Cobus Wessels given yellow card for Mitchell mistake
By Spiro Zavos, 6 Aug 2010 Spiro Zavos is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Cobus Wessels, IRB, Rugby Union, Springboks, Tri Nations, wallabies
124 Have your say
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- Tri Nations Tournament news
- South Africa Springboks news
- 2011 Wallabies squad news
On Tuesday, the rugby writers around the world received a less than informative IRB media release with the headline: Tri Nations Match Official Change. The release went on to confirm that Cobus Wessels, the South African assistant referee in the Wallabies – All Blacks Test in Melbourne, had been replaced as assistant referee for the Christchurch Test.
A New Zealander, Keith Brown, is to take his place. Wessels will be the television match official.
The release noted that the re-arrangement of officials followed a ‘routine review’ of match officials in Melbourne, and that the change had been approved by SANZAR.
There was not enough information here for my liking. I sent an email to the appropriate IRB official asking “why has Wessels been stood down?”
On Thursday, we all received an answer to this question. The IRB apologised to Drew Mitchell for being given a yellow card (his first for the match) for an illegal tackle on Richie McCaw.
During the Test the ‘tackle’ was missed by the television producers. I saw it later and what it amounted to was a slight hit on McCaw after he’d passed the ball. It’s history now that Mitchell was given a second yellow card for stopping a quick line-out being taken by the All Blacks.
And two yellow cards equals one red card. So Mitchell was off the field for 47 minutes all up.
The IRB referees boss Paddy O’Brien said that Wessels “saw something that did not happen … All we are saying is that referees need to be accountable.”
Hear, hear. Wessels is often seen raising his flag when he runs as an assistant referee. Too often in my opinion.
There has been a spate of yellow cards this Test season. The All Blacks’ Ben Franks was given one for a so-called shoulder charge which was more of a premature tackle.
Tacklers are taught to drop their shoulder before going into the tackle. Franks did this. Sometimes, though, the runner rushes into the tackle instead of bracing for it, rather like a driver trying to beat a red light.
When this happens, tacklers often find their shoulders making contact before they can get their arms up to wrap around the runner.
I’d like two changes to the way all this is being refereed.
First, the red card system should be abolished. It’s a bit like capital punishment – too severe, even if the person is guilty, and overwhelmingly unjust if the person is not. The rugby league system of putting a player on report should be used.
Second, before a yellow card is handed out, the referee and the video referee should look at the incident on the video replay system. This would ensure that incidents are avoided like the Mitchell debacle where the Wallaby winger, according to O’Brien, “put his hands up to avoid a collision with Richie McCaw.”
When Mitchell was first sinbinned, the Wallabies were down, but not out, at 21 – 14. When he returned, it was game over, 32 – 14.
As O’Brien points out, the yellow card that wasn’t had a “major impact” on the Test. His statement also conceded that several other yellow cards in the Tri Nations series had been ‘soft’ judgments.
And this bring us to an interesting point made by Robbie Deans.
The All Blacks have played three Tri Nations Tests this season and are yet to play against 15 players in the opposition for the full 80 minutes. Deans reckons that if all the Wallabies stay on the field for the entire match, they could give the All Blacks their first defeat in 13 Tests and prevent the sequence of All Blacks victories over the Wallabies inflating out to nine.
Wayne Smith writing in The Australian makes the point, though, that at Christchurch, the Wallabies will have to contend with “their nemesis referee,” Jonathan Kaplan.
I was at Wellington in 2000 when Kaplan allowed injury time to go on for nearly 7 minutes before awarding the Wallabies a penalty which John Eales kicked to win the Test. The mobile phones of the locals at the ground received a message when the full-time whistle was finally blown: “Bugger.”
Since 2000, though, the Wallabies and Australian teams in the Super Rugby tournaments have struggled when Kaplan is refereeing. According to Smith, Kaplan’s relationship with the Wallabies has been “spectacularly rocky.”
I asked a Super Rugby coach about Kaplan’s refereeing style. He told me that Kaplan allows a virtual free for all to take place at rucks and mauls. But as soon as he gives a call like ‘hands off,’ he expects an instant release.
He intensely dislikes foul and snide play. And he does not like being challenged on his decisions.
