Chennai Super Kings vs Mumbai Indians Match Scorecard – IPL 2026 (Match 33 & 44)
Chennai Super Kings defeated Mumbai Indians in both their IPL 2026 league stage encounters – by 103 runs at Wankhede Stadium on April 23 and by 8 wickets at MA Chidambaram Stadium on May 2. The Chennai Super Kings vs Mumbai Indians match scorecard from both fixtures tells a clear story: CSK were dominant at every phase of play, while MI struggled for consistency in batting and failed to defend totals with their bowling. This page covers full scorecards, playing XIs, phase-wise breakdowns, fall of wickets, partnership data, and verified match analysis for both matches.

Match Summary
Read More: Chennai Super Kings vs SunRisers Hyderabad match scorecard
The table below provides a quick reference for both CSK vs MI encounters in IPL 2026.
| Match | Venue | Date | CSK Score | MI Score | Result |
| Match 33 | Wankhede, Mumbai | April 23, 2026 | 207/6 (20 Ov) | 104 All Out (19 Ov) | CSK won by 103 runs |
| Match 44 | Chepauk, Chennai | May 2, 2026 | 160/2 (18.1 Ov) | 159/7 (20 Ov) | CSK won by 8 wickets |
CSK won five of their last six IPL encounters against MI heading into these fixtures. The 103-run loss in Match 33 was MI’s largest defeat against CSK in IPL history, surpassing their previous low of 136/8 at Dubai in 2021.
Match 33: MI vs CSK – April 23, 2026, Wankhede Stadium
The Chennai Super Kings vs Mumbai Indians match scorecard from Match 33 reflects one of the most one-sided El Clasico fixtures in recent IPL history. Sanju Samson‘s unbeaten century powered CSK to 207/6, and then Akeal Hosein’s four-wicket haul dismantled MI for 104 in 19 overs – their lowest total against CSK in IPL history.
Toss: Mumbai Indians won the toss and elected to bowl
Result: Chennai Super Kings won by 103 runs
Player of the Match: Sanju Samson – 101* (54 balls)
Playing XIs – Match 33
Chennai Super Kings: Sanju Samson (wk), Ruturaj Gaikwad (c), Sarfaraz Khan, Dewald Brevis, Shivam Dube, Kartik Sharma, Jamie Overton, Noor Ahmad, Anshul Kamboj, Gurjapneet Singh, Mukesh Choudhary
Impact Player (In): Akeal Hosein (replaced Kartik Sharma)
Mumbai Indians: Quinton de Kock (wk), Naman Dhir, Suryakumar Yadav, Hardik Pandya (c), Tilak Varma, Sherfane Rutherford, Mitchell Santner, Jasprit Bumrah, Krish Bhagat, AM Ghazanfar, Ashwani Kumar
Impact Player (In): Danish Malewar (replaced AM Ghazanfar)
CSK Batting Scorecard – 207/6 (20 Overs)
Sanju Samson’s 101* off 54 balls was the innings that made this total possible. He hit 9 fours and 6 sixes at a strike rate of 187.04 – his second century of IPL 2026 and fifth career IPL hundred.
| Batter | Dismissal | R | B | 4s | 6s | SR |
| Ruturaj Gaikwad (c) | b Ghazanfar | 22 | – | – | – | – |
| Sanju Samson (wk) | Not Out | 101 | 54 | 9 | 6 | 187.04 |
| Sarfaraz Khan | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Dewald Brevis | – | 21 | – | – | – | – |
| Shivam Dube | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Kartik Sharma | – | 18 | – | – | – | – |
| Jamie Overton | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Akeal Hosein (Impact) | Not Out | 22* | – | – | – | – |
| Extras | – | |||||
| Total | 207/6 | 20 Ov | 10.35 RR |

CSK Phase-Wise Batting – Match 33:
| Phase | Overs | Runs | Wickets | RPO |
| Powerplay | 0–6 | 72 | 2 | 12.00 |
| Middle + Death | 7–20 | 135 | 4 | 9.64 |
CSK’s powerplay score of 72/2 was the highest powerplay total across both fixtures. Despite losing two early wickets, Samson took control from the first over he faced and never released that control. The Samson–Kartik Sharma partnership of 43 runs and the late Samson–Hosein stand took CSK comfortably past 200.
