|

WPL 2025 Controversy: Third Umpire Under Fire After Three Shocking Run-Out Decisions in MI vs DC Last-Ball Thriller

Byadmin

The Women’s Premier League (WPL) 2025 witnessed a spectacular last-ball thriller on February 15, as Delhi Capitals (DC) edged out Mumbai Indians (MI) by two wickets at Vadodara’s Kotambi Stadium. However, what should have been a celebration of high-intensity cricket turned into a full-blown controversy, with the third umpire’s decisions coming under intense scrutiny after three contentious run-out calls in the final three overs.

The questionable decisions, all given not out by third umpire Gayathri Venugopalan, left MI players furious and sparked outrage among fans and cricket experts alike. With the WPL’s official playing conditions clearly outlining how LED bails should be interpreted in run-out scenarios, the inconsistent rulings have now put the integrity of decision-making under the scanner.

The Three Controversial Run-Out Calls – Did the Third Umpire Get It Wrong?

Shikha Pandey’s Survival (18th Over)

The first questionable decision came in the 18th over when a direct hit at the striker’s end appeared to have caught Shikha Pandey short of her crease.

🔎 Replays Showed:

  • Pandey’s bat was on the crease at the moment the LED bails illuminated.
  • The third umpire, after multiple replays, declared her not out, reportedly considering a later frame where Pandey’s bat was just inside the crease.
  • Adding insult to injury, the ball deflected off Pandey’s bat, allowing DC to steal an extra run, much to Harmanpreet Kaur’s frustration.

🚨 Reaction:

  • Harmanpreet Kaur was visibly furious and engaged in a heated exchange with the on-field umpires.
  • Commentators and fans expressed disbelief at how the LED light activation was ignored.

Radha Yadav’s Escape (19th Over)

The second debatable call came in the penultimate over, with Radha Yadav at the center of the drama.

🔎 Replays Showed:

  • Following a miscommunication with Nikki Prasad, Yadav attempted a desperate dive.
  • Wicketkeeper Yastika Bhatia dislodged the stumps, and replays showed Yadav’s bat hovering slightly above the ground when the LED bails lit up.
  • Despite clear evidence that Yadav was not grounded at the moment of illumination, the third umpire once again ruled in favor of the batter, allegedly waiting until the bails were completely dislodged.

🚨 Reaction:

  • MI players were shocked as Yadav immediately capitalized by smashing a six on the final ball of the over, shifting momentum in DC’s favor.
  • Social media erupted, questioning whether WPL’s playing conditions were even being followed.

Arundhati Reddy’s Last-Ball Escape (20th Over) – The Final Nail in the Coffin

The most controversial decision came on the final ball of the match, when Delhi Capitals needed two runs to win.

🔎 Replays Showed:

  • Arundhati Reddy sprinted for a desperate second run as MI attempted a run-out to force a Super Over.
  • The LED bails flashed just as Reddy’s bat was still on the crease, but the third umpire stayed consistent with the earlier calls and ruled her not out.
  • The decision sealed the match in Delhi’s favor, triggering immediate protests from MI players.

🚨 Reaction:

  • MI players surrounded the umpires, demanding an explanation.
  • Harmanpreet Kaur, known for her outspoken nature, was visibly frustrated but had no recourse.
  • Commentators and analysts criticized the inconsistency, with some calling it one of the worst umpiring performances in WPL history.

WPL Rules vs. Umpire’s Interpretation – Who’s Right?

The controversy boils down to a critical rule regarding run-out decisions in matches with LED stumps (Zing bails).

What the WPL Rules Say:

According to Rule 4.1 of Appendix D of WPL 2025’s playing conditions:

✅ “The moment at which the wicket has been put down shall be deemed to be the first frame in which the LED lights are illuminated.”
✅ “Subsequent frames showing the bail permanently removed from the top of the stumps shall not alter this decision.”

What the Third Umpire Did:

❌ Ignored the LED lights’ first flash and instead ruled based on when the bail completely left the stumps.
❌ This goes against WPL’s official playing conditions, sparking outrage over inconsistent umpiring standards.

Fallout: Will the WPL Take Action?

  • With the third umpire’s credibility under scrutiny, questions are now being raised about:
  • Whether the BCCI and WPL authorities will review the match and possibly sanction the umpire.
  • If MI will file an official protest over the three questionable decisions.
  • Whether this incident will lead to a review of DRS and umpiring protocols in WPL 2025.

👀 Possible Outcomes:

✅ BCCI may issue a clarification on the umpire’s decision-making process.
✅ Umpiring standards in WPL 2025 may face major scrutiny, with demands for better technology usage and review protocols.
✅ Teams could push for clearer DRS interpretations in future WPL matches.

Fans & Experts React – Umpiring Blunder or Biased Decisions?

The cricketing world has been divided over this controversy, with former cricketers, analysts, and fans weighing in.

💬 Harsha Bhogle: “If the rule clearly states that LED bails define the run-out moment, then the umpire got it wrong. No debate there.”

💬 Sanjay Manjrekar: “I don’t understand why the third umpire ignored the first flash of LED lights. This will be a talking point for the rest of the tournament.”

💬 Angry MI Fan on Twitter: “Three times in a row? If this happened in men’s cricket, there would be immediate action. WPL needs to fix its officiating!”

WPL 2025 – Will This Umpiring Controversy Overshadow the Tournament?

With WPL 2025 still in its early stages, this controversy has already taken center stage, raising concerns about:

  • Umpiring standards in the women’s game and whether they receive the same level of scrutiny and technology support as men’s cricket.
  • Whether MI’s potentially stolen victory will lead to changes in the way third umpires interpret LED bails.
  • How future matches will be officiated and whether teams will demand stricter DRS regulations.

With MI still having a strong squad and the WPL set for many more thrilling encounters, will this controversial game ignite a more competitive tournament, or will umpiring decisions continue to steal the limelight?

What’s Your Take?

  • Did the third umpire get it wrong, or was she following her own interpretation of the rules?
  • Should MI file an official complaint, and should the WPL take action against the umpire?
  • Do you think this controversy will impact future umpiring decisions in WPL 2025?

Similar Posts