The results of the series will count towards an official Test Championship for the first time.
Does the game need a Test league and is this system a fair reflection of the state of play?
The ICC Test Championship is based on a league system used by the Wisden Cricketers' Almanak since 1996.
But there is one major exception - results of one-off Tests will not be included.
In the current ICC Test Championship table, England lie in third place behind Australia and South Africa with Pakistan claiming eighth spot.
This exclusion of one-off matches has sparked protests from Wisden, who describe the new system as "an absurd compromise".
Does the omission distort the Championship and discriminate against smaller nations such as Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka?
Who do you think can challenge Australia at the top of the table?
And do you think Test cricket needs a league system as such, or is it an unnecessary addition to cricket's purest form?
Tell us what you think.
The ICC test ranking is a bit of a joke. I dont think it's any coincidence that England is the team that benefits the most from the exclusion of past one-off tests, as well as the decision to only take into account Test series played after September 1993.
England had lost a series 3-0 to India in march 1993. if that result were included, then India would be joint third in the rankings instead of its current seventh place. The point I'm trying to make is that, given such absurd assumptions, the current ICC test ranking doesnt really mean anything.
It seems to have been designed to have England ranked as high as possible when the rankings are first released, so it's definitely not fair. Only after a full cycle has been completed will we get an accurate ranking.
Sandeep,
USA
Before the league can make sense, the question of series lengths must be addressed; it is nonsense to give the same points for a 0-1 series loss and a 2-3 series loss. Better to make the bulk of the points come from match results.
David Mason,
New Zealand
Another conspiracy against Pakistan, the ICC have decided to work out the points table to best suit Australia and England. Why not start on a level playing field? Every team starts on 0 points plays each other home and away and at the end of the ten years someone gets crowned world champions and we start again.
Zulfiqar ,
Uk
Personally I think the table is just wrong. Everyone should start on a equal footing as in soccer at the start of the league season and then after five years the winner will be best team. It is not point in allocating points and positions now because the real thing starts now. Past performance such as Australia's don't count, it is what they do in the nex five years. This league will provide more competition in Test matches as they have something to play for. This format should also be replicated in the one day format to ensure that off-shore tournaments have a meaning rather than being one-offs
Adeel,
UK
How can the ICC pick and choose which tests to include? The Asian Test Championship and the one-off tests Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka have had to settle for were all legitimate competitions. How can the ICC discount Sri Lanka's defeat of England in their only visit? I thought cricket was supposed to be about fair play.
Suhail,
Pakistan
Absolutely ludicrous! Not unexpected though from the ICC.
Naveed,
UK
I am sure that the new system will be of minimal interest to real fans of test cricket. Why do the media have an obsession with rankings? Is it a consequence of the need to have something negative to use against those whose only crime was to have lost? Kick the whole stupid idea into touch.
Rodger Edwards,
UK
The new system doesn't really matter untill a full "round" has been completed. The current table shouldn't be taken too seriously. I am a fan of stopping one off tests, I'd rather see countries cancel the extra one day internationals (surely any more than five is ridiculous) to accomodate a test or two extra. The major flaw in the table is that there will be no five test series decider to be "official" champions. This seems like a missed opportunity of a high profile series showing test cricket at it's best over a series of good length. However the new system does guarantee Zimbabwe and Bangladesh the chance to develope and forces India to play more tests (something I've wished they would do for years). No one seriously thinks Pakistan are eighth in the world now, but if after a full round of series they are still there they will only have themselves to blame! I believe we must think of the five year period as a "restructuring" of tests and only assess the championship after this period.
Paul,
UK