Why Was Tilak Verma 'Retired Out'? Hardik Pandya Breaks Silence After Controversial Call in MI vs LSG Thriller

The IPL 2025 clash between Mumbai Indians and Lucknow Super Giants delivered high-octane drama—and one decision that left fans stunned. With just 7 balls remaining and 24 runs needed, MI made a bold move: Tilak Varma was retired out while batting on 25 off 23 balls. Mitchell Santner was sent in as a pinch-hitter, but the gamble failed, and Mumbai lost the match by 12 runs.

This made Tilak only the fourth player in IPL history to be retired out, sparking a wave of questions and criticism aimed at Mumbai’s strategy.

What Really Happened?

Tilak had been struggling to find boundaries during a crucial phase of the chase. With the equation becoming steeper, MI opted to pull him out before the final ball of the 19th over. However, the decision backfired. In the 20th over, bowled by Avesh Khan, Mumbai could only manage 12 runs—despite Hardik Pandya starting the over with a six.

Oddly enough, Hardik did not rotate strike for the remaining five balls, further fueling criticism.

Hardik’s Explanation: “We Needed Boundaries”

Speaking after the match, MI captain Hardik Pandya defended the move, saying:

“We needed boundaries and they weren’t coming. There are some days when you try but it doesn’t happen. That was the thinking behind the decision.”

While it was a calculated move, many former cricketers and fans questioned the timing and the logic, especially when MI still had power-hitters like Hardik and Santner on the field.

IPL's Rare ‘Retired Out’ List Gets a New Member

Tilak Verma has now joined a rare list of players who’ve been retired out in IPL:

• R Ashwin (2022 vs LSG)
• Atharva Tayde (2023 vs DC)
• Sai Sudharsan (2023 vs MI)
• Tilak Verma (2025 vs LSG)

Match Recap: LSG vs MI

• LSG: 203/8 (Marsh 60, Markram 53 | Hardik 5/36)
• MI: 191/5 (Suryakumar 67 | Avesh, Shardul, Akash Deep, Rathi – 1 wicket each)
• Result: Lucknow Super Giants won by 12 runs.

Mumbai’s unconventional move might have been bold—but in the end, it didn’t pay off. Whether it was a tactical masterstroke gone wrong or an over-engineered blunder remains up for debate.