There is a sort of emperor complex about his refereeing, I would say.
So the Wallabies need to listen carefully and take note of exactly what instructions he gives them and the All Blacks. This means that Rocky Elsom will need to be more switched on mentally than he was at Melbourne.
If this sort of ‘referee/captain’ role made famous, or infamous, by Sean Fitzpatrick and George Gregan is beyond him, Deans need look no further than Will Genia for his next – and probably best – captain.
All this is before us, though.
On Saturday, the Wallabies are facing a confident All Blacks that is playing well. Deans has brought (through necessity) a new centre pairing of Anthony Faingaa and Adam Ashley-Cooper. In the slippery cold conditions of Christchurch, this combination looks to be a good one.
Kurtley Beale at fullback will provide some of the slick passing and running that Quade Cooper has given to the Wallabies this season.
The promotion of Saia Faingaa in place of Stephen Moore at hooker should give the Wallabies a bit more pace and menace in the pack. There is no Scott Higginbottom, which is a surprise.
Let’s hope this Test will feature 15 on 15 for the full 80 minutes.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
- Explore:
- Cobus Wessels, IRB, Rugby Union, Springboks, Tri Nations, wallabies

MattyP said | August 6th 2010 @ 3:24am | Report comment
Spiro, are you suggesting that two yellows = a red be abolished, or that a player can’t be red carded? I would agree with the former, not the latter. The ref needs authority to keep discipline, and appropriately punish foul play. If the ref is confident they have the facts right and the severity warrants a send-off, clearly that should be within his (or her) power.
darwin stubby said | August 6th 2010 @ 6:29am | Report comment
I agree MP – surely we’re not saying here that the Irish player who took it upon himself to continuously knee and AB in the head recently merely be put on report and allowed to carry on …. that’s a recipe for the game to spiral downward into a free for all
pothale said | August 6th 2010 @ 8:45am | Report comment
He attempted to knee him twice, he got him once. Should Jamie Heaslip have got a red card, or been binned?
Burger was caught gouging at Fitzgerald’s face during play. Recommendation was a yellow card. Should he have got a red?
darwin stubby said | August 6th 2010 @ 9:29am | Report comment
both reds card offences in my book
Wooded said | August 6th 2010 @ 5:22pm | Report comment
reccomendation was not a yellow… the tj reccomended higher
greg said | August 6th 2010 @ 3:27am | Report comment
Have only seen the first half of the game and although it is unlikely that it would change the outcome of the match, two incidents occurred that had a baring on the game. One, when Carter charged down the kick to score the ball first went backwards from his hands, onto Nonus’ legs and Carter therefore picked up the ball in an offside position to score. Two, when Ashley Cooper as tackled by Conrad Smith the ref is heard to say ‘roll away’ Smith makes no effort to do so, effectively smothering Cooper on the wrong side and the ball is delivered to the All Blacks.
As I say its a moot point now, but I’d love to see touchees give real assistance to the ref when such glaring moments go unnoticed.
Jerry said | August 6th 2010 @ 6:38am | Report comment
The Carter one was pretty quick – I suspect the touch judges missed it too.
AAC actually fell on top of Smith in the tackle, making it hard for him to roll away. The crucial thing missed in that ruck was that Smith likely played the ball on the deck, again, not that hard to miss (especially as Rokocoko was trying to play the ball back legally – it was easy to think that he’d actually pulled the ball free).
Bit harsh to ascribe too much blame to the Refs for either missed call, IMO.
Harry said | August 6th 2010 @ 8:37am | Report comment
Agree hard to pinge the refs for Carter and McCaw’s tries.
The solution is simple and, in test mtches, justifiable. Extend the video review of trys to cover all lead up plays, not just the grounding to check for offisde at least. The Carter charge down try happened so quickly no fault can be attached to the refs for missing that, but clearly offside it was. As to the McCaw try, the strip/turnover was questionable, but once again showed smart play by NZ. The brilliant NZ 2nd try was also questioned by some for Mils being offside (I thought he wasn’t but we never saw a conculusive angle) and again, if the technology is there to say one way or another, lets use it. The reality is in today’s professional environment every effort should be made to get things right.
