The Pakistan Super League has witnessed one of the most dramatic finishes to a match in recent memory, with an unbelievable final-ball blunder proving costly.
Karachi Kings were taking on Lahore Qalandars in the Twenty20 competition on Tuesday when the match ended in chaos.
BITTERSWEET: Rabada rises to No.1 Test bowler ranking
Batting second, Lahore needed three runs off the final ball to win, but Sohail Akhtar fell agonisingly short when he was caught on the long-on boundary.
Karachi players ran onto the field in celebration, but received a rude shock when replays revealed that Usman Khan had inexplicably bowled a no-ball.
With the match on the line and one delivery remaining, why on earth would a bowler get that close to the front line?
Not to mention the fact that the non-striker was so far out of his crease that Khan could have easily affected a Mankad.
Khan was forced to re-bowl the final delivery, but adding to the drama was confusion around whether or not Lahore had completed a run before Akhtar was caught, and which batsman was supposed to face the free hit, given that they had crossed in the pandemonium.
After several minutes of discussions, umpires eventually awarded Lahore a single run for the no-ball, but didn't reward the second run they ran.
They also deemed that non-striker Gulraiz Sadaf had to face the free hit, leaving Lahore captain Brendon McCullum scratching his head on the sidelines.
When the final delivery was finally re-bowled, the Lahore batsmen scampered through for a single but Sadaf was run-out attempting a second, leaving scores level and forcing a super over.
Adding to Khan's embarrassment, Lahore went on to claim victory in the super over.
However the controversial final-ball ruling left players confused.
"I still don't understand the rule," McCullum said post-match.
Sri Lankan legend Kumar Sangakkara took to Twitter to express his displeasure.
But as it turns out, the umpires actually made the correct decision.
Under ICC rules, if a no ball is called on a third umpire review, "the batting side shall benefit from the reversal of the dismissal and the one run for the no ball, but shall not benefit from any runs that may subsequently have accrued from the delivery had the on-field umpire originally called a no ball."
"Where the batsmen crossed while the ball was in the air before being caught, the batsmen shall remain at the same ends as if the striker had been dismissed, but no runs shall be credited to the striker even if one (or more) runs were completed prior to the catch being taken."