Are multi-year NRL playing contracts much more than mere suggestions these days?

The terms of Zac Lomax’s release from his Parramatta deal – his second release from an NRL contract in two consecutive years – are set to occupy at least two days of argument before a Supreme Court justice next month.

Zac Lomax is headed to court over his contractual dispute with the Eels. Credit: Getty Images

The NSW winger was contracted at the Eels until the end of 2028 but, late last year, with the lure of a new rugby competition R360 apparently impossible to resist, requested to be allowed to leave.

Lomax’s request was granted by Parramatta, subject to him entering into a deed of release. Standard stuff. Apparently, that deed included a term stating that Lomax agrees not to play for another NRL team before the 2029 season without the Eels’ consent.

Apparently, it also recorded Lomax’s acknowledgement that he was afforded the opportunity to obtain legal advice about the terms of the deed before executing it. Apparently, Lomax received that advice – an important factor to which courts pay close attention. And apparently the executed deed was registered with the NRL.

Credit:

Now, though, Lomax is displeased with the deal he negotiated and would prefer to be cut loose from its shackles. There is talk the NRL was close to registering a new deal for Lomax to join the Melbourne Storm for the coming season.

It makes sense Lomax is looking for rugby league opportunities, now that Mike Tindall and the merry jesters of R360 have exited, stage left – having acknowledged the competition will not be up and running for another three years.

Rugby league boss Peter V’landys threatened players with 10 year bans for negotiating with rebel competitions, like R360.Credit: Getty Images

Evidently, the Eels won’t countenance a future reality where Lomax joins the Storm.........

© The Age