Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

[weststigers]

Lorax and Parra can both go and get stuffed

Thanks for getting on board

 

[weststigers]

I'll add I think the NRL are [This word has been automatically removed]ing spineless for letting this get to court and not saying they won't register a contract for Lomax if Eels don't sign their release.
I understand the argument of wanting the best talents playing the game but you also don't want to set a precedent of players breaking contracts as well (though arguably that horse has long bolted). I think Lomax playing for Storm without Eels getting fairly compensated does more damage to the game then him sitting out a year.

Sorry...who is Lomax? Do you mean Jac Lorax?

 

[Rock Hopper Steve]

Sorry...who is Lomax? Do you mean Jac Lorax?

Who came up with Lorax, think Borax sounds better.

 

[weststigers]

Who came up with Lorax, think Borax sounds better.

I can't remember, but I've already got 6 after 1 game. I'll need a spreadsheet by October.

 

[Tiger Stripes]

out of curiosity how much are we taking off Bula s contract after just one trial. He looks like hes got a future but hes not at Bula level or close imo.

We persevered for at least 3 years for Bula, paying on potential, to get to the level he is now.
No complaints for a fair and reasonable offer. Not more potential.
Bula is signed for this year 2026. and mutual option 2027. I think Attard, with a 1-year apprenticeship under his belt this year, will have a negligible or nil drop off in skills compared to Bula.
Hopefully committed to WT and with an even better skill set. [And not managed by Issuc Moses.]
Maybe a whisker slower, but he has a step Bulla doesn't have or will ever have.
I think the table has turned on Issuc Moses and Bula in trying to screw us.
Congratulations on WT on plan B, Attard. An astute signing.

 

[balmain boy]

Sometimes I think we get caught up in unrealistic expectations of how good depth should be,especially when you have been the worst club for 15 years. Sukkar is 21 years old, never gets dominated when carrying the ball landing on his front, makes his tackles and runs a hole. Thats the definition of decent depth. Yes he needs to get better, but at 21 he will. More than happy to have him starting regularly in State Cup. Solid back up.

You are incorrect.
Having a forward who gets dominated every single time he runs the ball is embarrassing. Slow in attack and defence, couldn't make a break if he was playing against 6 year olds. It's just not his game. In the last 10 years he's probably made fewer than 10 line breaks. He's good for 4-5m a hit up and making 85-90% of his tackles,so long as his opponents run straight at him.

Depth is having players who can contribute to winning matches in first grade. Not stars, but players who can do a job to help us win.

Charlie Murray is light-years ahead of him, and that's saying something.

 

[balmain boy]

This is a very different scenario.
The Eels have replaced him and no longer have room for him within their salary cap.
How can you honour a contract if you have no room within your salary cap to honour that contract ?
If the Eels left enough cap space to allow him to return and expressed a willingness for him to play with them in 2026 I would then be in agreement that he needs to honour his contract with them, but they have moved on and can no longer fit him in their salary cap.
Yes he was going to R360 and it never eventuated, you can’t ban him for something that didn’t happen.
This being the case they are now fighting to make him sit on the sidelines.

Given your adamant support for HBG I'm not surprised you completely misunderstand simple matters.

Honouring the contract is completely and totally irrelevant. That's not what was included in the release clause that he agreed to (no I haven't read it myself obviously, but going off reports of it's contents).

The release stated that if Lomax wished to return to the NRL within the timeframe of his original contract with Parramatta, that he could only do so with their written permission. That's it. They are not obliged to re-sign him, how could they be? They believed he was gone for the next few years at least so moved on.

Lomax and Melbourne claiming that Parra enforcing a contract is wrong because they want him is ludicrous and laughable will most likely be found to be illegal.

Could the storm be stripped competition points? Could their management get sacked? Salary cap penalties? Let's see if V'landys actually has the balls to enforce the rules. He's a real softie when it comes down to it.

 

[balmain boy]

Different positions therefore irrelevant

Sukkar has actually played most of his footy days as a prop. So no, it's fair. He only played second row due to a lack of other options, like Seyfarth. They're both props. As is Roberts.

 

[balmain boy]

Im wondering whether Kits natural position is 13
Bit smzll for a prop..but has good acceleration..
Hes a talent..gotta identify where he can fit in

Well he did play lock in every game he'd ever played up until last season ... His lack of size makes it difficult for him to play minutes though. So an impact prop became his role

 

[Leck]

Just to clarify: all the evidence points to LIV failing massively and losing the players it took back to the PGA. For example:

Slate link

Not saying that R360, or another international rugby or league competition could not emerge, but the fate of LIV, and the delay of R360, actually suggest that it takes more than money to create a sport league that people will actually watch longer term. Developing tribal fandom takes time

Over 100,000 attended LIV Adelaide, so they’re doing something right. Good on Greg. Where they are struggling is with TV deals, because traditional broadcast formats are still aligned with the PGA, and tradition is hard to beat.

What LIV has done well is disrupt pro golf and force purse increases. R360, when it happens, will do that too.