Anyway Spiro nails it with Kaplan’s emperor complex comment.
And lets hope there is no reason for yellow cards to either side for the weekend game.
Nick said | August 6th 2010 @ 9:37am | Report comment
I was at the match on the upper tier inline with Mils first try. The group around me all breathed a sigh of relief as Mils was a good meter offside (in front of Jane)… we were shocked that it was given 5 seconds later and the sighs of relieve quickly changed to groans. If you take out two definite tries that were offside scores and the last try scored when we’d been down 1 man for virtually the entire half you come up with close to a draw. I’m confident the wallabies are heading in the right direction… now we just need to drop brown.
Richierich said | August 6th 2010 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
Close to a draw or a close loss Nick?
Harry said | August 6th 2010 @ 3:34pm | Report comment
Rich I’m sure you’ll agree that Australia were the real winners of that game. There is no doubt that the first 3 tries for NZ shouldn’t have been awarded, and the Head Ref even admits Mitchell should never have been sinbinned – so it should have been 14-3 at that point instead of 22-11. And there is no doubt Mitchell would have prevented the try Corey scored had he have been there (Mitchell never misses a tackle right?) so thats another score off the NZ total. So final score would have been, at the absolute worst, 31-22 to the glorious Golden Wallabies. One test up then, only two to go to reclaim the Bledisloe.
Australia have nothing to worry about and just have to turn up to win this weekend. I’m sure everyone agrees.
Frank O'Keeffe said | August 6th 2010 @ 3:35am | Report comment
Spiro,
You write: “First, the red card system should be abolished. It’s a bit like capital punishment – too severe, even if the person is guilty, and overwhelming unjust if the person is not. The rugby league system of putting a player on report should be used.”
I couldn’t agree with this sentiment more if there were two Frank O’Keeffe’s.
As for Kaplan. David Pocock likes playing under him. Bam Bam once wrote here at The Roar that:
“But back to the breakdown.
I thought Kaplan did a good job there as he was consistent. As a loose-forward, you can change the way you play at the breakdown as long as the refs are consistent with their interpretations of the laws.
So I think the problem is not so much how they interpret the laws, but rather that they go by this for the whole game. And I thought Kaplan did well.”
Since he’s been Australia’s best player this year, maybe it’s a good thing we have Kaplan coming up.
Ben said | August 6th 2010 @ 3:40am | Report comment
I think there simply needs to be better referring…….there is very little consistency……I think they should not be so pedantic and let the game go, the offense needs to be obvious and game changing otherwise let the game move on.
cinematic said | August 6th 2010 @ 5:17am | Report comment
“The promotion of Saia Faingaa in place of Stephen Moore at hooker should give the Wallabies a bit more pace and menace in the pack”
Definitely more pace, but only because he has the physique of an inside back (which is where his twin brother is properly ensconced).
The Wallabies need to pray for as few scrums as possible, and given the weather conditions, more than the average number of scrums seems likely.
johno said | August 6th 2010 @ 5:31am | Report comment
I just love the fact that you thought this was a soft card. how do you think Bakkies Botha felt after the Phil Waugh incident? Or the Lions tour fiasco, or the first Tri Nations test? How do you think Danie Rossouw felt?
To quote Ace Ventura…’can you feel that huh, buddy?’ It’s time to suck it up buddy.
Can you even see the glaring inconsistency in the way that Roland has been allowed to get away with literally murder in relation to the minor infringement that Wessels perpetrated? Remember last year’s AB front row fiasco against Italy, makes you wonder whether the administrators are always as unbiased and objective as they claim to be.
By the way, I think both of Mitchells cards were justified, since he blatantly put his shoulder into McCaw. He didn’t attempt to pull out which would have been an unfair call, but actually dropped his shoulder and went for McCaw, which is probably why he a yellow was the call from Wessels.
warrenexpatinnz said | August 6th 2010 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Mate can i have your address so I can send you some glasses?
Nick said | August 6th 2010 @ 9:38am | Report comment
Bring back the shoulder charge… it would make for a better specatacle
RedsNut said | August 6th 2010 @ 11:53am | Report comment
Only if you want to see gratuitous violence and more injuries – imo. It’s not a tackle in any shape or form, merely an attempt to put a man on the injury table
Mick Gold Coast QLD said | August 6th 2010 @ 5:18pm | Report comment
Accurately read, RedsNut.
