These are troubling times for rugby union. The image of the game has been besmirched like never before. This month alone we have had an armband protest by the South Africa team against the suspension of Bakkies Botha, the Justin Harrison drug confessions and now “bloodgate”, with Tom Williams and Harlequins found guilty of trying to influence the outcome of a Heineken Cup quarter-final by cheating.

Last year there was the sex scandal involving four England players in New Zealand. Where will it end? Will match-fixing allegations be next to hit the headlines?

However regrettable, the sport - at its best, with its traditions, values and its esprit de corps, not only a game but a way of life - can no longer takes the moral high ground. One is left to ask: is this where the win-at-all-costs mentality of professionalism is taking us?

It is an uncomfortable truth that the sport at the highest level now has to confront. The Williams case is the latest and most serious manifestation of that trend. The question is whether this was a one-off or an example of something more widespread.

Anecdotal evidence suggests the latter. Matt Dawson, the former England and Lions scrum half, said yesterday: “I would be lying if I said I had not heard of this before. I couldn't give you an instance. And it does not mean it happened when I was playing.”

Dawson and Jonathan Davies, the former Wales fly half, discussed the vexed issue of the abuse of the replacements system in a BBC Radio phone-in during the Lions tour to South Africa. “The use of tactical replacements has become a significant part of the game at the highest level when a coach realises things are not going his way and he has to do something,” Dawson said yesterday. “On the subject of Williams's [12-month] ban, I think the length is ridiculous. It is almost seven times longer than that given to Schalk Burger for eye gouging.”

Davies said when he played he was aware of players being given a nick with a razor blade to enable them to go off for a “rest”. “There were also cases of players being given a quick elbow in the ear by a team-mate to draw blood,” Davies added.

“This was at the time blood bins were introduced, before we had rolling replacements. It provided an opportunity for a prop to take a breather. But it was always genuine blood, even if no one was quite sure how it got there. I have never known of something like tomato ketchup or a capsule. You cannot do that. It is taking the mickey. Maybe it is the pressure of professionalism. If it is, it is a sad day.”

The only previous high-profile case of cheating in English domestic rugby that led to a charge of misconduct involved Mark Regan, the Leeds hooker, whose head had been stamped upon by Mark Robinson in a Powergen Cup tie against Northampton in 2005.

Robinson was sent off and banned for 14 weeks. Regan had rolled around as if in agony, only to admit on television later that he had milked the situation for all it was worth. That led to a fine for attempting to deceive the referee.

The Harlequins case is a more worrying development. It suggests clear premeditation on the part of the club at management level. Who it involved, European Rugby Cup (ERC) could not decide. The written judgment will not be available for 14 days, but rugby cannot afford to be left in limbo. The RFU, under its admirable disciplinary officer, Judge Jeff Blackett, manages to announce its findings usually within a day of a hearing, however long and complex. The ERC verdict should be rush-released.

Williams is in an invidious position. He surely could not have acted alone, nor could he realistically have refused the instruction to chew on the phial. The ERC judgment is unsatisfactory in that, either way, a miscarriage of justice has taken place. If Williams was innocent, then he has been dealt a terrible wrong. If not, then someone has got away with an offence that undermines the very ethos of sport.

It may well be that for all the imperfections of the ERC decision, rugby has been done a service with the length of the punishment and the severity of the fine, £215,000 with half suspended, levied on Harlequins. Perhaps it should have gone farther. Banning Harlequins from Europe would not have been a step too far. But it should act as a deterrent. So would the introduction of independent doctors at matches as the arbiters of blood/injuries.

That is high on ERC's agenda. Whatever it takes to root out cheats is to be supported.

Cut to the quick

* IRB Law 3.12: Substituted players rejoining the match If a player is substituted, that player must not return and play in that match, even to replace an injured player.

* Exception 1 A substituted player may replace a player with a bleeding or open wound.

* Nick Evans was replaced in the 47th minute in the match between Harlequins and Leinster. Although the New Zealander was clearly carrying a knee injury, Dean Richards, the director of rugby, declared that Evans was tactically substituted. Chris Malone, his replacement, was then injured. The only way Richards, in need of a kicker with time running out, could send Evans back on was if a player was bleeding.