Perhaps because our case with uefa is also to do with old news not current finances yet the media are not treating it that way?
Hardly covered by the press or media with the exception of the times today , I just mentioned it on a guardian article about city v Watford and the post was immediately taken down by the mods ? Sounds like the truth is painful reading for a great many
Class, dignity, respect.
Possibly!
Stefan from 93:20 pod on twitter asking why is it being briefed now.... he speculates it could be things not going well with the investigations and processing and therefore we've briefed this into the mix...
Possibly!
Stefan from 93:20 pod on twitter asking why is it being briefed now.... he speculates it could be things not going well with the investigations and processing and therefore we've briefed this into the mix...
Doubt there is any connection whatsoeverPossibly!
Stefan from 93:20 pod on twitter asking why is it being briefed now.... he speculates it could be things not going well with the investigations and processing and therefore we've briefed this into the mix...
Unauthorised access is an offence under the Computer Misuse Act 1990. Absent any evidence of intent to commit further offences or alter the data, it's probable we decided civil action was the way to go.
And in civil action you have to weigh up the amount offered against the risk of costs going against you. So, if Liverpool offered a million pounds and we proceeded we'd risk the court deciding that £1m was fair given no proof of financial consequences and we should have accepted.
Interesting that it has found its way into the public domain. It suggests that Liverpool weren't able to bind us to a confidentiality clause. An indication of the strength of our case.