It is downright dangerous – I see it in League and cannot believe they’ve allowed it to develop as widely as it has.
Shoulder charging requires no skill, it disadvantages the exposed ball carrier mightily, it encourages the untalented dopes like that boofheaded Canterbury league player now at Townsville, the young kids will employ it in imitation (which is where real damage can occur, in terms of the age/size mismatches in juniors).
Rugby stopped Butch James in his earliest outings as they should have done.
Terry Kidd said | August 6th 2010 @ 5:51am | Report comment
Spiro I don’t think that Higginbotham is fully fit as yet which is why he isn’t selected. I would expect him to be called up in SA though.
darwin stubby said | August 6th 2010 @ 6:22am | Report comment
“The All Blacks have played three Tri Nations Tests this season and are yet to play against 15 players in the opposition for the full 80 minutes. Deans reckons that if all the Wallabies stay on the field for the entire match, they could give the All Blacks their first defeat in 13 Tests and prevent the sequence of All Blacks victories over the Wallabies inflating out to nine.”
While this is an interesting point made by Deans I wonder what his response would be to a follow question which highlighted that his team has played 15 v 14 against the boks in Brisbane and didn’t score a point and had a similar advantage against the AB’s for 6-7 mins and actually conceded points … anyway as we know all these tests from now until the W/cup are merely trials for Deans – the result isn’t as important as the performance
Jerry said | August 6th 2010 @ 6:33am | Report comment
It’s a bit of an excuse I reckon. Against the Boks you can at least say the cards came early and allowed the AB’s to set up a platform for victory (I don’t think that’s actually accurate, but it’s an argument). But in the match last weekend, the Wallabies were already 11 points in arrears when the first card happened – it’s not like they’d shown themselves to be particularly competitive prior to the card.
darwin stubby said | August 6th 2010 @ 6:51am | Report comment
exactly and all Mitchell’s 1st card did was to even things up again to 14 v 14 for a period .. so more Deans fluff that really is baseless, which is picked up by the media and spun
bennalong said | August 6th 2010 @ 8:30am | Report comment
With 47 minutes I think the Blacks had a slight advantage,…….don’t you?
Harry said | August 6th 2010 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Don’t forget NZ got the first yellow, but due to STUPID play by a professional footballer … failure to find touch from the reultant penalty kick … much of the advantage of that time was squandered
Jerry said | August 6th 2010 @ 11:41am | Report comment
How’d the other 33 go? Oh that’s right – I JUST SAID IT IN THE POST YOU REPLIED TO.
Miss the point much?
johno said | August 6th 2010 @ 6:26am | Report comment
http://www.supersport.com/rugby/blogs/brenden-nel/Consistency_Paddy_FAIL
And to validate this even further
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdr-W775hk4
Jerry said | August 6th 2010 @ 7:32am | Report comment
That breakdown is laughable – the guy simply doesn’t know the laws.
Take the clip at 1:40 for instance, he claims Owen Franks drives into a ruck from the Bok side. But it’s not a ruck when he gets there, McCaw is still on his feet (so it’s not a tackle either). It’s not a maul when he gets there, cause there’s only one Bok attached to McCaw, De Villiers is the second Bok there and Franks is touching him when he gets there). So what does Franks actually do? He falls over a player in the process of being tackled and ends up on the All Black side of a ruck. He also claims Mealamu joins from the wrong side, when in fact all that happens is Mealamu and Smit bump into each other before Mealamu goes round to the back and joins correctly – unlike Smit, I might add.
And the whole thing is laughable anyway as without a similar analysis of the Boks or Wallaby tactics, there’s no comparison. I could trawl through some youtube clips and find multiple instances of both teams doing exactly the same thing time and again.
MattyP said | August 6th 2010 @ 11:41am | Report comment
Go on then, I’d like to see that.
I agree that the Franks clip is touch and go, although it was a pathetic effort at best – a tad later and it would have been a ruck, and he clearly never tried to get in a position to legally help his team mate, seemed happy to just collapse into the melee. Technically he is offside because he’s in front of his team mate with the ball, and therefore shouldn’t be involved in play.
