Lucknow Super Giants’ win over Sunrisers Hyderabad on Sunday (April 5) evening left a bitter aftertaste, with the talking point revolving around Avesh Khan’s actions near the end of the chase. SRH are unhappy not just about how the match finished, but also about a handful of decisions that have gone against them in their previous two outings.
Quick facts
- Match: Lucknow Super Giants vs Sunrisers Hyderabad on Sunday, April 5
- Flashpoint: Avesh Khan struck the ball back after Rishabh Pant hit a boundary off the penultimate delivery
- Claim: Some believe the ball had not crossed the boundary rope
- Debate online: A section suggested a penalty of five runs and invoking Law 20.1 (Dead Ball) and Law 41 (Unfair Play)
- Context: At that stage, LSG needed only one run with scores level
- Wider concern: SRH also raised complaints about Klaasen’s dismissal vs Royal Challengers Bengaluru, Abhishek Sharma’s wicket vs Kolkata Knight Riders, and Varun Chakravarthy’s catch vs Blessing Muzarabani
The incident happened after Rishabh Pant played a shot off Jaydev Unadkat on the second-last ball of the innings’ situation. Avesh, positioned close to the LSG dugout, then used a bat to tap the ball back down. A claim has circulated that the ball never made it over the ropes, and social media users even argued that SRH should have been awarded five penalty runs—pointing to Law 20.1 (Dead Ball) and Law 41 (Unfair Play).
Even allowing for the criticism, the key cricketing point is that it could not reasonably be treated as a deliberate interference with a fielder attempting to prevent a boundary. There was no fielder in the immediate vicinity, and the “unfair play” framework cannot be stretched to cover a scenario like this, where no direct attempt at stopping the ball was being thwarted.
At the moment of the incident, Lucknow also did not need a chase-altering score; with the scores level, the equation required only a single run. An umpire familiar with the specifics of the situation said there was no grounds to reverse the call and turn the boundary into something else. Still, the controversy has sparked fresh discussion about what SRH might do next.
There is chatter that Sunrisers could approach the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) regarding the episode. They may also include a couple of other cases they believe were handled incorrectly earlier in the season.
One of those concerns relates to Heinrich Klaasen’s dismissal in SRH’s opening match against Royal Challengers Bengaluru. Klaasen was ruled caught at the boundary line by Phil Salt off Romario Shepherd. SRH sources suggest they are not satisfied with how that wicket was adjudged.
Similarly, SRH are understood to be aggrieved by the way Abhishek Sharma was dismissed in their next game against Kolkata Knight Riders at Eden Gardens on April 2. The franchise’s displeasure extends beyond the two early matches, with additional questions raised about Varun Chakravarthy’s catch off Blessing Muzarabani at deep square leg.
While SRH do have the consolation of securing their second win, the larger context is that they also suffered a defeat on March 29 at the Chinnaswamy Stadium in Bengaluru. With results and dismissals not expected to be overturned, the current belief is that the franchise may still knock on the BCCI’s door—if they have not already.
