Few understand cricket laws and playing conditions better than Simon Taufel. The former international umpire, once widely regarded as the best in the game, believes some modern rule changes have gone too far. Speaking to Cricbuzz, Taufel questioned the Impact Player rule, strategic timeouts, and the removal of the umpire’s soft signal, while also suggesting bold ideas to restore balance between bat and ball in T20 cricket.
Now serving as the head of match officials in the ILT20, Taufel remains closely involved in the game despite retiring from international umpiring in 2012. His role keeps him up to date on how modern cricket is played, officiated, and managed.
Simon Taufel on Impact Player Rule and Strategic Breaks
Taufel admitted he is not a fan of rules like the Impact Player in the IPL or the Super Sub in ILT20. According to him, these changes undermine the traditional value of playing XI vs XI and diminish the importance of all-rounders.
“My core cricket tells me I’d love to see 11 on 11,” Taufel said. “When a player only bats for two balls and doesn’t field, where is the value?”
He also raised concerns over strategic timeouts, saying they break the flow of the game. While T20 cricket is meant to be a fast three-hour contest, many matches now stretch well beyond that due to stoppages.
Taufel believes if tools like the stop clock are used, they should apply equally to both bowling and batting teams. He warned against changing rules just for marketing reasons, saying it makes the game harder to understand for fans, players, and umpires alike.
Despite his criticism, Taufel acknowledged that some changes, such as clarity on switch hits and boundary laws, have added value and improved athleticism in the sport.
Call for Balance Between Bat and Ball in T20 Cricket
One of Taufel’s most interesting suggestions was allowing one bowler to bowl five overs in a T20 match. His argument is simple: if a batter can stay for all 20 overs, why restrict bowlers to just four?
This, he feels, could help counter dominant batters and bring better balance to the contest. Taufel stressed that maintaining fairness between bat and ball is a constant focus of the MCC law subcommittee, of which he is a member.
He also backed the return of the umpire’s soft signal, especially in close catching decisions. According to Taufel, technology does not always give a clear answer. In such cases, the on-field umpire’s judgment should be the starting point, with technology only overturning it if there is clear evidence.
On DRS, Taufel admitted it is not perfect but still valuable. While umpires are right over 92% of the time, DRS helps lift accuracy closer to 98%, though at a cost of time and money.
