I'm finding this a little hard to follow

So... it was previously established, and admitted to, that the inclusion of a match in an intelligence report was wrong because the match didn't take place.

However we are now learning that the erroneous inclusion of this match in the report was down to AI, not a google search as previously suggested.

So, two questions from me:

1. What material difference does the original source of this error make? This statement today looks like a clarification. But what does it change?
2. What was included in the report about this 'match' that influenced the original decision to ban away supporters? What has been 'concealed' as you suggest? I've seen nothing on this.

Posted By: norwaay, Jan 14, 13:05:25