Storm’s latest offer rebuffed as new details emerge in Lomax stoush

Zac Lomax allegedly told Parramatta officials he didn’t want to play rugby league again when requesting a release as it emerged that the Eels rejected an increased transfer fee offer of $300,000 from the Melbourne Storm.

Lomax’s playing future has become the subject of a Supreme Court case after Parramatta initiated legal action to prevent him from joining Melbourne. The court outcome this month will determine whether Lomax makes his Storm debut against his former club in round one.

Sources speaking on the condition of confidentiality because the matter is before the courts say Lomax told the Eels last year he had no intention of playing in the NRL again, and wanted to instead switch to rugby.

Informed sources have told this masthead that, as part of the release negotiated with Parramatta, Lomax would have to pay the club $200,000 if he joined proposed rebel competition Rugby 360. The mooted move fell over when R360 officials postponed their inaugural season from 2026 to 2028.

Another agreed term of Lomax’s release, according to Parramatta, is that the representative star can’t join another NRL club before October 31, 2028 without its express written consent.

The Storm initially offered Parramatta $200,000 in compensation in a bid to sign him. That offer was rejected, with the Eels instead seeking a player of similar value in return, identifying Xavier Coates, Stefano Utoikamanu or Jack Howarth.

When the parties couldn’t come to an agreement, the Storm – according to confidential sources – upped their compensation offer to $300,000. Given Lomax was on a contract worth $700,000 per annum, the total benefit to Parramatta in 2026 could have been $1 million.

However, the Eels again rejected the offer, given the $300,000 figure can’t be added to their salary cap, and they wouldn’t get an adequate replacement despite allowing a representative star to go to a rival.

The Storm was also open to the prospect of taking on another Eels player in a move that would have freed up more salary cap space for the blue and golds – and a top-30 roster spot – but no deal eventuated.

Privately, the Eels feel the conversation would have been very different had Lomax approached them last year about a release to join the Storm, as opposed to another code. The majority of NRL teams have sided with Parramatta in the dispute, a position that has been made clear in recent meetings of club chief executives.

While some pundits have pointed to the fact that the Tigers accepted a $165,000 transfer fee from Canterbury to release Lachlan Galvin, higher sums have been paid in the past. The Bulldogs paid a $500,000 transfer fee to the Broncos for Karl Oloapu, a teenager who at that stage hadn’t made his NRL debut. Such deals may provide context as to what constitutes fair recompense when the matter is heard in the Supreme Court.

Lawyers acting for Lomax, who spent one season at Parramatta after being granted a release from a long-term contract with St George Illawarra, will argue Parramatta’s actions represent a restraint of trade. The issue of whether the Eels actually wanted Lomax to fulfil his four-year contract is also likely to be ventilated in court, according to sources.

The Eels, Storm and Lomax’s manager were contacted for comment.