The association added that the claims committee is an independent committee, whose majority members were not connected to the events that are the subject of the investigation. If there was such a connection to any of the committee members, it would have been to Attorney Meiri. The Claims Committee was given full authority to investigate the issues that are the subject of the application, a power that was even expanded in the court's decision at the request of the applicants and with the consent of the Association. The members of the committee who were appointed had professional experience and knowledge, and the examination and investigation procedures conducted by them were in-depth. The committee documented its work, received many documents and conducted interviews with various parties. According to the Association, all the members of the committee were given an opportunity to express their opinions, and in this context, the applicants' position that the majority members of the committee saw Adv. Meiri as an external party to the committee should be rejected.
- Since there was no flaw in the procedural level, the decision of the Claims Committee should not be examined or interfered with. In addition, the Association undertook to accept the conclusions of the Claims Committee, and therefore its establishment should not be seen as an "escape route" from filing a lawsuit. The association does indeed respect the conclusion of the claims committee, even though the committee's position was different from that of the association. At the same time, the respondents also referred – in their opinion – to the applicants' arguments to the body of the committee's decision.
- Regarding the claim regarding a "double offset" of the sum of NIS 3.7 million, it was claimed that it was offset One of the amounts actually transferred to the teams, in view of the difference between the funds that the association was supposed to receive from the Toto (about NIS 26 million, which was registered as an "asset") and the funds that were actually transferred to the teams (NIS 22 million, based on the Toto's commitment to transfer the sum of NIS 26 million). The scope of the prohibited transfers is the amount actually transferred to the teams, and it is the one that is supposed to be a seat in the Association's coffers. Moreover, even if there were a "double offset", the Claims Committee's decision not to collect an additional sum of NIS 3.7 million is not an extremely unreasonable decision, in a manner that requires judicial intervention.
Regarding the "hypocritical" funds, it was argued that the request for approval should not be accepted in relation to the full sum (NIS 7.5 million), since the association collects these funds every month by way of offset. As of the date of submission of the summaries, NIS 5,455,080 of this sum has been returned to the Association's coffers, and the collection is ongoing.