I know, wasnt meant in a bad way, just hoping that some would have the common sense to understand that than start having a pop at the club. Where if he sat and read the article instead of posting, he may have known what he SHOULD have posted instead.
Christ Dai get real will you, Biggs was a convicted criminal who together with the rest robbed millions from a train. There is no comparison at all ! This is a civil matter between Ajax and Laudrup only, there is no government involved
There could be a sign-on fee involved, and you could expect Laudrup earning exatly that kind of money in his last professional contract. Second : Ajax are trying to get THEIR money back, it's not the dutch government. Ajax had to pay tax-money back years ago; now they're trying to get their money back from Laudrup. It's unclear if Laudrup has done anything wrong, that's why they want him to show up in court.
Read stumpy's post on the other thread. It explains everything. Storm in a teacup. Nothing to see here.
'' FOR ALL WE KNOW THEY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO CONTACT HIM BUT HE IS IGNORING THEM '' speculation, '' THAT IS NOT THE SIGN OF SOMEONE WHO HAS NOTHING TO HIDE '' Defamatory Keep going .......
Not singling you out Dai, you say that it's nothing to do with us and then you speculate that he is ignoring them and has something to hide, wheras the thread is about the board backing ML.
I can't see him earning that kind of money all those years ago, was looking at the site below for the premier league and the wages were nowhere near that. Remember the premier league even back then was one of the biggest payers http://www.sportingintelligence.com...ll-wage-figures-for-the-past-25-years-301002/
Ain't the club speculating then ??? Like i have plainly said we dont know what the truth is but there is no smoke without fire and Ajax think they have a case that they want laudrup to appear in court....I hope he goes as it will send out a bad message if he dont....
You're probably right - still back then he was a mega star... I don't know. Then you tell me how they could have that kind of a claim on him?
He is but one of all the players that played for Ajax at the time, they are looking to get money from every player from the 1997 era and the £2.5M probably constitutes the total. Either way you have to wonder why Ajax didn't pay the tax at source, they seem to be a very poorly run club.
Because its a speculative claim, I don't think they will have any chance of getting anything from this
1, Ajax were taken to court by the Dutch inland revenue. 2, Ajax paid a wedge over to the Dutch inland revenue in fines. 3, Ajax appealed and some of the funds were returned. 4, Ajax looked at their books and realised they had paid x amount related to funds received by Laudrup. The tax on the x amount is what Ajax want from Laudrup. It does beg the question about bungs and illegal payments, were any made and all concerned tried to hide it in the Ajax accounts? I have worked with a lot of Dutch companies and some are a tad disorganised to say the least and there tax laws are as complex as most countries. Good for the club verbally supporting Laudrup but is it just sound byes until it all comes out in the wash, I think not as it is a civil case between 2 parties but from a PR viewpoint it may be a ticking bomb.
With the ad, Ajax probably followed customary practice when a civil complaint is filed against a party without a domestic address. They follow this procedure, ML fails to make an appearance either personally or through counsel, and they obtain a ruling. It's not their job to find him and wherever he is to make service in that jurisdiction. ML can either answer the complaint or not; but if he wants to keep it simple he will file an answer and go from there. If Ajax get a ruling against him for some amount of money by default who knows how they will be able to collect but it just gets messy - somebody might be able to shed light on intra-EU collection practices. I'm sure some expensive suit will get a gig and it will all be ironed out sooner or later. It's not a criminal complaint so there is nothing ostensibly preventing ML from travelling to Holland.
No the club have not speculated. All the club has stated is the Ajax could of contacted ML via Swansea and did not need to take the unusual step of placing an ad in a newspaper.
Ajax was a poor and poorly run club at that time. I lived in Amsterdam at that time, not that I was an Ajax-fan. But they brought in Morten Olsen (Olsen brought Laudrup from his exile in Japan) to get the championship back that they hadn't won for years at that time. They won the double but Olsen was sacked due to lies and a player rebellion. It all had to do with the de Boer brothers wish to go to Barcelona and play. Ronald de Boer has later issued a public excuse to Morten Olsen... It was all later with the sale of the de Boer brothers (and others) to Barca, and finally the Groenkjaer move --> Chelsea
Such a shame, and yet to this day companies all around the EU still have not been forced to pay all employee taxes from source. It would solve and prevent alot of the problems regarding tax evasion. This situation should not have been allowed to happen and yet we see it in all types of businesses.
