Saeed Ajmal’s comments on Sachin Tendulkar’s controversial LBW decision from the 2011 World Cup semi-final have once again brought one of the most controversial moments in India-Pakistan cricket into the spotlight. It happened in Mohali during the big-ticket clash between the arch-rivals on March 30, 2011.
Sachin Tendulkar survives an important LBW decision.
India was chasing Pakistan's 261 when Tendulkar met Ajmal. With India under pressure, Ajmal delivered a ball that struck Tendulkar in front of the stumps after the batter tried to play it on the leg side.
On-field umpire Ian Gould gave Tendulkar out LBW. It looked like a solid decision. The ball struck the batter around the off-and-middle stump area. Tendulkar made the decision to review the decision and spoke to Gautam Gambhir on it after the match.
We have now seen that the review finally overturned the on-field decision. Ball tracking indicated that the delivery would have missed the leg stump.
Ajmal Still Believes Tendulkar Was Out
Ajmal has recalled the dismissal repeatedly and said he thought he had dismissed Tendulkar. He still keeps the controversy alive years after the match.
The Pakistani spinner has questioned how the technology showed the ball missing the stumps despite what he believed was a strong LBW appeal.
The episode is especially memorable since Tendulkar had already survived another review earlier in his innings so his escape against Ajmal was one of the most talked-about moments of the match.
What actually happened with the Review?
The match record is not in evidence of the third umpire intentionally changing the ball's course.
Instead, the review relied on ball tracking technology to determine where Ajmal’s delivery was expected to go after hitting Tendulkar’s pad. The technology indicated that the ball would pass outside the leg stump, meaning the LBW decision could not stand.
ESPNcricinfo’s retrospective on the incident also notes that the ball pitched outside and was projected to turn past the leg stump.
Gautam Gambhir was part of the discussion
Gautam Gambhir was at the non-striker's end when Tendulkar received the original LBW decision. Contemporary reporting confirms that Tendulkar discussed the review with Gambhir before choosing to challenge Gould's decision.
The review was ultimately the deciding factor as Tendulkar continued his innings after he was given a second chance.
Tendulkar's Fortune Continued in Mohali.
Tendulkar later scored 85 runs in India's win and played the role of a leader in India's chase. India eventually defeated Pakistan by 29 runs and went on to the World Cup final.
The match is still one of the defining India-Pakistan encounters in World Cup history, and Tendulkar surviving against Ajmal is still remembered as one of its most dramatic moments.
Saeed Ajmal:~ "Gautam told Sachin, 'You’re out', but Sachin took a review. The third umpire deliberately changed the direction of the ball. This was unfair to me." 🤯
— 𝗬𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗿_𝟵𝟯 (@Boom_093) September 11, 2026
Ajmal:- “When we had India under pressure, Sachin tried to flick my ball and was given LBW. The umpire gave him… pic.twitter.com/3kSMIC8ean
A Controversy That Refuses to Disappear
More than a decade later, Ajmal's belief that Tendulkar should have been dismissed shows how controversial the decision remains from Pakistan's perspective.
And while Ajmal's disagreement with the decision is well documented, claims that the third umpire deliberately manipulated the ball trajectory or that the ICC favoured the BCCI are allegations, not facts. The official outcome of the review was based on the available ball-tracking technology.
What happened?
The incident took place on March 30, 2011, during the ICC Cricket World Cup semi-final between India and Pakistan at the Punjab Cricket Association IS Bindra Stadium in Mohali.
The viral claim we hear today refers to a 15-year-old cricket incident, not a new one. The current match reports and later cricket retrospectives tell the same story: Ajmal bowled to Tendulkar, Gould gave an LBW decision, Tendulkar reviewed it, and the decision was overturned when the technology indicated the ball was missing the stumps.
