This story about 50 charges being dropped has been doing the rounds for ages but I'm very dubious.
That number sounds very much like it's the charges under the first heading (sponsorship, related parties, accurate financial statements). And these are the issues substantially dismissed by CAS, so they've always been weak unless the PL found some sort of smoking gun that UEFA didn't. I don't believe for one moment that is likely though.
I've heard (I believe reliably) that we presented our evidence on that part of the charges and it was pretty well the same evidence we presented to CAS, with pretty well the same witnesses. If that is the case, that doesn't suggest the PL agreed to drop those particular charges before they were heard.
It's possible, I suppose, that the tribunal has questioned whether the PL lawyers have that smoking gun. If they don't have that then, without it, the tribunal might be very reluctant to override the CAS decision and may have made that clear. We just don't know.
And the PL may well have asked for a specific deduction of points in its original submission but there's simply no way the tribunal will have applied that before closing arguments have been heard. And they will make their own decision on that.
I'm not saying people don't hear things but my experience is that they don't understand what they've heard, or put a different, often overly sensationalist, construct on the information. There's a big difference between the PL asking for a specific deduction and the panel issuing one, but people hear these things and don't interpret them accurately.
As someone said earlier it's the equivalent of "Send reinforcements, we're going to advance" morphing into "Send three and four pence, we're going to a dance".
