Contact must start on your side; the racket may finish over the net.

The international ruleset used here

This page applies the BWF Laws of Badminton, Section 4.1, in force 26 April 2025, Version 5.0 (2), especially Laws 7.3, 13.4, 15 and 17. It uses the BWF Instructions to Technical Officials (ITTO), in force 17 November 2025, Version 8.0 (2), for match-official procedure.

The rulings are the BWF baseline for standard badminton singles and doubles. They are not a claim about AirBadminton, an unaffiliated house code or a local rulebook that has not adopted the BWF Laws. Law 13.4.6 contains additional Wheelchair Badminton faults; those sport-class-specific provisions are outside this page's scope.

A published 2027 edition is not yet in force

BWF has issued Section 4.1 Version 6.0 with an effective date of 4 January 2027. On this page's check date, 25 August 2026, Version 5.0 (2) remains the controlling edition. The relevant wording in Laws 13.4 and 15 is unchanged in the issued 2027 text, so the net-invasion rulings below continue across that scheduled transition.

Use six checks in this order

1. Was the shuttle still in play? Law 13.4 applies to a player “in play.”
2. Where was the initial contact point? It must be on the striker's side of the net.
3. What crossed the plane? The exception covers the racket following the shuttle in the same stroke, not the player's body.
4. Was the net or a support touched? That is a separate Law 13.4.1 test.
5. Was the opponent obstructed or distracted? Apply Laws 13.4.3–13.4.5 rather than deciding only from the plane of the net.
6. What follows? A fault ends the rally; then apply the score and service consequence. Review rights are limited.

The contact point—not the whole shuttle—must be on your side

BWF Law 13.4.2 asks where the initial point of contact with the shuttle occurred. It does not ask where the striker's feet were, where the racket later finished, or whether every feather had already crossed the vertical plane.

A player may therefore strike when the racket's first contact point is on that player's side even if part of the shuttle projects across the plane. Conversely, standing entirely inside one's own court does not legalise reaching across and making first contact on the opponent's side.

The exception is limited to the racket in the same stroke

After lawful initial contact, Law 13.4.2 permits the striker's racket to follow the shuttle over the net “in the course of a stroke.” BWF defines a stroke as a movement of the racket with an intention to hit the shuttle. A continuous finish to a tight net kill can therefore cross the plane.

The exception does not authorise the player's hand, arm, head or other part of the person to invade the opponent's court over the net. Nor does it cover a new reach after the hitting action has finished, or leaving the racket across the plane to affect the next stroke.

A legal hit can still become a net-touch fault

While the shuttle is in play, BWF Law 13.4.1 makes it a fault to touch the net or its supports with the racket, person or dress. A player can satisfy the own-side contact test and still lose the rally when the racket, hand, shoe or clothing touches the net before the rally has ended.

The shuttle touching the tape is different: it is not a player touching the net. Play can continue if the shuttle passes over and remains in play. If it strikes the net or post and starts falling towards the court on the striker's side, Law 15 says it is already no longer in play.

Law 15 decides whether a later touch can be a rally fault

The shuttle ceases to be in play when it hits the court, when a fault or let has occurred, or when it strikes the net or post and starts to fall towards the surface on the striker's side. A net touch after one of those events is too late to create a Law 13.4.1 rally fault.

This is a sequence question, often separated by only a fraction of a second. If the racket touches the net while the winning shot is still airborne, the net fault occurred first and ends the rally. If the shuttle lands before the player's momentum produces contact, the rally had already ended. Deliberate damage or other inappropriate post-rally conduct can still be dealt with separately under Law 16.

Crossing underneath is a fault only when it has the required effect

Law 13.4.3 makes under-net invasion by racket or person a fault when it occurs such that an opponent is obstructed or distracted. The clause does not create an automatic badminton “centre-line fault” from every toe or racket tip that crosses the floor boundary.

Effect matters. BWF ITTO 5.9.1.1 directs the umpire to fault a player who slides under the net and, in the umpire's opinion, clearly obstructs or distracts the opponent. A harmless momentary crossing and a slide into an opponent's landing or movement space are therefore not the same ruling.

An opponent is entitled to complete a legal net stroke

Law 13.4.4 faults a player who prevents an opponent from making a legal stroke in which the shuttle is followed over the net. The protected action is the opponent's lawful stroke and permitted follow-through—not an early hit whose contact point would be on the wrong side.

A defender is not automatically safe merely because the defender's racket stays on that defender's side. Holding or moving it into the path of the opponent's otherwise legal follow-through can still be obstruction. A racket clash is evidence of what happened, not a complete ruling by itself: the umpire must identify whether the stroke was legal and whether the opponent was prevented from making it.

