The Lomax Case: What Are We Missing?

To most people, me included, the Lomax thing feels pretty black and white.

He asked for a release to go to R360. He got that release on the condition he wouldn’t sign with another NRL club. He signed it. Done.

Simple. Or at least it should be.

But something doesn’t quite smell right. It can’t be that clean. There has to be something we’re missing.

He’s lawyered up, and not with someone who’s just going through the motions. You don’t dig your heels in like this unless you think you’ve got a case.

So what is it? What don’t we know?

The whole “I signed when Brad Arthur was coach and Clint Gutherson helped bring me in” argument doesn’t really stack up. He played an entire season after they were both gone and never looked publicly unhappy. And unless there’s some clause in his contract saying he can walk if the coach leaves, which we definitely would have heard about by now, that’s not something that holds much weight legally.

So what’s the angle?

Because if this was truly black and white, it would already be over.

Lomax's legal team have already stated they believe it's a restraint of trade. They'll try and prove that the terms of the release are unreasonable and are denying Lomax the right to earn a living.
However the missing piece is that Parra are willing to compromise. They've made genuine attempts to resolve this. If the Eels were sitting here saying Zac can't play NRL anywhere for 3 years then I'd suspect the Court would deem that unreasonable. But the Eels are willing to work towards a fair exchange of value which I'd suggest the Court would find a reasonable approach.
Remember this court business came about because Lomax officially stated in writing that the release was unreasonable, couldn't be enforced and therefore he was going to sign with Melbourne regardless. That's why the Eels took this to court urgently.

"It's now out of the NRL's hands. If the court says the conditions of the release are valid and still stand then that is that. The NRL can't stomp all over the Eels' legal rights. Lomax told the Eels in writing he was proceeding with the Storm…"

"You'd think it's in the NRL's best interest to be on Parra's side here. If they take the side of Lomax then every player contract means nothing. This is bigger than a single case- it could open up a world where players do whatever they want,…"

"When the announcement was made by the Eels regarding the dispute with Lomax, the club made a very important note in their commentary- the agreement was made in 'Good Faith'. This is a very important principle in legal agreements- both parties agree…"

Replies

Randy Handlinger January 26, 2026 at 4:25pm

this fucking guy
Muttman January 26, 2026 at 4:35pm

Lomax's legal team have already stated they believe it's a restraint of trade. They'll try and prove that the terms of the release are unreasonable and are denying Lomax the right to earn a living.
However the missing piece is that Parra are willing to compromise. They've made genuine attempts to resolve this. If the Eels were sitting here saying Zac can't play NRL anywhere for 3 years then I'd suspect the Court would deem that unreasonable. But the Eels are willing to work towards a fair exchange of value which I'd suggest the Court would find a reasonable approach.
Remember this court business came about because Lomax officially stated in writing that the release was unreasonable, couldn't be enforced and therefore he was going to sign with Melbourne regardless. That's why the Eels took this to court urgently.
- Eli Stephens > Muttman January 26, 2026 at 4:46pm
  
  Lomax is basically screwed imo.
- LB > Muttman January 26, 2026 at 6:10pm
  
  It's a restraint of trade but Parra mentioned other 15 clubs and he said no. Isn't that restraining his own trade?
  - Muttman > LB January 26, 2026 at 6:51pm
    
    For sure it is. He has other options but only wants Melbourne. I think there's a whisper that the Storm have been behind this from the beginning. If that comes to light this could be huge.
  - Clintorian > LB January 26, 2026 at 11:34pm
    
    Not to mention all the other teams in Rugby he could be playing in.
Flow Basket January 26, 2026 at 4:51pm

Just saw a delivery driver needed in prospect on seek. He can learn manual
Perpetual Motion January 26, 2026 at 5:21pm

Growing rumour that Melbourne was the plan all along. No one else walked out on their contract for R360.
- LB > Perpetual Motion January 26, 2026 at 6:09pm
  
  I urgently messaged my contact to ask that question. He said he hasn't seen Zac in weeks but hasn't heard Melbourne until it was released to media. But he did say if it was the plan all along he wouldn't of been told in case it leaked, if it leaked Parra wouldn't release at all.
  
  Makes sense.
RB January 26, 2026 at 5:23pm

I think there could be a grey area in the contract, where it said he could sign for another team, but the competition never ended up happening so Lomax argues it shouldn't stand. All depends on how detailed the contract was and who put it together.