If you think about it, rugby league has probably had more unsavoury incidents involving pitch invasions in the recent past in this country than football. Remember the KR - FC a few years back?

It needs to be nipped in the bud. It seems to be the crapper teams with the potential problems. You never get much trouble from leeds/saints/wigan. Not to this extent anyway.

I'll fetch the ladder shall I?

I would say that Leeds have in my experience always had the most civilised supporters. In the past I have seen (and experienced first hand) a lot of yobbery from Saints fans.

London fans for me, they still clap their players off now.

Probably the same as us of late - glad the match is over.

Sorry but it isn't, only in an association football match is it a criminal offence (As I posted upthread) The worst they could be done for just being on the field is trespass which is a civil matter and would be a royal PITA to chase up. Pubic disorder offences were committed (not by all on the field btw) and a possible assault or two but just entering the field isn't a criminal offence in any sport other than soccer.

I'm sure those that are identified & deserve to be banned from RL games will be.

One thing we do know is that this has had and will have huge negative repercussions both within and outside the sport.

You must have missed this delightfully ironic shot from one of the videos.

Drunk and disorderly? Inciting violence? Being criminally thick?

The 1991 Act only covered Association Football but its coverage was expanded to all forms in the Football (Offences and Disorder) Act in 1999 and in the 2006 Crime Reduction Act which replaced much of the 1999 law.

I suspect the "thinking" was "if we wreck the sign saying it's a criminal offence to go on the pitch we'll be able to go on without being nicked."

Criminal damage? Assault?

You've given the yobs credit for being able to think, tad over-generous don't you think?

If I could think I'd be a yob by your logic!

It was? Hadn't heard this.

Which section/s?

Possibly chapter 21 or section 9 ? If I remember correctly this Act was also the first legislation which said that racist "chanting" could be carried out in isolation. previously the law said you have to have 2 to chant. Many of the changes to subsequent laws were not so much putting additional provisions in but involved the removal of certain restrictive terms. For example much of the 1999 Act refers to "football" and not "association football". This allows an extension of the provisions of the law but also eliminates any disparity where a ground is used for soccer and rugby (eg:- DW / Huddersfield/ KC).