Just to distract from this silly rumor, for the more long standing (I.e. older) fans, it’s interesting to reflect on the behaviors that were known or acknowledged by players in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s (and, in many cases into the 90’s) before we started to take less of a boys will be boys viewpoint. In fact, until after about 2000, I suspect more than a few similar cases quietly disappeared. There are plenty of shocking tales of footballer antics out there, after all.
It’s quite satisfying to see that times have changed, but the suggestion about mandatory exclusion periods for set crimes (earlier in the thread) would not be intelligent, in my opinion. The superior choice would be to have a judicial officer for the SFA, possibly a retired judge, to review cases and recommend periods of suspension for offenses against the public order. There are many factors in determining what is appropriate, and that isn’t captured in a “this gets you that” table.
The clear example of that being a drink driving conviction at the lower limit with no incident is much different than the same conviction with four or five times the limit and property damage and/or injuries/deaths. They are both clearly crimes and stupid, but one is clearly criminally reckless, where the other lacks the same sky-high level of inherent stupidity.