 Yn y ddweud y llwydoedd yfynod ar y cyfnod, cyfnod ymwneud yma, yng Nghymru yn cyfnod yma hwn ymwneud. Yn y ddweud yw'r cyfnod, yw'r cyfnod yma, yw'r cyfnod yw'r cyfnod, yw'r cyfnod yw'r cyfnod yw'r cyfnod? Maen nhw'n amlwg yr ymddur nhw'n lle i'n golygu'r pryd arall y ffaith aceleu? Rydym yn ymddur i'r report, ond mae'r 20, mynd i'n 30 miliwn, sy'n 30 miliwn i'n cyffredinol yw'r ffaith achos gael. Mae'n gyfrifio bod diwrnod i'r cyffredinol yn y sîm. Felly mae'n amlwg fel unrhywun yma ac mae'n golygu, sy'n ymddur i'r meddwl honno, Brydd ddiriol ac ystafell o'r ymddur y Llywodraeth? Felly have the argument, that there is a lot of chance flowing from the fact of mounting political pressure to associate with those companies. I don't think, I would create it if I am wrong, that those companies were sanctioned. Even at the time it was a moral decision maybe to cut ties, which I think is probably the right decision to make, If you've got a sanction that you can hook the loss of chance argument on, then that's certainly a stronger position for Everton to take, but it sounds as though that isn't the case, and it would be, as you rightly point out, more of a moral argument. There is mounting political pressure to dissociate with companies, and to that extent we say that there is a loss of chance it wouldn't have been moral for us to carry on dealing with them, and that any financial losses flowing from that should be taken into account in mitigation when looking at PSR breaches. I think there is a stronger argument there certainly, and it doesn't fall foul of the same vulnerability that the first case did, which is that there wasn't a signed contract as at the point of the incursion into Ukraine. Evidentially the situation is probably stronger, albeit the weakness would be that without a specific sanction to hang the loss of chance argument on, it may be slightly harder to demonstrate that the mounting political pressure was sufficient to give rise to the loss of chance.