I think Sky have misjudged this one. It is galling that, however inaccurate the statement, they hold the whip hand in any discussion as they control the means by which any message is disseminated.
Even if the club goes all-out to put the facts into the public domain, it will always come over as bleating about being caught ('The lady doth protest too much, methinks') rather than a rejection of a patently false narrative.
Remember, as far as the other 91 clubs are concerned, we're the cheating bastards who played 'Ineligible Ale' to get into the Prem before taking the FFP regulations into the bog to use after an all-you-can-eat curry, licorice and Guiness marathon. The narrative will support their version of events to the wider world rather than give an accurate rendering of the club's character.
It is the standard TalkSpurt approach: say something to get everyone's attention by implying the negative but actually stepping back from outright libel and encourging the listeners to make the running whilst saying 'Well, this certainly seems to have angered you...'
For example, asking whether QPR chose to take the knee allows them to headline: 'QPR Refuse To Support Equality Initiative' (which is false) when the content of the story shows that neither side took the knee and QPR's opinion is only dropped in to act as an out of context, lukewarm, non-apology after setting the parameters characterisng us as the villain.
As has been said previously, fcuk SKY, the shower of farmyard aniligualists.