The strange walk of Isehan Kishan during the Srh vs Mi crash in Hyderabad has caused confusion and criticism for arbitrary decisions.
In a strange moment during the IPL 2025 clash between the Sunrisers Hyderabad and the Mumbai Indians at the Rajiv Gandhi International Stadium, Isehan Kishan was fired under unusual circumstances, asking questions about the decision making of the batter and the management of the referee of the situation.
In front of Deepak Chahaha, Isehan tried to look at the side of the leg. The ball seemed to miss the bat, and the Wicktkeeper Ryan Rickelton picked it up cleanly. There was no appeal of the bowling player or the Wicktkeeper, and the referee in the Vinod Seshan field seemed ready to point out a broad.
However, in an amazing turn of events, Kishan began leaving the field, apparently recognizing an advantage. Seeing this, the referee changed his mind and raised his finger, even though there was no appeal or review.
The repetitions told a different story. The Ultragege showed no peak or deviation, and clearly indicated that there was no contact between the bat and the ball.
Look at Ilan Kishan’s dismissal drama
What does the rules book say?
According to MCC 31.7 law:
“A referee will intervene if he is satisfied that a hitter, without having been delivered, has left the wickt under a malpiddle of being out. The referee who intervenes will call and indicates a dead ball … and remind the batter.”
This law is specifically designed for situations in which a hitter mistakenly believes that they are outside and leaves. The referee has the authority to remember the batter, provided that the next ball has not been delivered and the tickets have not finished.
Also read:
In the case of Kishan, this intervention never arrived. The referee did not call the dead ball or remembered the batter, despite the fact that the repetitions showed that there was no advantage and the dismissal had not been actively appealed.
The dismissal caused a collapse of Sunrisers Hyderabad, who fell to 13/4 in 4.1 overs. Although Heinrich Klaasen (71 of 44) and Abhinav Manhahar (43 of 37) helped rebuild entries to 143/8, the incident eclipsed much of the first entries.
The former players and fans expressed criticism, questioning why the referee did not follow the protocol and why Isehan decided to walk even though the DRS were available.
Did the referee blame?
Technically, yes: by the letter of the law, the referee should have proceeded with his extensive call or, seeing the route, intervened under Law 31.7 and remembered Kishan. The decision to declare it, despite any appeal or evidence, was inconsistent with the rules book.
For more updates, follow Cricxtey on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Telegram and YouTube.