MI Bowling vs CSK – Match 33
| Bowler | O | M | R | W | ER |
| AM Ghazanfar | 4.0 | 0 | 25 | 2 | 6.25 |
| Ashwani Kumar | – | 0 | 37 | 2 | – |
| Jasprit Bumrah | – | – | – | 0 | – |
| Others | – | – | – | – | – |
Ghazanfar’s 2/25 was MI’s most economical bowling effort, but the damage was done in the death overs where Samson accelerated to finish unbeaten on 101. No MI bowler was able to contain the run flow once Samson reached the 70s.
MI Batting Scorecard – 104 All Out (19 Overs)
MI’s top order disintegrated inside three overs. Three wickets fell for 11 runs before the innings had any shape. Tilak Varma (37) and Suryakumar Yadav (35) briefly stabilised the innings, but once they fell in quick succession, MI’s chase was over as a contest.
| Batter | Dismissal | R | B | 4s | 6s | SR |
| Quinton de Kock (wk) | b Choudhary | 7 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 70.00 |
| Danish Malewar (Impact) | c Samson b Hosein | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 |
| Naman Dhir | b Hosein | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 |
| Suryakumar Yadav | c Khan b Hosein | 35 | 30 | 5 | 0 | 116.67 |
| Tilak Varma | b Hosein | 37 | 29 | 5 | 0 | 127.59 |
| Hardik Pandya (c) | c Choudhary b Ahmad | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 50.00 |
| Sherfane Rutherford | c Kamboj b Ahmad | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 |
| Shardul Thakur (Impact) | c Brevis b Kamboj | 6 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 50.00 |
| Krish Bhagat | c Singh b Overton | 7 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 46.67 |
| Ashwani Kumar | Not Out | 1 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 16.67 |
| Jasprit Bumrah | c Samson b Singh | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 40.00 |
| Extras | 8 | |||||
| Total | 104/10 | 19.0 Ov | 5.47 RR |
CSK Bowling vs MI – Match 33
Akeal Hosein’s impact player appearance produced one of the finest T20 bowling spells in this IPL season – 4 wickets for just 17 runs in 4 overs at an economy of 4.25.
| Bowler | O | M | R | W | ER |
| Akeal Hosein (Impact) | 4.0 | 1 | 17 | 4 | 4.25 |
| Mukesh Choudhary | 4.0 | 0 | 31 | 1 | 7.75 |
| Anshul Kamboj | 3.0 | 0 | 10 | 1 | 3.33 |
| Noor Ahmad | 4.0 | 0 | 23 | 2 | 5.75 |
| Jamie Overton | 2.0 | 0 | 14 | 1 | 7.00 |
| Gurjapneet Singh | 2.0 | 0 | 7 | 1 | 3.50 |
Fall of Wickets – MI Innings, Match 33
| # | Batter | Score | Over |
| 1 | Danish Malewar | 7/1 | 1.0 |
| 2 | Quinton de Kock | 7/2 | 1.5 |
| 3 | Naman Dhir | 11/3 | 2.3 |
| 4 | Tilak Varma | 84/4 | 11.5 |
| 5 | Hardik Pandya | 85/5 | 12.1 |
| 6 | Sherfane Rutherford | 85/6 | 12.2 |
| 7 | Suryakumar Yadav | 87/7 | 13.1 |
| 8 | Krish Bhagat | 100/8 | 17.0 |
| 9 | Shardul Thakur | 100/9 | 17.1 |
| 10 | Jasprit Bumrah | 104/10 | 19.0 |
Three wickets fell in three deliveries between overs 12.1 and 13.1 – the score moved from 84/4 to 87/7 in the space of five balls. That five-ball collapse ended any remaining chance MI had of a competitive total.
Phase-Wise Scoring – MI Chase, Match 33
| Phase | Overs | Runs | Wickets | RPO |
| Powerplay | 0–6 | 29 | 3 | 4.83 |
| Middle Overs | 7–13 | 58 | 4 | 8.29 |
| Death Overs | 14–19 | 17 | 3 | 2.83 |
Chasing 208, MI were 11/3 in the third over. The required run rate crossed 18 per over before the fourth over began – a rate no T20 side has consistently managed from that position in IPL history.
Match 44: CSK vs MI – May 2, 2026, MA Chidambaram Stadium
When reviewing the Chennai Super Kings vs Mumbai Indians match scorecard from Match 44, the result looks closer on paper – one run separated the two sides’ totals. But the manner of CSK’s chase, completed with 11 balls to spare, showed the gap in batting quality. Ruturaj Gaikwad and Kartik Sharma shared an unbroken 98-run partnership that made the target look straightforward.
