THE Scottish Football Association know that any punishment meted out by their judicial panel to Ian Black, the Rangers midfielder, in the event of him being found guilty of breaching rules on betting on football, will be viewed as a precedent.
Black is accused of betting on 160 matches while playing for Inverness Caledonian Thistle, Hearts and Rangers, including betting against his own team on three occasions.
The SFA have a blanket ban on footballers betting on any match and the three-man panel, who will convene at 1pm, have the authority to invoke a suspension as well as a fine if they see fit.
The SFA's guidelines on fines for breaching Rule 22, which covers betting, range from £500 to £1m, but the panel also has the authority to impose a suspension and even expulsion.
Black, who was reported to the SFA by a bookmaker, answered the charges by letter two weeks ago and will be represented today.
His case has sparked much debate in the game. Some argue that Black is unfortunate to be the focus of attention because betting is rife in dressing rooms at all levels, although charges of betting against his own team have been widely condemned.
His team-mate David Templeton says the Rangers squad is supportive of the 28-year-old and has praised his return to form on the pitch in SPFL League 1. He said: "The main thing is he has been playing well. Regardless of what has been going on off the park, he has put in 100% and shown the fans what kind of player he is. He has been by far a better player than last season.
"A lot of players were not too sure of the rules on betting. I have to be honest and say I didn't know you couldn't bet on any football in the world. I have no idea why that is the case. I mean, if you wanted to put a tenner on an English Premiership game what is the harm? In all my time at Hearts and Rangers, no-one has told me I can't do that."
The panel will also deal with the Aberdeen manager Derek McInnes and the Hearts assistant Billy Brown who were sent to the stand by referee Alan Muir at the end of a match at Tynecastle after an altercation. Both men can expect to receive touchline bans.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article