COP29, the 29th UN annual conference on climate change, opened in Baku, Azerbaijan, on Nov. 11, providing another opportunity for international collaboration.

Last year’s event confirmed that international action to address climate change was way off track against target, and a focus of COP29 is how finance can be made available to developing countries to enable climate action. Achieving agreement is fraught with difficulty.

Given that there is such a gap between promises and action at national level, it should be little surprise that initiatives at a micro level have been piecemeal. In December 2018, the sports sector and the UN launched the Sports for Climate Action Framework. Its objective is to draw together sports organizations, teams, athletes and fans to raise awareness and develop actions to meet the UN goal of achieving climate neutrality by 2050.

The original signatories to the 2018 initiative numbered 17. Today, there are around 200. The list contains only six cricketing bodies — the England and Wales Cricket Board, Marylebone Cricket Club, Melbourne Cricket Club, Gloucestershire Cricket, Surrey Cricket and the Desert Vipers. The latter is one of six franchises in the UAE’s ILT 20 League and has sustainability at the core of its operations.

What also stands out from the current list is the presence of the national, international and world governing bodies of most other sports. Neither cricket’s governing body, the International Cricket Council, nor 11 of its 12 full-member boards are signatories.

The sports sector generates emissions in various ways, including travel, energy and water use, catering, equipment production, pitch preparation, venue construction and in-stadium activity. Cricket is no exception. Hence the lack of commitment by most of its leading bodies to the Sports for Climate Action Framework is disappointing. It appears to reflect a lack of concern about cricket’s contribution to climate issues. There are few obvious external signs amongst the game’s custodians that a coordinated effort is being orchestrated and encouraged.

In fact, there are strong counterviews. Evidence of these erupted in early 2023 following the announcement that Alinta Energy’s sponsorship of Australian cricket, worth $40m over four years, would end in June 2023. Australia’s men’s captain, Pat Cummins, was accused of influencing the decision because of his climate activism.

Cummins is the public face of Cricket for Climate, an organization working to help local clubs install solar panels. He has insisted his personal stance played no part in either Alinta’s or Cricket Australia’s decision. This did not stop vitriolic personal attacks against him, and he was called a “climate catastrophist clown” and accused of “incoherent far-left activism” on Sky News. The channel went further by suggesting: “Sporting bodies need to understand that it’s one thing to alienate sponsors, but they are also alienating fans.”

This is heady stuff. Cummins has dealt with the criticism with dignity, doubling down on his activism. He and his peers have reminded people of the extreme climate conditions which players endured during the ODI World Cup in India in November 2023. These included exceedingly high temperatures, off-the-scale air quality readings and heightened fatigue levels, each of which had adverse impacts.

In some quarters, the riposte is that the players are handsomely rewarded and should keep quiet about societal issues. This puts me in mind of Milton Friedman, the free-market economist, whose stance was that the business of business is business, allowing no room for social responsibility. Cricket is a creator of emissions and waste for which, arguably, it should take responsibility. It is also one of the most vulnerable sports to extreme climate variations. Setting aside apocalyptic visions of stadiums on fire, floods devasting stadiums beyond recovery and unbearable air quality causing death, there is evidence of adverse effects on the game.

One example is the flooding of grounds by rivers bursting their banks in successive years. Worcester is one example, with relocation under consideration. This is ironic, given estimates that an international cricket arena requires around 60,000 liters of water per day.

Cricket seems to react to disasters rather than having plans to prepare for them. It does not appear to be taking steps to anticipate or accept changing trends in weather patterns or putting strategies in place to cope with them. The ECB, to its credit, launched an Environmental Sustainability Plan in November 2023. This has three priority areas — tackling climate change, managing resources and waste, and protecting the natural environment. Some county cricket clubs have sustainability strategies in place.

Within the ECB’s overall plan is an aim to build a more circular economy to replace buy-use-dispose-buy. This applies to equipment and it is in this context that the Desert Vipers’ initiative is so relevant. Their playing kit for the 2025 ILT20 league is produced by a local UAE company, Palmfit, obviating the need for long distance transport and creating local employment opportunities.

The kit uses recycled materials, reducing the need for new ones and lowering carbon footprint by approximately 50 percent. Water-based inks are used, eliminating some harsh chemicals. The kits are printed-on-demand, so made only when needed.

Whether the Indian franchises will follow suit is unknown, but there have been some initiatives in the Indian Premier League. In 2023, Royal Challengers Bangalore wore jerseys made from recycled stadium waste in a match against Rajasthan Royals. However, even with schemes by other franchises, there is little evidence of a coordinated effort across the league.

Cricket is not only a potential victim of a mercurial climate; it is a contributor to environmental degradation. Despite being resource-heavy, it lags behind other sports in calculating its environmental impact, whilst development of sustainability plans is slow compared with other sports.

The reasons for this are not entirely clear but international leadership seems lacking. A balance needs to be achieved between the requirements of development, growth and environmental preservation.

Cricket’s leaders should not expect direction from COP29. They should generate it.

