BY DAN

Are the Raiders interested in getting involved in the Zac Lomax imbroglio? You’ll be shocked to hear that no, they’d rather not dip their wicks in that particular candle. Instead, Don Furner has come out with an unusually forthright dismissal of suggestions to the contrary, as reported by the Sydney Morning Herald.

It is rare that the Canberra Raiders go on the record when it comes to matters of retention or recruitment. When they do, however, it’s usually equivocal, and a sign that whatever they’re signaling is a good chance of occurring. By the time the recorders are in front of the faces of Don Furner or Ricky Stuart, and they’re being forthright in their response, then they’ve already done what they say they are doing.

This is noteworthy today because Furner expressed his response to suggestions that the Milk had been interested in Zac Lomax, in no uncertain terms:

We never heard from anyone and we wouldn’t have been interested anyway. We don’t have the salary cap room and we are well stocked with outside backs. Lomax wasn’t on our radar.  – Don

Jeez Don, tell us how you really feel. 

So how did they end up in this discussion? This has all come out of the process that Lomax, the Eels, and the Storm are going through in the courts, following the fallout of Lomax’s foray into rugby 360. Lomax’s lawyer said Lomax’s representatives had been in contact with the Storm, Bears, and curiously, the Milk. I won’t speculate as to the reasons the Raiders were included in the list, but it does feel like a new twist on the Raider Raise (Raider Raise: Legal Eagles). There are legal discussions happening that are above our pay grade, and Canberra have evidently been drawn into them and would much rather not be. Hopefully Furner’s directness is a determination that the best course of action when lawyers are involved is truth. That would be smart. 

Aside from not wanting to be involved in the legal discussion, this is an entirely understandable position from a football perspective. Lomax is obviously talented but not really aligned with the Raiders’ needs. He’s a high-priced outside back, and the Milk are full of low cost versions of the same product. Is it better to be playing Sav Tamale something around 400k a year or Lomax a cool million? I’m inclined to the former. What’s 600k in opportunity cost between friends?

Maybe you’d start him ahead of Xavier Savage, but then that’s not really the question. But as Don noted, the cap is tight. Including Lomax at his market rate wouldn’t just mean sacrificing the playing time of one of Tamale, Savage, Finau or Stuart, but also getting rid of more than one of these. My guess is that Tamale, Finau and maybe Stuart are worth one Lomax. Are you still keen to do the deal?

As we noted recently, the Raiders are built to be sustainable, within and between seasons. They want to put as many talented players as possible in competition to support getting the best out of them, moving to youth instead of stars. They are looking to build for the long-haul, not Lomax’s U-Haul that gets moving as soon as the wind changes. Lomax at the Raiders just doesn’t seem like a realistic fit, something that would not only be at odds with their youth approach in recent times, but also any other time this millennium. 

Whatever the nature or drive of their contact with Lomax in recent times, Furner’s position seems clear: Canberra don’t mess around with stars with complicated needs. They need footballers with a focus rather than people chasing money and dreams of the wrong kind. The Raiders are committed to this side, and their plans, and are not being drawn into quick solutions and hail marys. This is a messy affair. I’m glad Canberra are steering clear.

The Milk have never really been about quick fixes and the shiny distractions of Sydney heroes. Whether their plan pays off is another matter, but with this plan, this pathway, and this squad built on competition rather than chequebooks, they have built an identity and a realistic chance of finding forever. In a sage this chaotic the best move they could make is the one Furner just confirmed.

The Sportress is transitioning away from Facebook and Twitter for distribution so sign up to the email below before we disappear from your feed altogether. Don’t hesitate to send us feedback (dan@sportress.org) or comment below if you think we are stupid. Or if we’re not.