 

[balmain boy]

then parramatta should take lomax back. If they can't then that is probably deemed a restriction
it will come down to what is a "reasonable compensation" via courts

It's not a restriction of trade, He agreed to the restriction of his trade should he wish to return to the NRL, and signed a legally binding contract accordingly. He didn't have to, he could have negotiated a different release. He didn't. He agreed to Parramatta's demands

He also had multiple contract offers from union, which is the sport he was leaving for in the first place.

 

[bigsiro]

We persevered for at least 3 years for Bula, paying on potential, to get to the level he is now.

I’m confused by your post. What level are you saying Bula is at?

Then you said “I think Attard, with a 1-year apprenticeship under his belt this year, will have a negligible or nil drop off in skills compared to Bula.”

Bula just turned 24…

What are you saying?

 

[Bula]

It's not a restriction of trade, He agreed to the restriction of his trade should he wish to return to the NRL, and signed a legally binding contract accordingly. He didn't have to, he could have negotiated a different release. He didn't. He agreed to Parramatta's demands

He also had multiple contract offers from union, which is the sport he was leaving for in the first place.

100 percent right. Pretty much alll restraint claiuses struck out as being unfair were put in contracts of employment not arrangements negotiated on the way out the door.

 

[426Tlgerland]

Bulla needs to sign up by Friday , this is just taking to long , 2 contracts and he still cant sign , let him go and use AD this year and Attard next year , Bulla and his manager are just pissing us around , club is bigger than both of them

 

[Spartan117]

Kit was very good last night, but Kit was very good in a trial last year and then wasn't given an opportunity after that.
I think he's a much better option than Bunty on the bench.

Firstly Welcome to the WTF.

Kit is 20. He is a mini mountain.
Got tons of development and growth to come.

I hope both he and the Tigers stay patient.

He's gonna be a fan favourite

 

[weststigers]

Given your adamant support for HBG I'm not surprised you completely misunderstand simple matters.

Honouring the contract is completely and totally irrelevant. That's not what was included in the release clause that he agreed to (no I haven't read it myself obviously, but going off reports of it's contents).

The release stated that if Lomax wished to return to the NRL within the timeframe of his original contract with Parramatta, that he could only do so with their written permission. That's it. They are not obliged to re-sign him, how could they be? They believed he was gone for the next few years at least so moved on.

Lomax and Melbourne claiming that Parra enforcing a contract is wrong because they want him is ludicrous and laughable will most likely be found to be illegal.

Could the storm be stripped competition points? Could their management get sacked? Salary cap penalties? Let's see if V'landys actually has the balls to enforce the rules. He's a real softie when it comes down to it.

To your point, the question begs. If a player can get a release by code-hopping, then double back after their club has spent the money allocated for them with no limitation, doesn't it now provide a ready made get out clause to any and all players looking to break contracts?

If he gets up in this case, they should just go back to contracts based on a wink and a smile, because that's all they'll be worth.

 

[king_sirro]

You are incorrect.
Having a forward who gets dominated every single time he runs the ball is embarrassing. Slow in attack and defence, couldn't make a break if he was playing against 6 year olds. It's just not his game. In the last 10 years he's probably made fewer than 10 line breaks. He's good for 4-5m a hit up and making 85-90% of his tackles,so long as his opponents run straight at him.

Depth is having players who can contribute to winning matches in first grade. Not stars, but players who can do a job to help us win.

Charlie Murray is light-years ahead of him, and that's saying something.

In the last 10 years lol....ive watched him since he was 8 years old. He never gets dominated carrying the ball, never. Your biased against him big time and its clouding your eyes.

That being said, I may be biased towards him because i never thought he would play NRL, so im surprised he has gone ok at a young age. Maybe that clouds my judgement a little. He was average on Saturday. Never got dominated like you make up, but he got stood up badly twice by footwork just hanging the arm out. And it reminded that he has always just hung an arm out when footwork is put on him. If he doesn't fix that then he is gone. For the record I dont know him. My son played against him and I always respected Tony because he was bigger and faster than everyone in the comp but he was never a grub. So I wish him well.

 

[king_sirro]

Sukkar has actually played most of his footy days as a prop. So no, it's fair. He only played second row due to a lack of other options, like Seyfarth. They're both props. As is Roberts.

Wrong yet again. Sukkar has played some front row in reps due to poor judgement and him being the biggest. Never played prop at club level. He has always been a backorwer or centre. Obviously his pace hasn't progressed to stay a centre.

 

[Red88_Tiger]

Wrong yet again. Sukkar has played some front row in reps due to poor judgement and him being the biggest. Never played prop at club level. He has always been a backorwer or centre. Obviously his pace hasn't progressed to stay a centre.

In what I’ve seen I cannot see a centre.

 

[hank37w]

no if a court rules otherwise it will be a restriction of trade.
At present parramatta can't say we dont want you to play for us and by the way you can't play for anyone else either
Parramatta need to find a place for him if he wants to come back to nrl.

Parramatta should say fine we can take you for 300k then if Lomax doesnt accept that then potentially no restriction of trade.

Well, I can agree with the last part.

Low ball Lomax* and tell him he can take it or leave it.

Note: * known by some forum members as Lorax.