It seems only fair and balanced that, after last week’s coverage of triple centurions, attention should focus on players who have taken hat-tricks in test cricket.

This feat constitutes the bowler taking wickets with three consecutive deliveries, not necessarily in the same over, although this is usually the case. The feat has been achieved 46 times in men’s test cricket and three times in women’s tests. A hat-trick may be considered an equivalent feat to scoring a triple hundred, although the latter may involve greater levels of endurance. This could be reflected in the smaller number of triple centuries — 32 — compared with hat-tricks.

Cricket folklore has it that the term originated in 1858. H. H. Stephenson achieved the feat when playing for the All England Eleven against Hallam and Staveley in Sheffield. By this time, a practice had emerged of taking a crowd collection for professional players who achieved an outstanding feat. On that day, the collection was used to purchase a white hat, which was presented to Stephenson. Records suggest that it was not his first hat-trick that season. Stephenson had already taken two others, both for England, but no award was recorded. His victims were either “veterans” or in the lower order, called rabbits, so perhaps the feats were not deemed outstanding.

The first hat-trick in a test match was claimed by Fred “The Demon” Spofforth for Australia against England in January 1879, in only the third ever test match. This was 50 years before the first triple hundred was scored. It was not long before the next hat-trick was achieved.

Billy Bates of England claimed one at Melbourne in January 1893. By the turn of the 19th century, three more had been taken, all by Englishmen. Johnny Briggs of England at Sydney in February 1892, George Lohmann at Port Elizabeth in February 1896 and Jack Hearne at Leeds against Australia in June 1899, all bowled themselves into cricketing history.

The five hat-tricks at the back end of the 19th century were followed by four in the early part of the 20th. They were remarkable in that only two bowlers were involved. In January 1902 and March 1904, Hugh Trumble of Australia became the first bowler to claim two hat-tricks, both against England. Even more remarkably, he was followed in achieving this feat by Australia’s Jimmy Matthews who claimed two hat-tricks on the same day, May 28, 1912. This was against South Africa at Manchester in a triangular series with England.     

Only two other players have taken two test match hat-tricks. In March 1999, Wasim Akram of Pakistan took a hat-trick in successive tests against Sri Lanka, played as part of the Asian Test Championship. Akram’s first occurred in a group stage match in Lahore, the second in the final, played in Dhaka, a neutral venue. Stuart Broad staged hat-tricks for England against India at Nottingham in July 2011 and against Sri Lanka at Leeds in June 2014.

His achievement in 2011 may not have stood had the Decision Review System been in place. India had not accepted its use at that point. Broad’s first wicket was MS Dhoni caught behind. The second trapped Harbhajan Singh in front with a perfect full-length delivery but replays suggested that Singh had got an inside edge on his bat before the ball hit his pads. The third bowled Praveen Kumar. Broad’s second hat-trick was spread over two overs, the last ball of one and the first two of his next over. The umpire had to remind Broad of his achievement.

Other hat-tricks have generated their own quirks. The first one since 1912 was taken by Maurice Allom in 1930 on his test debut. Two players have achieved the same feat, New Zealand off-spinner Peter Petherick in 1976 and Australian pace bowler, Damien Fleming in 1994, both against Pakistan. One player has taken a hat-trick off the first balls of a test match. This incredible feat was achieved by Sri Lankan seamer Nuwan Zoysa in November 1999 against Zimbabwe. Indian pace bowler, Irfan Pathan claimed a hat-trick in the first over of a test match against Pakistan in 2006.

Although a hat-trick is usually considered as three consecutive balls in the same over, there have been exceptions. Australia’s Merv Hughes claimed one when the wickets fell over three overs. At Perth in 1988, he took a wicket with the final ball of an over. In his next over he took a wicket with the first ball to end the West Indian innings. When the second innings began Hughes claimed a wicket with the first ball. There have been two other occasions when a hat-trick has been taken over two innings, both against Australia by West Indians in 1998 and 2003.

Prior to 1939, eleven hat-tricks out of the 46 had been taken. It is no surprise that as the volume of test cricket increased the potential for hat-tricks increased. It did take until 1957 for the 12th one to be taken — Peter Loader for England against the West Indies. Thereafter, there is no pattern to the frequency. Since 2000, 20 of the 46 have occurred, the latest by Keshav Maharaj for South Africa against the West Indies in June 2021. The most recent one in women’s test cricket was by Rene Farrell for Australia against England in 2011. This was seven years after Shaiza Khan for Pakistan and 53 years since the first one by Betty Wilson for Australia against England in 1958. 

It should be no surprise that some of the game’s finest bowlers have claimed a hat-trick. Shane Warne did so in 1994 and Glenn McGrath in 2000. It is also a surprise that others did not, most notably James Anderson and Muttiah Muralitharan, two of the leading wicket takers in test history. It seems that a specific set of circumstances need to align for the feat to be achieved. There will have been many occasions when two wickets have been claimed in two balls, but the bowler has failed to take a wicket with the next delivery. It is a common feature of both hat-tricks and triple centuries that they are rare and unexpected. Predicting when the next ones will occur is a fool’s game.