But I don’t think the other instances are as arguable. The rest seemed liked reasonable analysis.
Just as a matter of normal debate, to make the argument that (for example), “NZ is always offside” you don’t have to show clips showing other team are also offside (or try to prove they are more often onside). The assertion was that against the Boks NZ were offside a lot with little response from the ref, and this vid makes a decent case. If you want to retort that “everyone else is it doing” the onus is on you to counter with similar evidence, otherwise you are just gainsaying.
I don’t think it’s fair to knock blokes who are actually putting together some evidence for their opinions. You may argue with some of the interpretations (a la your Franks analysis) but give the guy some credit for at least trying to back up what he is saying. It’s a damn site more credible than a lot of the other “commentary” and ” opinions” which get spouted around.
Jerry said | August 6th 2010 @ 11:50am | Report comment
Franks isn’t offside, you’re allowed to be in front of a team mate with the ball if you don’t obstruct a potential tackler or play the ball yourself, and he does neither.
As for the “analyst” he does himself no favours by ignoring one team when looking for infringements – as I’ve noted below, the Boks infringe in some of the very instances he highlights.
See below – it took about 10 minutes on youtube and I’ve found instances of both the Boks and Wallabies cheating at the breakdown in similar fashion.
No wait, I’ll cut and paste…
“In the example at 1:40, Owen Franks does nothing wrong. It’s not a tackle, ruck or maul when he arrives so where he joins from is irrelevant. Mealamu and Smit bump into each other but Keven then goes round the back and joins legally, unlike John Smit who joins from the side.
In the next example he points out Franks goes past the ruck to clear out. That’s true, but he somehow misses that directly prior to this John Smit is trying to hold Franks back from hitting the ruck at all.
And in the next example it’s Smit again! Tony Woodcock goes to ground in a tackle and at 2:25 Smit steps behind the tackle on the All Black side to try and prevent AB players from entering the tackle ruck/area. He does it pretty half heartedly sure, but what’s his intention in taking that step?
The 4th example is fair enough – but it’s only the All Blacks that do this sort of thing, right? Oh, hang on – what’s happening to Brad Thorn at 2:46 in this vid from last year? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdr-W775hk4&feature=player_embedded
And what’s Bismark doing at 3:13?
And again at 3:19?
You could make a similar analysis from either team in most matches, I suspect. In fact…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdr-W775hk4&feature=player_embedded – this is a vid by the same guy who made the original analysis of AB breakdown play – let’s see what he’s missed?
What’s Richard Brown doing at 1:06?
And what’s Elsom doing at 3:13? Surely not exactly the same thing he hauled Donnelly up for in the other vid?
Or what about Brown at 4:30?”
Richierich said | August 6th 2010 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
I vote Jerry for Prime Minister excellent work chap
Jerry said | August 6th 2010 @ 1:45pm | Report comment
Just noticed the links are wrong in that post
Here’s the Boks – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzdjBcS2Hoo – different video so different time stamps
Note, 1:56, 2:19, 225 and 3:02
Here’s the Wallabies http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPQ53aJOv00
Note 1:06, 3:13 and 4:30.
ohtani's jacket said | August 6th 2010 @ 10:33am | Report comment
What is it with this trend of idiots making youtube clips? You realise, Johno, that this same guy made a clip the next week rubbishing the Springboks and praising Pocock incessantly.
MarkR said | August 6th 2010 @ 4:35pm | Report comment
OJ – I made the mistake of watching this guys clips last year – biased is not a strong enough term for his views & disregard of anything that contradicts his viewpoints..
ohtani's jacket said | August 6th 2010 @ 4:48pm | Report comment
Is it the same guy? They may be breeding. He has a case in some of the clips but boy does he have a funny idea about what constitutes a ruck.
sixo_clock said | August 6th 2010 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
This ‘scarfman’ gets every call wrong, think for yourself mate. Look more closely at the snide and unsportsmanlike play of the ‘Boks from captain down and you will see why those calls were made. I did an analysis of this youtube rubbish for a ‘Shaun’ in the thread below, you are welcome to rebut my arguments.
http://www.theroar.com.au/2010/07/30/the-last-piece-of-the-rugby-laws-puzzle/
TembaVJ said | August 6th 2010 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
What it does show and that no one here is talking about is the 2 warnings and the an official warning and then just a penalty to McCaw so its 4 penalties 3 of them warning, 2 of them 5 meters from the line and no yellow. The last penalty given, the ref has forgotten about the warnings including his official warning.
