In the wake of this week’s claims about match-fixing in tennis, made following a joint investigation by the BBC and Buzzfeed, the subject of sports betting has naturally been to the fore. And Murray has described as “a little bit hypocritical” the fact that players are not allowed to be sponsored by betting organisations, but that tournaments are.

The latest revelations of alleged misdeeds in world sport have been carefully timed to coincide with the tournament in which Murray and his fellow elite are currently engaged, the Australian Open – where the official partner happens to be bookmaker William Hill.

The investigation claims that a group of 16 players in the top 50 have been repeatedly flagged to the sport’s governing body as suspicious without incurring any let or hindrance. It also asserts that eight of this group have been involved in the first grand slam of the 2016 season.

Murray acknowledged that he had been aware match-fixing had been a problem in tennis for a number of years, although he said he had never been approached himself. His comments came a day after world number one Novak Djokovic reaffirmed he had been indirectly approached in 2007 and offered £110,000 ($155,000/€142,000) to throw a match in Saint Petersburg.

The other part of Murray’s response was to stress the importance of education on the subject, particularly for younger players who might be susceptible to making bad decisions.

“I was never warned about it when I first came onto the tour when I was about 18,” he added.

At the time he joined the tour, in 2006, the young Scot could also have benefited from a little education about the way of the media world as a lighthearted and off-interview defence of his home football team – who, unlike England, were not about to play in the World Cup finals – was manufactured into a story which caused him ill-founded antagonism for many years. A little under a decade later, little Englanders were pleased enough with his contribution to a historic Davis Cup victory…

Be that as it may, Murray’s instinct is to address the culture of the game – the ethos that lies at its heart. “I do think it’s important that players are educated from a very young age, not just about how damaging it is to their career but to the integrity of the whole sport,” he said.

The same essential challenge lies before a series of other sports which have already seen their image broken and muddied in recent years – cycling, football and most recently athletics. It is, at the last, a question of establishing the correct abiding culture, without which nothing can truly flourish.

One of the few plus points for the beleaguered IAAF in recent days has been the fact that the science of their anti-doping efforts through the athlete biological passport has been proven as an effective long-term deterrent, and endorsed as such within the second part of the report published last week by the World Anti-Doping Agency’s (WADA) Independent Commission.

But without the culture of honouring that method with consistent application, the science is useless.

It may be that the recent spate of scandal within many of our most popular sports will be viewed as a crucial cultural revolution.

Dick Pound, chairman of the WADA Independent Commission and an International Olympic Committee (IOC) member since 1978, has made it clear recently that he believes the IOC has largely reformed itself from the parlous position it found itself in 18 years ago when the scandal over bribery and the Salt Lake City Winter Games broke.

Eighteen years from now, will we view the lurid revelations of recent months as a critical time for world sport? It would be good to think so.

This week, albeit on a far smaller scale, another sport has been attempting to re-establish its own sense of correct culture – namely rugby union.

On Tuesday, Clermont Auvergne flanker Viktor Kolelishvili received a 14-week ban for pushing referee Wayne Barnes in last weekend's 21-13 European Champions Cup loss to Ospreys.

The Georgia forward shoved Barnes, apparently feeling that the official was in his way as Ospreys prepared to play the ball in a ruck.

Barnes did not take action at the time, choosing instead to give the player a stern talking-to, but Kolelishvili was then cited for the shove.

The punishment has raised some controversy within the sport. On Twitter, Sale Sharks and sometime England player Danny Cipriani allied himself with those who felt the punishment was exorbitant.

“Minor push, VK didn't want to get blocked if people ran into his channel using the ref as a blocker" was the Cipriani view. And it was one which others shared.

However, the greater weight of numbers inclined to the view that it was vital to reinforce the principle that the referee could and should not be physically jostled. A message needed to be sent out within the game at large – and it had been.

Incidents such as this, and the reaction to them, are vital in calibrating the inner workings of sports.

“Seems extreme but we don’t want it to end up like football” offered another Twitter follower.

The memory is still clear for many of the tragi-comic incident during Sheffield Wednesday’s match against Arsenal in 1998 when home player Paolo di Canio reacted to being shown a red card by Paul Alcock by shoving the referee in the chest with such force that he – eventually – fell over.

Result for the Italian loon: obloquy – and an 11-match ban.

Nobody in rugby wants to see that element of football culture infiltrate their game. While we are on the subject, a similar, mortifying, challenge emerged this week with news that Glasgow's Scotland flanker Ryan Wilson had been cited for allegedly grabbing the testicles of Northampton's scrum-half Lee Dickson during another European Champions Cup game at the weekend.

So is rugby becoming infected by the malign spirit of Vinnie Jones? Not according to the Judicial Officer, who declared that he was not satisfied “to required standard” that the act of foul play had been committed – even though Dickson testified in person.

Which will no doubt elicit sighs of relief within the game. But it sounds too close for comfort – and not just for Dickson.