I think those ideas suggested in SnookerBacker's final paragraph make for interesting reading. As he rightly mentions, there is little or no room for any player to plead ignorance to the rules - Not anymore.
So the idea of these kind of breaches taking place begs the question that are the sanctions for such breaches severe enough?
In comparison to sanctions given for more serious offences - they might actually be consistent - but that may no longer be enough, given that it is almost becoming a 'riskworthy' sanction - given it is to be a betting rule breach and no manipulation of outcomes
In allowing players to bet within strict guidelines - the questions asked are, how strict are they? When can or cannot a player place a bet? In an event he has failed to qualify? Can he begin to bet in an event after he has been eliminated? Can he bet on an event he hasn't entered? Can he bet on events that he isn't eligible to compete in?
One question - Would it do snooker any good to "legitimise" something on the basis that the rules and or present sanctions don't prove to be enough of a deterrent?
I don't think it would (personally)