I guess I should be more "clear". Obviously, if he was in the clear, as in nothing was wrong with what he did, then we covered our bases and I'm okay with that. But, that being said, if there was ANY sort of exchange of money that WASN'T first cleared with Capel and the compliance office, then he should not have been let back on the court until we were absolutely 100% POSITIVE that there was no issue. If that didn't happen, then I hold Capel and Castiglione responsible, and it's time to clean house. That's my point. I actually don't think there's an argument here, I was just abrupt in my response and it was a bit of a knee-jerk response by me.