you are saying about this being a line in the sand moment for the club, which shows strength and an uncompromising attitude. I would be very surprised however if the club made Lomax sit at home on the couch instead of allowing him to play for another club. That's not in anybody's interest. What this tells me is that the club are very much looking to use this situation to their advantage. We have already signed another seasoned wing/centre, which the media has called a Lomax replacement. We all know Kelly's not in the same league as Lomax, but who knows how he can develop within a couple of years, of course given he is already 29 years old?
So is Kelly the solution as far as the club is concerned? That's a rather disturbing thought, and would put Parra firmly in the also-rans with an attitude like that. Even allowing for juniors coming through in the near term, losing an Australian rep to be replaced with a player of considerably lower calibre is not a great look. I'd rather believe we have another ace up our sleeve, but not sure where that is going to come from.
Longfin, why is it in nobodies interest to have Lomax sit on a couch? It's in the Eels' interests. Lomax bailed 1 yr into a 4 yr deal. The Eels had made recruitment and retention decisions with that contract in mind. If Lomax bails, the Eels gain little to let another NRL club benefit?
So I think the Eels should stick to their guns and thus send a message: don't come if you're not going to honour your contract.
Good luck to Lomax outside the NRL. He won the Provan-Summons award for spirit of the game so it's likely that reflects that outside this contract fiasco he is regarded as a good person. But the Eels don't need to sit idle while another NRL team gains an advantage from signing Lomax (unless the Eels feel they can turn it to their advantage)
Because nobody gains much if Lomax sits on the couch for a year. We still don't have a rep quality winger, Lomax still doesn't play, and we just look like a stubborn, desperate club - not the professional club we are trying to establish. As I said, I think there is more to this, and I expect we will use this situation to our advantage to attract another rep quality player. It's a business transaction, and it may not even be for an outside back. I doubt very much Lomax's salary went to Kelly, so he is not the answer, but most likely an opportunistic buy to fill a gap.
Matto on a stool in the corner, Lomax on the couch...I hear music!
la la lah.....This is what you get
na nah nah...This is what you get
wa wah wah..This is what you get
When you mess with Us
yep, Karma's a bitch. Lomax can suck it, we've got him by the balls. All his own doing.
I see your point but unless the situation plays out to be a win in the Eels favour, I'd be staying staunch. The big thing for me would be the club primarily focused on what is in our best interests and definitely not giving Lomax a 'fair go' and letting him play elsewhere. I think it's exactly why the release came with a clause - it gives us the upper hand in this exact situation. I think whoever made the call to include this clause should be applauded and is likely feeling a bit vindicated right now.
It also shows a complete reversal from the mindset that led to Dylan Brown's ridiculous contract that had us over a barrel in the interests of satisfying a player and his agent.
Thank you for nice comment, just live discussion. Though I do get things wrong a lot and some things right but is a part of discussions and everyone putting their opinions in. I learn everyday something new which is what I love.
Tyran Wishart would be good put him at 6 then move him to Fylan Walker utility role in the future. He's coming off contract anyway and could possibly leave.
We already have the same type of forward as Loiero with Guymer and Hopgood
Pahulu/Warbrick would be my choice
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next