Under-net distraction and deliberate distraction are distinct tests

Under Law 13.4.3, the under-net movement itself must have obstructed or distracted the opponent; the clause does not add a requirement that the invasion was deliberate. Law 13.4.5 separately faults a player who deliberately distracts an opponent by an action such as shouting or gesturing.

This distinction prevents two shortcuts: accidental under-net encroachment is not automatically legal if it actually disrupts the opponent, and an ordinary shout is not automatically a Law 13.4.5 fault without the required deliberate distraction.

A net-invasion fault loses the rally; it is not replayed

Under BWF Law 7.3, the opposing side wins the rally and adds a point when a side commits a fault. In singles, Laws 10.3.1–10.3.2 decide whether the same server serves again or the receiver becomes the new server; Laws 11.3.1–11.3.2 do the equivalent for doubles.

There is no football-style advantage phase after a Law 13.4 fault: Law 15 says the shuttle is no longer in play once the fault has occurred. Withdrawing the racket or recovering position afterwards cannot cure it. An ordinary net fault is a rally decision, not automatically misconduct; Law 16 may become relevant to separate flagrant or inappropriate behaviour.

Instant review does not decide net-invasion challenges

The umpire is in charge of the match and must call faults and lets. Under BWF Law 17.5 and ITTO 2.4, an official's decision is final on the points of fact for which that official is responsible, subject to the stated line-call exceptions.

BWF's Instant Review System is for line-call challenges; it is not a video appeal system for the position of a racket, net contact or obstruction. A player may raise a point of dispute with the umpire before the next service. An unsatisfied appeal may go to the Referee only on a question of law, not merely because the player disputes the umpire's factual view; Law 17.6.8 also imposes the before-next-service deadline (or, at match end, before the appealing side leaves the court).

Part of the shuttle still projects across the plane

Situation: the feathers extend over the net plane, but Blue's racket first contacts the shuttle at a point on Blue's side and then follows through legally.

BWF Version 5.0 (2) ruling: legal on the invasion test. The law specifies the initial point of contact; it does not require the entire shuttle to be on Blue's side. Net contact or obstruction would still be assessed separately.

A net touch happens just before—or just after—the landing

Situation A: Blue makes lawful contact and the shuttle is heading down inside Red's court, but Blue's racket touches the net while the shuttle is still airborne. BWF Version 5.0 (2) ruling: fault to Blue under Law 13.4.1; the earlier net touch ends the rally.

Situation B: the shuttle first hits the surface of Red's court and only then Blue's racket touches the net. BWF Version 5.0 (2) ruling: no Law 13.4.1 fault from that later touch because Law 15 ended the rally at the landing. The sequence is decisive.

A shoe crosses under the net without affecting play

Situation: Blue's toe briefly enters the space under Red's court, but Red's movement, view and stroke are unaffected.

BWF Version 5.0 (2) ruling: Law 13.4.3 does not make the crossing alone a fault; the required obstruction or distraction is absent on the stated facts. A larger slide that changes Red's movement or attention can produce the opposite ruling.

A defender blocks a legal follow-through

Situation: Red contacts the shuttle on Red's side and is entitled to follow through over the net. Blue holds a racket in that swing path and prevents Red from completing the stroke.

BWF Version 5.0 (2) ruling: fault to Blue under Law 13.4.4. The decisive fact is prevention of Red's otherwise legal stroke, not simply which rackets crossed the plane.

A player asks for video review of the contact point

Situation: the umpire faults Blue for making contact on Red's side. Blue asks to challenge the call using the Instant Review System.

BWF Laws and ITTO ruling: there is no IRS challenge for that factual net-invasion call. IRS handles line calls. Blue may promptly ask the umpire about the ruling, but an appeal to the Referee is limited to a question of law and must meet Law 17.6.8's deadline.

Governing-body sources and effective versions

• Badminton World Federation — Statutes Section 4.1, Laws of Badminton, in force 26 April 2025, Version 5.0 (2): definition of “stroke” and Laws 7.3, 10.3, 11.3, 13.4, 15 and 17
• Badminton World Federation — Statutes Section 4.1.1, Instructions to Technical Officials, in force 17 November 2025, Version 8.0 (2): Instructions 2.4–2.5, 5.8 and 5.9.1.1 (BWF document copy hosted by Ghana Badminton)
• Badminton World Federation — Statutes Section 4.1, Laws of Badminton, Version 6.0, effective 4 January 2027: Laws 13.4 and 15 (issued future edition; BWF document copy hosted by Ghana Badminton)

Checked 25 August 2026 against the controlling BWF lawbook, the current BWF technical-official instructions and the already-issued 2027 lawbook. The 2025 lawbook remains in force on the check date; the 2027 edition is cited only to make the scheduled version boundary explicit. This page asserts no competition-specific variation. An event prospectus, national-association rulebook or Para badminton provision may supplement the baseline, so the appointed rules for that match still control.