Water governance is a multi-level and multi-actor decision-making process. The multi-actors are grouped under formal and informal institutions, and they collectively determine how irrigation scheme infrastructure is operated or managed. Infrastructure and governance interactions are precursors to a fully functional irrigation scheme, consequently enhancing agricultural productivity, which subsequently boosts rural economies. Water control infrastructure is a critical component that determines management of canal operation and use, and therefore, has to be built within a water governance framework that considers multisector and multilevel actors. This paper sought to establish an operational and functional relationship between water control infrastructure and the existing water governance in Mooi River Irrigation Scheme (MRIS) and Tugela Ferry Irrigation Scheme (TFIS). The technology adopted was imposed rather than being setup in a participatory manner and only considered engineering and hydraulics and not human and institutional aspects. This study uses a fuzzy model to establish a link between water control infrastructure, i.e., its characteristics, operational requirements, on one hand, and the existing water governance frameworks in the respective irrigation schemes, on the other. The approach was based on Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP) and Fuzzy Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (FTOPSIS). The FAHP techniques was used to determine the fuzzy weight of the water control infrastructure aspects and the FTOPSIS was used to rank the water governance aspects, i.e., institutions, processes, procedures, rules and regulations, with respect to the infrastructure weights. Due to the high uncertainty and vagueness, the linguistic variable were expressed, as triangular fuzzy numbers. Questionnaires were administered to five irrigation experts from each scheme. The Closeness Coefficient (CCi) was used for ranking. The study revealed that TFIS had strong institutional setups (CCTFIS=0.18), as compared to MRIS (CCMRIS=0.13). However, TFIS showed a low ranking on rules and regulation (CCTFIS=0.14) as compared to MRIS (CCMRIS=0.20). Farmers’ unwillingness to pay water tariffs and contribute funds for operation and maintenance is illuminated under the rules and regulations governance pillar. A collective and participatory approach is required to improve on the water governance shortcomings. In consequent, this will improve the scheme performance.