I’m thinking of football for some reason, but it would presumably have broader application to other sports.
Meaning, suppose the rules say that you can’t do X, and in a given situation you judge that the penalties for doing X are likely smaller than the damage to your side from not doing X (e.g. some pass interference situations), and/or that you’re not so likely to be caught altogether, is the proper “fair play” approach to do X or not?
There might be a difference in the two situations above, i.e. between whether you’re judging that the penalty is less harmful than the alternative on the one hand, and situations where you’re in a position to violate the rules without getting caught on the other. (In basketball, fouling in the closing minute of the game to stop the clock and get the ball back is SOP.)
You would also need to differentiate in the case of rules which are in place to prevent serious injury to the opposing player.