ScopeThe ruleset and effective date used here
This page applies the World Rugby Laws of the Game 2026, principally Law 8.3, together with the full-contact Sevens variations. World Rugby implemented its July 2026 law assets for new competitions and events beginning after 1 July 2026. It tells leagues or competitions already in progress to check their implementation date with the relevant union. Unless a variation is identified, every ruling below uses that World Rugby version.
The penalty-try wording itself is in the general rugby-union scoring law; the Sevens scoring variation does not replace Law 8.3. Sevens does, however, change the yellow-card suspension to two minutes and makes the scoring team take the next restart. A union, age-grade competition or match organiser may supplement the baseline, particularly for review procedures. Modified forms such as touch, tag or T1 are outside this page's scope.
Law 8.3There are two routes to a penalty try
World Rugby Law 8.3 covers either of these counterfactual outcomes:
- No try was scored: without the opponents' foul play, a try probably would have been scored.
- A try was scored in a worse place: without the foul play, a try probably would have been scored in a more advantageous position.
The second route matters because the place of an ordinary try sets the conversion angle. If illegal interference probably changes a central grounding into a corner grounding, the referee can award the penalty try between the posts instead of leaving the attack with the worse outcome.
ProbableThe law asks what probably would have happened
“Probable” is the threshold; Law 8 does not define it as a percentage. The referee judges the situation at the time of the foul play, then considers the likely sequence without that act: possession and control, distance to the try line, the carrier's path, available support, touch and dead-ball boundaries, and defenders who could still intervene legally.
World Rugby's TMO training specifically calls for a wider view in an intentional knock-forward review so officials can see other defenders who could have been in play. One credible covering defender can make the difference between a probable score and a possible one. The foul need not occur in in-goal or even within five metres of the line, but uncertainty usually increases with distance and unfinished work.
Foul playAn infringement and foul play are not interchangeable
The World Rugby definitions confine foul play to conduct contrary to Law 9: obstruction, unfair play, repeated infringements, dangerous play and misconduct. A legal tackle, an attacker losing control or an accidental knock forward cannot support a penalty try, however likely the attack had looked before that event.
Likewise, being in an offside position is not by itself enough. The decisive action may become foul play if, for example, an offside player intentionally obstructs or interferes under Law 9.2, or a player intentionally infringes under Law 9.7. The referee must identify both the actual illegal act and how it prevented the probable scoring outcome.
Intentional knock forwardA blocked pass is not automatically a penalty try
World Rugby Law 11.3 makes it a penalty offence to intentionally knock the ball forward with a hand or arm. Law 11.4 adds an important limit: a failed attempt to catch is not intentional if there was a reasonable expectation of gaining possession.
Even after an intentional knock forward is established, Law 8.3 still requires the separate probable-try test. If legal cover remained, the outcome can be a penalty and the appropriate foul-play sanction without a penalty try. If the act removes the last probable scoring pass with no credible cover, the penalty-try threshold may be met.
Card sanctionYellow or red is mandatory when Law 8.3 is met
Law 8.3 says a player guilty of preventing the probable try must be cautioned and shown a yellow card or sent off. A penalty try with only a verbal warning to that guilty player is not one of the stated outcomes. The score and card answer different questions: Law 8 supplies the scoring remedy, while the nature and seriousness of the foul play determine yellow or red.
Under the Sevens variation to Law 9.29, yellow means a two-minute suspension. Dangerous foul play may require red; the sent-off player takes no further part. Any competition-specific foul-play review or red-card replacement procedure is separate from whether the penalty try should be awarded.
No conversionThe seven points are complete immediately
Law 8.1 values a penalty try at seven points, and Law 8.3 says no conversion is attempted. It is not a five-point try followed by an automatic successful kick, and the team cannot choose to take a drop-kick conversion. The award itself supplies the full seven.
This also means the Sevens variation's 30-second conversion limit in Law 8.8(c) never starts. The referee records the score, administers the yellow or red card and manages the next applicable match sequence.
AdvantageScoring anyway does not end every question
World Rugby Law 7 allows play to continue after an infringement when advantage may be gained, but that advantage must become clear and real. The referee must stop immediately if continuing would be dangerous. If no sufficient advantage develops, the referee returns to the sanction for the original infringement.
If the attack scores the same probable try in the same advantageous position despite the foul, there is no lost scoring outcome for Law 8.3 to repair; the try can stand and the referee still deals with the foul-play sanction. If the foul probably forced the grounding into a worse position, Law 8.3's second route remains relevant. A card is not erased merely because advantage produced a score.
TMO and officialsReview is available only when appointed
Under World Rugby Law 6.5, the referee and appointed match officials are the judges of fact and law. Law 6.15 permits a match organiser to appoint a television match official to clarify an infringement leading to or preventing a try, and Law 6.16 sends reviews through the TMO protocol. A community tournament without a TMO does not acquire video review because footage exists on a phone or broadcast feed.
