In his Editor’s notes in the 2025 edition of Wisden Cricketer’s Almanack, Wisden Almanack editor Lawrence Booth criticised and proposed changes to the World Test Championship.
In his editor’s notes, Booth explained why he called the World Test Championship “a shambles masquerading as a showpiece”.
“With teams playing a different number of matches against a different set of opponents, it requires a calculator to rank them, offending the first rule of thumb for any sporting endeavour: it must be easy to follow. The current edition, which climaxes at Lord’s in June, has shone a light on this absurdity.”
In its current form, the WTC ranks teams by PCT, the ratio of their points to the maximum points they could have got. This is to account for the different number of games the teams play. England, for example, played 22 Tests in the ongoing 2023-25 WTC cycle, significantly more than South Africa’s 12.
“South Africa, who sent a C-team to inevitable defeat in New Zealand, and whose home schedule in 2025/26 currently comprises five T20Is, reached the final thanks to wins in the West Indies and Bangladesh, then at home against Sri Lanka and Pakistan – all in two-match series, the bane of the Test schedule,” added Booth.
South Africa, who topped the table with a PCT of 69.44, played six series of two Test matches each. Of these, they won eight and drew one. Two of their three defeats came on the New Zealand tour of early 2024, where they sent a second-string side as it coincided with the SA20.
“While the race for Lord’s gave several games context and drama they would otherwise have lacked, the fact that India, England and Australia all played five-match series against each other turned that race into a weird hybrid – like trying to choose between the winner of the 400m hurdles and the 100m sprint,” he added.
“This is not South Africa’s fault,” he reminded. “It may even be to their benefit, if the path from laughing stocks to Lord’s persuades their board that Test cricket is worth saving. But the ICC cannot allow the championship to continue as if designed on the back of a fag packet.”
Booth proposed changes to the tournament: “Double its length to four years, like football and rugby, and ensure the top nine in the rankings all play each other, home and away, over series of at least three Tests.”
He mentioned how fantastic 2024 was for cricket’s longest format: “As 2024 repeatedly reminded us, Test cricket is more competitive than proponents of a two-tier system believe. West Indies prevailed at the Gabba, Sri Lanka at The Oval. Bangladesh won in Pakistan, who came from behind to beat England, who won in New Zealand, who had just won 3-0 in India, who won the first Test in Australia, who won three of the next four.
“Early in 2025, West Indies squared a series in Pakistan. Unpredictability is the essence of sport. So is entertainment: of the 53 Tests in 2024, three were drawn, and two of those were rain-affected; at 3.65 runs an over, it was also the fastest-scoring year in history, beating 3.52 in 2023. Test cricket can hardly be accused of failing to adapt.
“The Border–Gavaskar Trophy, meanwhile, was an instant classic, attracting 837,879 spectators, a non-Ashes record. At the MCG, where Australia won by taking seven Indian wickets in the last session, 373,691 had turned up, surpassing a record set in Bradman’s day. It seemed like a moment in time: by several measures, the BGT is now bigger than the Ashes.
“The response to all this must not be to insist on more, more, more – diluting the marquee series until they lose what makes them special. It must be to resist two divisions, and to invest in Test cricket everywhere, creating a more attractive proposition for the broadcasters. ICC insiders fear they will get nothing like the £2.4bn TV deal that runs out in 2027, with potentially damaging consequences for many Test nations. It’s in everyone’s interests to share the love.”
