That's fair enough, because my concern, again—and this comes back to Mrs. Thomas's question—is that you're telling the world that the fund is meant to defend legal actions resulting from accidents and injuries in “sanctioned hockey activities”, which is a wider thing, versus previously “in CHA play”. Before, you were saying it was on the ice; now, you're saying it's sanctioned activities off the ice.
Mr. McLaughlin, would you say that the 2018 alleged sexual misconduct incident with the players assaulting a woman in a hotel room would be “sanctioned hockey activities”?