Taufel calls for more focus on balance between bat and ball

Few know cricket laws and playing conditions better than Simon Taufel. The former elite umpire says he does not like some modern rules, including the Impact Player rule and strategic breaks. He advocates for the return of the umpire soft signal and believes it would be fair if one bowler were allowed to bowl five overs in a T20 innings to better balance bat and ball. Now head of match officials in the ILT20, Taufel explained his thoughts in an interview.

How has been your association with ILT20?

The league is fascinating. Developing cricket in the UAE is a wonderful project. There's a real need here for officiating expertise and a thirst for knowledge among local umpires. I see it as an opportunity to help their development and be part of a tournament with substantial growth potential.

So you have managed to keep yourself involved in the game even after retirement.

It keeps me contemporary. I officiate matches and support other umpires technically. From a referee's point of view, it keeps me current on playing conditions, training, and development.

Since you retired from international cricket, how do you look at the rules and playing conditions changing over the years?

The game continues to evolve. There's a proliferation of T20 and T10 cricket. Scoring rates are up across formats, and schedules are incredibly tight. Every tournament is looking for something unique, leading to a lot of tweaking. There's a real danger sometimes that if it isn't broke, why are we fixing it? It's very unusual for playing conditions to remain the same for two seasons in a row, which is challenging for players, fans, and officials.

Are you comfortable with those changes?

Not all changes are good. Sometimes we change things just for the sake of a marketing gimmick. We must be careful because if fans don't understand, it makes the game harder to follow. Playing conditions need to add value.

We need to create an environment where players can express themselves. Some changes, like those around the switch hit or boundary laws, are great. But whether it's laws or playing conditions, it's crucial to focus on the balance between bat and ball.

My core cricket tells me I'd love to see XI on XI. I love the strategy of 11 on 11, not changed by an impact player who might only bat for two balls and doesn't field. I like traditional aspects.

Timeouts certainly break the momentum. Maybe that deserves a rethink. Additions like the stop clock to speed up play are good, but maybe it should apply to batters too. T20 is designed to be a three-hour game, but in some places, it goes for four hours plus. We want fast, exciting cricket without stoppages, which seems counterintuitive.

You sit on the MCC Cricket Committee. Any changes to the playing conditions you envisage?

The lawmakers try to keep up with inventive players looking for loopholes. We're always focused on maintaining the balance between bat and ball, keeping up with modern cricket, and empowering umpires. A new edition of the laws comes out in 2026 with several changes.

Any playing condition that you think has outlived its course?

It doesn't matter what I think individually. What's important is the collective intelligence of a diverse committee. My focus is on match officials: providing resources and support programmes to allow the best umpires and referees to come through.

Any changes that you want introduced?

Personally, I'd love to see bat and ball be more equalised in limited-overs cricket. In T20, I'd love to see one bowler allowed a fifth over. If a batter can be out there for the whole innings, why are we limiting all bowlers to four overs? Maybe give one bowler an extra over to even up a dominant batter versus a dominant bowler. I'd like to see how we can rebalance the scales.

Your thoughts on DRS? It has been in the news of late.

DRS is not foolproof. On average, players get reviews right 25% of the time. Umpires get it right 92-93% of the time. DRS raises that to 97-98%. It doesn't get us to 100%. It's a mix of technology and humans. It gets more decisions right, but at a financial and time cost.

One great addition in the ILT20 this season is the smart replay feature. We use two specialist TV umpires who get very efficient, reducing interruptions and keeping the focus on play.

Mitchell Starc says the ICC should provide DRS technology.

I'd love to see the ICC own the technology, rather than it being supplied and paid for by broadcasters. If the ICC owned and controlled it, there would be more accountability. Currently, there are more third-party people responsible for decision-making with no accountability.

I'd certainly like to see the umpires' soft signal come back. I'd like umpires to provide a starting point for fair catches and obstruction.

Are you sure you want the soft signal reinstated? Any particular reason?

Technology doesn't always give us a clear answer. If a camera replay is missed or isn't clear, I'd love umpires to say, 'We believe that's out,' or 'We believe it's not out,' as a starting point. If technology conclusively shows the on-field umpire is wrong, we change it. Otherwise, we stick with the on-field decision.