Lucknow Super Giants’ (LSG) winning boundary against Sunrisers Hyderabad (SRH) in an IPL 2026 match was hit back into the field of play by the batter who was supposed to be the next man in, Avesh Khan. Should the team have been penalised?
LSG were five down and needed just a run off the last two deliveries to seal the game against SRH. Avesh Khan, presumably the next batter in, was padded up and standing just outside the boundary ropes when Rishabh Pant hit the match-winning boundary.
But as the ball was about to cross the boundary, Avesh, seemingly in celebration, hit the ball back into the field of play with his bat before it could cross the ropes. The act wasn’t considered serious enough by the on-field umpires; LSG got the four runs and won the match by five wickets to register their first victory of the 2026 campaign.
However, questions were raised over whether the umpires should have penalised LSG, with some suggesting a five-run penalty and even a one-match ban for Avesh. A five-run penalty would have seen Lucknow left needing six runs off two deliveries. But the umpires were right to not sanction Avesh and LSG.
vs
Match 10, Sunrisers Hyderabad vs Lucknow Super Giants
What do the laws say about Avesh Khan's act?
Clause 19.2.3 of the IPL 2026 playing conditions, which comes under ‘identifying and marking the boundary’, clearly states that “if an unauthorized person enters the playing arena and handles the ball, the umpire at the bowler’s end shall be the sole judge of whether the boundary allowance should be scored or the ball be treated as still in play or called dead ball if a batter is liable to be out as a result of the unauthorized person handling the ball.”
Under a similar law, India were awarded just two runs, instead of four, when a ball boy stepped onto the field to collect the ball, during an
ODI against the West Indies in 2014.
Moreover, clause 41.2, which deals with ‘unfair action’, states that "the umpires shall be the sole judges of fair and unfair play. If an umpire considers that any action by a player, not covered in the clause, is unfair, he/she shall call and signal Dead ball, if appropriate, as soon as it becomes clear that the call will not disadvantage the non-offending side, and report the matter to the other umpire.”
But in this case, the umpire didn’t call it a dead ball as there was no fielder in the vicinity and the fielding side weren’t at a disadvantage here, with the ball having cleared the mid-off fielder easily and being on its way over the boundary.
Moreover, if the umpires had deemed it an ‘unfair action’, the most they could have done was to “summon the offending player’s captain and issue a first and final warning which shall apply to all members of the team for the remainder of the match, and warn the offending player’s captain that any further such offence by any member of his team shall result in the award of five penalty runs to the opposing team.”
Only a repetition of the act, by any player of the offending player’s team, would have led to a five-run penalty. Therefore, the umpires were right not to penalise LSG immediately, and also not to issue a warning. The same was explained by former international umpire Anil Chaudhary in a video he posted on social media.
Follow Wisden for all cricket updates, including live scores, match stats, quizzes and more. Stay up to date with the latest cricket news, player updates, team standings, match highlights, video analysis and live match odds.
