接受《南華早報》(SCMP) 頭版採訪，講解美斯在香港球賽缺陣事件，主辦方有否法律責任。 簡言之，法律觀點而言，個別球員會否上陣，向來都是觀看現場球賽的一個不確定因素。
假如Tatler Asia在明知美斯將會缺陣，依然向公眾明確宣稱美斯會上陣踢足球而出售門票，則可能違反商品說明條例。 然而，公眾及政府就此難以搜證。 即便如此，主辦方的商業聲譽，不論是有心或無意導致今次的事件，難免遭受打擊。 下次再主辦活動的話，消費者定必格外留神了。
報導亦訪問了立法會議員田北辰，他建議Tatler Asia考慮 “回水”。
// … Lawyer Eric Chan Pak-ho, who runs his own firm CPH Legal, pointed out that it was common sense that injury might prevent a player from appearing, and said Tatler Asia was unlikely to be vulnerable to prosecution, unless they had known Messi was not going to play but continued to market the game giving the impression he would.
While Tatler Asia’s reputation might be damaged, its behaviour “would fall short of any legal liabilities”.
Lawmaker and Roundtable convenor Michael Tien Puk-sun said the incident had significantly damaged the city’s reputation, especially considering the number of visitors from South Asia and mainland China who came specifically to watch the match.
He suggested the organiser should refund half of the ticket price to fans.
Tien also said Tatler Asia as a reputable business should take the initiative to pay back a portion of the financial subsidies received from the government. //