ARL Boss Signals Support for Storm and Lomax
Peter V'landys' guest stint on Triple M in Las Vegas re-enforced his support for embattled winger and Victorian side
ARL Chair Peter V’landys clearly felt at home joining the airwaves of Triple M in Las Vegas as he addressed the Zac Lomax case without interjection or fact checking from the supposedly independent journalists alongside him.
In what could best be described as 3 minute monologue, V’landys spoke about the Lomax case without once directly addressing the crux of the matter.
He stated that he didn’t want to lose a player like Lomax to a competing code.
Nevermind that V’landys himself was the one to state 10 year bans would be handed out to any player who signed a deal with R360. Then when it came out that Lomax had indeed signed a deal, that ban vanished.
The other issue is that Lomax would already be playing Rugby Union if Rugby Australia saw it fit to boost his contract price to the level of his Parramatta deal. RA declined to do so.
V’landys then had the gall to say that the only thing Lomax had done, was to get the best deal for his family.
I was unaware that signing for a mythical international competition was a good deal. Especially when he had a 4 year, multi-million dollar contract signed in the NRL and was a walk up start for NSW and Australia.
R360 has never formally existed. It has no governing board, no teams, no coaches, no stadiums and no officials. It’s the shady crypto-coin of the sporting world. All tip and no iceberg.
V’landys also claimed that “Parramatta got him for free from St George.”
The Dragons could have refused his release. Lomax negotiated a full release from the club. He didn’t organise a release, then signed a release contract that stated he couldn’t play in the NRL and then directly sign for a rival of the Dragons.
So sod off with your attempt at undermining Parramatta there, Peter.
The crux of the Lomax matter is simple though.
It’s whether Parramatta’s contract of release is valid and enforceable in NSW.
The facts are straight forward, and 1 Eyed Eel’s own Hell on Eels has compiled a great timeline and breakdown of events.
What has been released so far through the discovery process has been the Storm both trying to bully Parramatta into a favourable release, and request the NRL step in on their behalf.
To date, neither the NRL nor Melbourne have refuted this. It’s hard to when it’s in writing.
It’s hard to cop the ARLC and NRL though being so blatantly in favour of one club over another.
How do you square this with a supposedly level competition?
The fact the Eels have now subpoenaed the NRL indicates they believe there are more skeletons in the closet at head office.
Should it come out that one of V’landys or NRL CEO Andrew Abdo has done anything other than shut down a Melbourne request to force through the Lomax contract, their positions immediately become untenable.
This week of Supreme Court hearings could be the most seismic in NRL history since the Super League War.
Should Parramatta win, they will have laid the marker for any future player trying to play musical chairs. If they lose, then it essentially signals open season to players on anything longer than a 12 month deal.
Thank you for writing such an informative piece. I have always believed that some clubs are treated far more favourably than others and for some unknown reason Melbourne Storm is one that seems to get away with everything. I read everything I can about what is going on between Lomax, Parramatta and Storm and I hope like hell that Parra comes out on top, Zac Lomax doesn't like to lose and seems to think he can walk from one NRL team to another when it suits him. It would give me the greatest of pleasures to see Lomax, Vlandys and the Storm come out on the losing end of this. I used to really like Lomax, I thought he would make a real difference to Parra when they needed him most but he wanted to walk, good riddance I say, we don't need him.