Toss: Mumbai Indians won the toss and elected to bat
Result: Chennai Super Kings won by 8 wickets (11 balls remaining)
Player of the Match: Ruturaj Gaikwad – 67* (48 balls)
Playing XIs – Match 44
Chennai Super Kings: Sanju Samson (wk), Ruturaj Gaikwad (c), Urvil Patel, Dewald Brevis, Shivam Dube, Jamie Overton, Prashant Veer, Ramakrishna Ghosh, Noor Ahmad, Anshul Kamboj, Mukesh Choudhary
Impact Player (In): Kartik Sharma (replaced Mukesh Choudhary)
Mumbai Indians: Ryan Rickelton (wk), Will Jacks, Naman Dhir, Suryakumar Yadav, Tilak Varma, Hardik Pandya (c), Robin Minz, Krish Bhagat, Trent Boult, Jasprit Bumrah, AM Ghazanfar
Impact Player (In): Raghu Sharma (replaced Robin Minz)

MI Batting Scorecard – 159/7 (20 Overs)
MI’s innings was held together by Naman Dhir’s 57 off 37 balls – the highest score across all MI batters in both matches. Ryan Rickelton gave MI a fast start with 37 off 24, but the middle order could not push MI beyond 159 once Kamboj and Noor Ahmad took control.
| Batter | Dismissal | R | B | 4s | 6s | SR |
| Ryan Rickelton (wk) | b Noor Ahmad | 37 | 24 | – | – | – |
| Will Jacks | b Kamboj | – | – | – | – | – |
| Naman Dhir | – | 57 | 37 | – | – | – |
| Suryakumar Yadav | – | 21 | – | – | – | – |
| Tilak Varma | b Noor Ahmad | 5 | – | – | – | – |
| Hardik Pandya (c) | – | 18 | – | – | – | – |
| Raghu Sharma (Impact) | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Krish Bhagat | Not Out | 3 | – | – | – | – |
| Extras | – | |||||
| Total | 159/7 | 20 Ov | 7.95 RR |
CSK Bowling vs MI – Match 44
Anshul Kamboj (3/32) and Noor Ahmad (2/26) were the two match-defining bowlers for CSK in this fixture. Kamboj struck in the second over with the wicket of Will Jacks, denying MI their planned opening platform. Jamie Overton’s 1/23 in 4 overs at an economy of 5.75 was the most economical full-quota spell of the match.
| Bowler | O | M | R | W | ER |
| Anshul Kamboj | 4.0 | 0 | 32 | 3 | 8.00 |
| Noor Ahmad | 4.0 | 0 | 26 | 2 | 6.50 |
| Jamie Overton | 4.0 | 0 | 23 | 1 | 5.75 |
| Prashant Veer | – | – | – | – | – |
| Ramakrishna Ghosh | – | – | – | – | – |
MI Phase-Wise Scoring – Match 44
Read More: Nepal national cricket team vs Canada national cricket team timeline
| Phase | Overs | Runs | Wickets | RPO |
| Powerplay | 0–6 | 57 | 1 | 9.50 |
| Middle Overs | 7–15 | 65 | 4 | 7.22 |
| Death Overs | 16–20 | 37 | 2 | 7.40 |
MI’s powerplay of 57/1 was their most competitive phase across both matches. However, four wickets in the middle overs for 65 runs – with Noor Ahmad and Kamboj doing the damage – pulled MI back from what looked like a 175+ total in the 12th over.
Fall of Wickets – MI Innings, Match 44
| # | Batter | Score | Over |
| 1 | Will Jacks | 1/1 | 1.2 |
| 2 | Ryan Rickelton | 59/2 | 6.4 |
| 3–7 | Middle and Lower Order | 59–159 | 7.0–20.0 |
The early removal of Will Jacks in the second ball of the second over was the first turning point of Match 44. It denied MI their planned overseas opener combination and forced a reshuffle that disrupted batting momentum.
CSK Chase Batting – 160/2 (18.1 Overs)
Ruturaj Gaikwad’s unbeaten 67 off 48 balls was a measured, tactical knock – not flashy, but exactly what the chase required. Urvil Patel’s 24 off just 12 balls at a strike rate of 200 was the explosion that set up the acceleration. Kartik Sharma then anchored the finish with a maiden IPL half-century.

