Really not sure what your issue is.
I know you don't want to troll through previous posts, but equally, I'm not going to just repeat over and over what I've said in the past just because you've decided you want to argue this point one way or the other today.
https://bournemouth-forum.vitalfootball.co.uk/threads/non-pandemic.10904/page-667#post-453671
The previous trials were down to efficacy, it was never down to safety. Thus any European decision prior to the blood clotting reports were not down to safety.
You cannot blend the two to try and fit your narrative, they are two completely separate issues. Europe didn't approve its use in the older age groups due to lack of data, the United States agency didn't approve it for the same reason.
Both have since concluded further trials, have their efficacy measurements and concluded its safe.
So, now on to the blood clotting, that has been highlighted in the real world after millions of doses, the European Medicines Agency is making another statement today. The MHRA are going to be doing the same at some point. Until then there's no new added guidance.
A suspension in a trial in children, an age group where there will always be heightened sensitivity, is hardly unexpected.