While IPL 2026 has largely delivered thrilling contests, two officiating moments have sparked sharp debate. The first involved Angkrish Raghuvanshi being ruled out for obstructing the field during Kolkata Knight Riders’ clash with Lucknow Super Giants. The second centred on why KKR’s pace bowler Kartik Tyagi was not taken off after delivering two consecutive waist-high full tosses in the same match—both judged no-balls—during the final over at Ekana Stadium on Sunday.
In the fifth over of KKR’s innings, Raghuvanshi played a shot towards mid-on and immediately set off for a run. He was sent back by the non-striker, Cameron Green. As Raghuvanshi turned and began to return to his crease, a throw from LSG quick Mohammed Shami towards the striker’s end hit the batter as he dived in.
Lucknow lodged an appeal. On-field umpires Abhijeet Bengeri and Keyur Kelkar reviewed the incident and referred it to the TV umpire, Rohan Pandit. Pandit concluded that Raghuvanshi was out for obstructing the field, stating that the batter had “changed his direction of movement” after noticing the ball being thrown at him. The call immediately drew criticism, with commentators describing the dismissal as highly unfortunate.
Raghuvanshi reacted angrily after the decision, striking the boundary cushion with his bat and tossing his helmet into the dugout. He was later fined 20% of his match fee and handed one demerit point for breaching Level 1 of the IPL Code of Conduct for Players. Even though KKR eventually overcame LSG in a thrilling Super Over, the match’s storyline was inevitably overshadowed by the contentious wicket.
Former international umpire Anil Chaudhary, however, believes Raghuvanshi’s dismissal did not align with the laws of the game. Chaudhary argued that, in this situation, the ruling should have gone in the batter’s favour.
“Look, I didn’t feel that he was deliberate (in obstructing the ball). That change in direction was not wilful. It’s not just about a change in direction—it must also be wilful, because the batsman had very little time. When a batsman plays in front of the wicket, he is watching the ball, so he didn’t have much time to react. Turning 180 degrees doesn’t give the batter much scope. I felt that declaring him not out would have been a better call,” Chaudhary said, as he is currently involved in IPL commentary on JioHotstar.
Chaudhary, who has officiated in 12 Tests, 49 ODIs, and 64 T20Is, pointed to the relevant wording in the MCC Laws. Under Law 37.1.4, it states: “For the avoidance of doubt, if an umpire feels that a batsman, while running between the wickets, has significantly changed direction without probable cause and thereby obstructed a fielder’s attempt to effect a run-out, the batsman should, on appeal, be given out obstructing the field. It is not relevant whether a run-out would have occurred.”
The former umpire also questioned the handling of Tyagi during the same fixture. He argued that the pacer should have been taken off after two beamers/unsafe deliveries aimed at LSG batter Himmat Singh, in line with the rules and match safety expectations.
“He should have been removed from the attack. The second no-ball was at the same height—it wasn’t too far off and was in the same range. There was a discussion going on outside (the ropes). The KKR coach (Abhishek Nayar) also suggested bringing on a spinner, and one was seen on screen. Then I think the TV umpire said the second beamer wasn’t dangerous. They must have seen it on TV, it’s their opinion,” Chaudhary added.
“To me, I think he (Tyagi) should have been taken off because the second full toss was above waist height. It’s not allowed,” he said, underlining his view that the delivery height made the decision to continue the over questionable.
Even so, Chaudhary said he is broadly satisfied with the overall quality of umpiring in IPL 2026. “New umpires are coming in and doing well. There are incidents because of technology, and sometimes decisions are opinion-based. So it wouldn’t be fair to give a general negative opinion. Many are doing good umpiring. There are a few controversial incidents, maybe because they happened back-to-back, it feels more significant,” he said.
Other IPL dismissals for obstructing the field
- KKR’s Yusuf Pathan on 72, vs Pune Warriors India in 2013
- DC’s Amit Mishra on 1, vs SRH in 2019
- CSK’s Ravindra Jadeja on 5, vs RR in 2024