| Batter | Dismissal | R | B | 4s | 6s | SR |
| Sanju Samson (wk) | c Rickelton b Bumrah | 11 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 122.22 |
| Ruturaj Gaikwad (c) | Not Out | 67 | 48 | 5 | 2 | 139.58 |
| Urvil Patel | b Ghazanfar | 24 | 12 | 2 | 2 | 200.00 |
| Kartik Sharma (Impact) | Not Out | 54 | 40 | 4 | 3 | 135.00 |
| Extras | 4 | |||||
| Total | 160/2 | 18.1 Ov | 8.81 RR |
MI Bowling vs CSK – Match 44
Jasprit Bumrah took the only wicket that mattered – Sanju Samson for 11 – but conceded 20 runs in 3 overs at an economy of 6.67, above his career economy of 7.33. No other MI bowler maintained control once Gaikwad and Kartik Sharma settled.
| Bowler | O | M | R | W | ER |
| Jasprit Bumrah | 3.0 | 0 | 20 | 1 | 6.67 |
| Trent Boult | 3.1 | 0 | 37 | 0 | 11.68 |
| AM Ghazanfar | 4.0 | 0 | 40 | 1 | 10.00 |
| Raghu Sharma (Impact) | 4.0 | 0 | 24 | 0 | 6.00 |
| Hardik Pandya | 2.0 | 0 | 17 | 0 | 8.50 |
| Krish Bhagat | 2.0 | 0 | 22 | 0 | 11.00 |
Trent Boult conceded 37 runs in 3.1 overs at an economy of 11.68 – the worst bowling performance of either match across all bowlers. Combined with Ghazanfar’s 1/40 in 4 overs, MI had no pressure option outside Bumrah after the fifth over.
Fall of Wickets – CSK Chase, Match 44
| # | Batter | Score | Over |
| 1 | Sanju Samson | 13/1 | 2.0 |
| 2 | Urvil Patel | 62/2 | 5.4 |
CSK lost both wickets inside six overs yet still posted 62/2 in the powerplay – a powerplay total higher than MI’s despite being two down. That reading of the chase was the difference.
Partnership Analysis – CSK Chase, Match 44
| Partnership | Batters | Runs | Balls |
| 1st Wicket | Samson & Gaikwad | 13 | 12 |
| 2nd Wicket | Gaikwad & Urvil Patel | 49 | 22 |
| 3rd Wicket (unbroken) | Gaikwad & Kartik Sharma | 98 | 75 |
The 49-run second-wicket stand off 22 balls brought the required run rate below 8 per over inside six overs. The unbroken 98-run third-wicket stand between Ruturaj Gaikwad and Kartik Sharma then sealed the match with 11 balls to spare – the most decisive passage of play in Match 44.
CSK Chase Phase-Wise – Match 44
| Phase | Overs | Runs | Wickets | RPO |
| Powerplay | 0–6 | 62 | 2 | 10.33 |
| Middle Overs | 7–18.1 | 98 | 0 | – |
Complete Stats: Both Matches Combined
Top Run Scorers
| Player | Team | Match | R | B | SR |
| Sanju Samson | CSK | Match 33 | 101* | 54 | 187.04 |
| Ruturaj Gaikwad | CSK | Match 44 | 67* | 48 | 139.58 |
| Kartik Sharma | CSK | Match 44 | 54* | 40 | 135.00 |
| Naman Dhir | MI | Match 44 | 57 | 37 | – |
| Tilak Varma | MI | Match 33 | 37 | 29 | 127.59 |
| Ryan Rickelton | MI | Match 44 | 37 | 24 | – |
| Suryakumar Yadav | MI | Match 33 | 35 | 30 | 116.67 |
| Urvil Patel | CSK | Match 44 | 24 | 12 | 200.00 |
| Akeal Hosein | CSK | Match 33 | 22* | – | – |
Top Wicket Takers
| Bowler | Team | Match | O | R | W | ER |
| Akeal Hosein | CSK | Match 33 | 4.0 | 17 | 4 | 4.25 |
| Anshul Kamboj | CSK | Match 44 | 4.0 | 32 | 3 | 8.00 |
| Noor Ahmad | CSK | Match 33 | 4.0 | 23 | 2 | 5.75 |
| Noor Ahmad | CSK | Match 44 | 4.0 | 26 | 2 | 6.50 |
| AM Ghazanfar | MI | Match 33 | 4.0 | 25 | 2 | 6.25 |
| Anshul Kamboj | CSK | Match 33 | 3.0 | 10 | 1 | 3.33 |
| Jamie Overton | CSK | Match 44 | 4.0 | 23 | 1 | 5.75 |
| Gurjapneet Singh | CSK | Match 33 | 2.0 | 7 | 1 | 3.50 |
| Jasprit Bumrah | MI | Match 44 | 3.0 | 20 | 1 | 6.67 |
Head-to-Head Record: CSK vs MI – IPL 2026
CSK dominated both meetings in IPL 2026, winning the Chennai Super Kings vs Mumbai Indians match scorecard battle across every phase.
| Fixture | Venue | Toss Winner | Result | Margin |
| Match 33 | Wankhede, Mumbai | MI | CSK won | 103 runs |
| Match 44 | Chepauk, Chennai | MI | CSK won | 8 wickets |
MI won the toss in both fixtures and still lost both matches – a data point that reflects CSK’s adaptability regardless of conditions or match position.
