As I have repeatedly said Messrs Grime and Harrison may say what they like out of court.
In court they simply would not be allowed to say "The alerts have no evidential reliability" as that is assuming a power they do not have. They may well be correct but that would not be the point should it wind up in court. In that case it would be up to the judge to direct and the judges and jury [if any] to decide the weighting if any given.
So what precise information with impeccable sources do you have to offer?
The case extends somewhat further than a pair of dogs, their handler and his boss.
All a bit hypothetical, but anyway.
If the McCanns had been tried in PT, would Grime and Harrison have had to testify in person? Or would the rogs have sufficed (it must be somewhere in the articles I posted earlier, but I haven't actually read it all yet).
Next question: if they had to testify in person, who would have been competent to question whether corroborative / physical / forensic evidence was necessary? The didn't have such dogs in PT, so there would have been no precedent.