The Avesh Khan-Sunrisers Hyderabad storyline in IPL 2026 has again served as a reminder of how quickly emotions can spill into decision-making on the field. Avesh, who previously made headlines for throwing his helmet in celebration after a win over Royal Challengers Bengaluru in IPL 2023, now finds himself at the centre of another incident that SRH will be keen to address. This time, there was no flashpoint involving an opposing player—yet his actions near the boundary have sparked fresh debate about whether the moment crossed the line of acceptable conduct.
The controversy was set in motion when Rishabh Pant struck the second-last delivery he faced, sending it over mid-off against Sunrisers Hyderabad. As soon as the ball cleared the infield, the outcome looked essentially settled, with Lucknow Super Giants close to sealing the result. In that high-tension phase, Avesh appeared unable to rein in his feelings and stepped in by swinging his bat from outside the boundary line before the ball reached the ropes.
On-field officials did not halt play or raise an immediate intervention call, largely because there was little to no realistic prospect of the ball being stopped. With the ball still landing for four runs, LSG completed the chase and secured the win. However, the discussion has continued after the match, with reports suggesting SRH are weighing up whether to file a formal complaint regarding Avesh’s boundary-area involvement.
As per the report, Sunrisers Hyderabad are considering lodging a grievance, viewing the incident as an unfair-play concern. The thrust of their argument is that a person outside the field of play intervened before the ball had crossed the boundary, potentially affecting what would otherwise have been the natural outcome.
Even so, a review of the MCC Laws of Cricket indicates SRH may face an uphill task in terms of overturning the result or getting a significant remedy. The key factor is whether the umpires believe the ball would have reached the boundary regardless of the intervention, because the laws frame “boundary” recognition around the officials’ determination at the moment of contact.
Under MCC 19.2.7, the law states that if a person, animal, or object comes onto or over the field of play while the ball is in play, it should not automatically be treated as a boundary unless the umpires decide otherwise at the time contact occurs between the ball and that person, animal, or object. Importantly, the decision is made separately for each such occurrence.
Further, MCC 20.4.2.12 adds a crucial condition: if the umpires judge that either side was disadvantaged by a person, animal, or other object within or over the field of play, they consider the impact—but if both umpires conclude the ball would have reached the boundary even without the intervention, then the boundary is awarded. That clause directly aligns with the situation on the day, where the match officials appeared to treat the intervention as non-decisive given the ball’s trajectory.
With the victory, Lucknow Super Giants opened their account in the points table and climbed to seventh place after registering one win and one loss. Their next assignment is against a struggling Kolkata Knight Riders side on April 9.