Key Tactical Takeaways
How CSK Controlled Both Matches
The Chennai Super Kings vs Mumbai Indians match scorecard across both fixtures reveals a consistent pattern in CSK’s game plan. Powerplay bowling discipline was CSK’s primary weapon in Match 33. Three wickets in 2.3 overs reduced MI to 11/3, removing de Kock, Malewar, and Dhir before the innings had any foundation. Hosein, Kamboj, and Ahmad were all used in rotations designed to exploit the Wankhede pitch early. In Match 44, CSK’s bowling was more measured – conceding 57/1 in the powerplay – but Kamboj’s second-over wicket (Will Jacks) denied MI their planned start. The middle-over phase then became CSK’s kill zone, with four wickets falling for 65 runs between overs 7 and 15. CSK’s batting approach in both matches was chase-structured. In March 33, Samson anchored and accelerated. In Match 44, Gaikwad and Patel attacked the powerplay despite two early wickets, bringing the rate down for Kartik Sharma to finish.
MI’s Recurring Problems
MI recorded top-order collapses below 40/3 in both their powerplay phases across the two matches – 29/3 at Wankhede and, indirectly, 1/1 in the second ball at Chepauk disrupting their batting order. No MI batter between positions 4 and 7 scored more than 21 runs in either of the two middle-order phases where stabilisation was required. The team’s reliance on one or two individual performances – Samson at Wankhede, Dhir at Chepauk – meant that when the top order failed, no secondary tier was available to rebuild.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs):
Q1: What was the result of CSK vs MI in IPL 2026?
A1: CSK won both matches. They beat MI by 103 runs at Wankhede (Match 33, April 23, 2026) and by 8 wickets at Chepauk (Match 44, May 2, 2026).
Q2: What was the full Chennai Super Kings vs Mumbai Indians match scorecard in Match 33?
A2: CSK scored 207/6 in 20 overs, led by Sanju Samson’s 101* off 54 balls. MI were bowled out for 104 in 19 overs. Akeal Hosein took 4/17 for CSK.
Q3: What was the full scorecard of CSK vs MI Match 44?
A3: MI scored 159/7 in 20 overs, with Naman Dhir top-scoring on 57. CSK chased 160 in 18.1 overs, losing just 2 wickets. Ruturaj Gaikwad scored 67* and Kartik Sharma 54*. Anshul Kamboj took 3/32.
Q4: Who was the Player of the Match in CSK vs MI Match 33?
A4: Sanju Samson won Player of the Match for his unbeaten 101 off 54 balls – 9 fours, 6 sixes, strike rate 187.04.
Q5: Who was the Player of the Match in CSK vs MI Match 44?
A5: Ruturaj Gaikwad won Player of the Match for his unbeaten 67 off 48 balls (SR 139.58).
Q6: What was MI’s lowest total against CSK in IPL history?
A6: 104 all out at Wankhede in Match 33 of IPL 2026 is MI’s lowest total against CSK in IPL history, surpassing their previous low of 136/8 at Dubai in 2021.
Q7: What were Jasprit Bumrah’s bowling figures in Match 44?
A7: Bumrah took 1/20 in 3 overs at an economy of 6.67 in Match 44 at Chepauk.
Q8: What was the Ruturaj–Kartik Sharma partnership in Match 44?
A8: Ruturaj Gaikwad and Kartik Sharma shared an unbroken 98-run third-wicket partnership off 75 balls, sealing the chase with 11 balls to spare.
Q9: What were Akeal Hosein’s figures in MI vs CSK Match 33?
A9: Hosein, playing as an impact sub, took 4 wickets for 17 runs in 4 overs at an economy of 4.25 – the best bowling figures across both IPL 2026 CSK vs MI matches.
Q10: Did CSK vs MI results affect the IPL 2026 playoff race?
A10: Yes. CSK’s back-to-back wins kept their playoff chances active, while MI’s two losses significantly reduced their qualification prospects for IPL 2026.