The breakdown is a mess and call are normaly 50-50 but if you penilase the same person 4 times with 3 warning you have to start taking action, it was killing the contest, frustrating the Boks and handing the AB’s an uneven victory.
ohtani's jacket said | August 6th 2010 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
How poor are people’s listening comprehension skills. The official warning is against the team not against McCaw. The ref says the next time a player kills the ball in this particular area he’s going to the bin. Twelve minutes later, McCaw gets wrongfully penalised how many metres in opposition territory? 10?
johno said | August 6th 2010 @ 5:24pm | Report comment
The All Blacks, as wonderful as they have played this year (although most of the time against 14 men) have conceded 34 penalties so far in Tri-Nations.
Twelve in Auckland, nine in Wellington and 13 in Melbourne. But no cards. The Springboks have conceded 24 (5 + 9 + 10) and got four cards…
Two of those, Bakkies Botha in Auckland and BJ Botha in Brisbane, were for slowing the ball down or so called professional fouls. Yet, the most penalised team get warning upon warning.
ohtani's jacket said | August 6th 2010 @ 7:22pm | Report comment
Owen Franks was carded in Melbourne.
sixo_clock said | August 6th 2010 @ 1:32pm | Report comment
Look closely at the niggle ‘off the ball’, refs make allowances for a team that has to deal with these cynical efforts to win an advantage, then decide who was doing most of the extracurricular and then look at the penalties – bingo – comprehension!
TembaVJ said | August 6th 2010 @ 1:45pm | Report comment
Wow the kiwi “god of rugby” complex is so deeply ingrained and so glowingly visible when you guys are winning.
McCaw has gone from useless last year and useless this year in the S14 to being absolutely untouchably good in the 3N… And everyone else turned rubbish. He admitted himself that he “tests” the ref… in other place it’s called cheating and seeing how far he gets. Rolland let him go off the leash, like a rabies infected dog in the park.
Doesn’t matter, 3N over before the halfway mark AB’s way ahead of the pack boosting their followers and their own hopes high enough to make the fall next year all that more pleasing to observe.
Nothing as gracious as a kiwi winner. Before you point out that I am a bad loser, anything but I just want a fair contest, you guys might like winning with huge margins but I like the old fashion close games.
Jason said | August 6th 2010 @ 1:49pm | Report comment
Who was calling McCaw useless?
Jerry said | August 6th 2010 @ 1:52pm | Report comment
Were you complaining last year when the Boks were winning with the same tactics?
ohtani's jacket said | August 6th 2010 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
How about the gracious guy who said New Zealand would come last in the Tri-Nations this year?
TembaVJ said | August 6th 2010 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
OJ i did not expect the blacks to play against 14 men the entire season.
ohtani's jacket said | August 6th 2010 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
The game with the most cards in it was South Africa vs. Australia!
ohtani's jacket said | August 6th 2010 @ 2:07pm | Report comment
Actually, I think the Melbourne Test equalled it.
johno said | August 6th 2010 @ 5:54pm | Report comment
Karma’s bad you know.
usually it comes around at the worst possible moment, like a WC semi against France.
But then again NZ has always been good at cheating and getting away with it, ask Boy Louw about having to defend himself against the NZ boxing champ a week before a test.
ohtani's jacket said | August 6th 2010 @ 7:15pm | Report comment
Wow, you got that last story mixed up.
Lee said | August 6th 2010 @ 6:28am | Report comment
To anyone who is interested, Ruan Pienaar is injured and out for at least 6 weeks after which he will take up his contract in Belfast.
Good for the Boks? It will give Francois Hougaard a chance, and force the Boks to call another half back into the side which may bring Januarie under some pressure.
TembaVJ said | August 6th 2010 @ 1:12pm | Report comment
No Lee it will insure January plays for the rest of the year.