Technology changes the evidence available, not Law 8.3's threshold. Officials still need the foul-play act, the probable-try counterfactual, any realistic cover and the responsible player. Competition regulations should be checked for the appointed TMO or foul-play review process.
Restart and extra-timeThe scoring team normally kicks off again
The Sevens variation to Law 12.4 makes the scoring team restart with a drop kick on or behind the centre of halfway. There is no conversion before that restart. In elite rugby, current Law 6.29 also says water carriers may not enter the field at a penalty try.
Law 12.4 states a 30-second restart clock from a conversion being taken or declined, or from a penalty or dropped goal being kicked; it does not state a separate timing trigger for a penalty try. The safe reading is not to invent a new penalty-try clock: the officials follow the appointed event timing procedure and move directly to the restart. There is no restart if the penalty try is the first score in extra-time, because the Sevens addition at Law 8.30 declares the first scoring team the winner immediately.
Decision pathA compact way to analyse the call
- Name the governing ruleset. Confirm the World Rugby edition, union implementation date and any event review protocol.
- Identify the act. What exact Law 9 foul play occurred, and who committed it?
- Remove that act. Reconstruct the likely play without the illegal interference.
- Test probability. Would a try probably have been scored, considering control, distance, support, boundaries and legal cover?
- Test position. If a try was still scored, was a more advantageous grounding position probably lost?
- Apply the result. If either Law 8.3 route is met, award seven points between the posts, attempt no conversion and show the guilty player yellow or red.
- Finish the sequence. Apply the Sevens card timing and the restart or extra-time outcome that governs the match.
Worked case 1The last scoring pass is slapped down
Situation: five metres out, an attacker passes to an unmarked team-mate moving into in-goal. The last defender deliberately knocks the pass forward and no other defender could legally intervene.
World Rugby 2026 ruling: an intentional knock forward is a penalty under Law 11.3 and an intentional infringement is foul play under Law 9.7. On these stated facts the foul removes a probable try, so Law 8.3 supports a penalty try: seven points, no conversion, and yellow or red for the guilty player. The absence of credible cover is decisive.
Worked case 2A genuine interception attempt fails
Situation: a defender reaches with both hands for a pass and had a reasonable expectation of catching it, but the ball goes forward and completes a knock forward. The receiving attacker might otherwise have had open field ahead.
World Rugby 2026 ruling: Law 11.4 says this is not an intentional knock forward on the stated facts. Without another act of Law 9 foul play, Law 8.3 is unavailable. The ordinary scrum sanction for the knock forward applies; the promising attack alone cannot create a penalty try.
Worked case 3There is still credible cover
Situation: a support runner is tackled without the ball 15 metres from the line. A second defender is between the ball-carrier and the line and, on the stated facts, probably would make a legal covering tackle.
World Rugby 2026 ruling: tackling a player without the ball is penalised by Law 9.14, but the stated cover makes the try possible rather than probable. Award the penalty and the foul-play sanction justified by the incident, but not a penalty try. The seriousness of the foul does not replace the probability test.
Worked case 4The try is scored in the corner anyway
Situation: an offside defender intentionally grabs and pulls back the ball-carrier, who stays upright and grounds in the corner. Without that interference, the open path and position of the remaining defenders show that a grounding near the posts was probable.
World Rugby 2026 ruling: the intentional offside interference is foul play under Law 9.2, and Law 8.3 also covers a probable try prevented from being scored in a more advantageous position. The referee may award the penalty try between the posts rather than leave the ordinary corner try, with seven points, no conversion and yellow or red for the guilty player. If the better position was only speculative, the ordinary try stands and the foul play is dealt with separately.
Worked case 5Advantage produces the same central score
Situation: a defender obstructs a support player, but the ball-carrier continues and grounds between the posts; the obstruction did not change the probable place or completion of the score.
World Rugby 2026 ruling: allow the ordinary try because the attack obtained the scoring outcome that Law 8.3 would otherwise protect. Do not add a penalty try or seven more points. The referee can still sanction the offender after the score; scoring advantage and foul-play discipline are separate.
Common mistakesClaims the law does not support
- “Any cynical penalty near the line is a penalty try.” No. Foul play and a probable lost try, or probable better position, are both required.
- “The attacker must already be in in-goal.” No. Law 8.3 sets no distance, though unfinished work and cover affect probability.
- “An intentional knock forward always means seven points.” No. The referee must still remove the act and find a probable try.
- “A red-card offence automatically creates a penalty try.” No. Card seriousness and the lost scoring outcome are different tests.
- “A penalty try still needs a sevens drop-kick conversion.” No. The award is seven points and Law 8.3 prohibits a conversion attempt.
- “Scoring under advantage erases the card.” No. The actual try may settle the scoring question, but foul-play discipline remains.
Official referencesGoverning-body sources and effective versions
Checked on 28 August 2026 against World Rugby's 2026 law book, live law pages and July implementation notice. The baseline is full-contact World Rugby sevens. Competitions already underway on 1 July 2026 should confirm their adoption date with the relevant union; event regulations may also determine whether a TMO or other review process is appointed.