When the Weather Changes the Game: British Sport Faces a Climate Reckoning It Is Not Ready For

British sport has long treated bad weather as an occasional nuisance, a waterlogged pitch here, a rained-off Test match there. A new report from the British Association for Sustainable Sport (BASIS) makes clear that this mindset is now dangerously outdated. Climate change, it argues, has become a material, recurring and intensifying business risk, one that is damaging facilities, disrupting fixtures, driving up costs and pushing people away from physical activity. The most striking finding is not the scale of the problem but the gap between how widely it is felt and how little the sector has prepared for it.

A universal problem, a narrow response

Every organisation surveyed by BASIS reported being affected by extreme weather in 2026, and 94% said sport was under-prepared for climate change. Among more than 200 clubs, venues and governing bodies, 86% had been hit by extreme heat, 78% by drought, 31% by storm damage and 28% by flooding.

Set against this near-unanimous experience, the corporate response looks thin. A separate review of professional club disclosures found that only nine had explicitly identified climate or extreme weather as a business risk. In other words, the people running grounds and organising fixtures know the threat is real, but it has not yet reached the boardroom, the annual report or the long-term financial plan. That disconnect is the heart of the problem. Risks that are not formally recognised are rarely budgeted for, insured against or planned around.

BASIS founder Russell Seymour put it bluntly, saying sport is already paying the price through damaged grounds, rising insurance costs, lost match-day income and lost opportunities for people to be active. His central message, that “the game has changed,” reflects a landscape built for weather conditions that no longer exist.

The financial exposure is already on the balance sheet

The report moves the debate from abstract projection to hard numbers. BASIS found that 27% of the professional football, rugby league and rugby union stadiums it analysed in England face high direct flood risk, a share projected to rise to 35% under future climate scenarios.

For some clubs the cost has already arrived. AFC Wimbledon reported nearly £900,000 in stadium flood costs in its 2025 accounts, a heavy burden for a club of its size. Carlisle United has described flood insurance for Brunton Park as increasingly unaffordable, while Worcestershire County Cricket Club’s flood-prone New Road ground has repeatedly faced questions over its long-term viability.

Perhaps the most telling signal comes from the top of the game. Manchester United has warned investors that extreme weather could damage property, disrupt match-day operations and cause losses that may not be fully covered by insurance. The report draws the obvious conclusion: if a club with United’s resources considers the risk material enough to disclose, smaller and less resilient institutions cannot treat it as peripheral. The warning also exposes an uncomfortable truth about insurance. As climate risk grows, cover becomes more expensive or harder to obtain, leaving clubs to absorb losses directly.

Fixtures, revenue and the squeeze on smaller clubs

Disruption to competition schedules adds a second layer of financial strain. Research cited by BASIS found at least 118 weather-related postponements across the top six tiers of English men’s football between the 2021-22 and 2025-26 seasons, with lower-league and non-league clubs bearing the brunt.

This is where the inequality of climate risk becomes visible. Elite clubs have undersoil heating, modern drainage and deep reserves. Lower-division clubs, operating on tight budgets, depend heavily on gate receipts and match-day spending. A cancelled or rearranged fixture can mean smaller crowds and lost revenue that such clubs struggle to recover. Over time, repeated disruption threatens not just individual seasons but the financial sustainability of the football pyramid’s foundations.

2026: the summer that made the risk visible

If any single year has crystallised the issue, it is 2026. Britain’s long, hot and exceptionally dry summer left its mark across sport. The Rugby Football Union took the unprecedented step of postponing the start of the community rugby season in September because rock-hard pitches raised serious player welfare concerns. For a governing body to delay an entire grassroots season is a clear sign that extreme weather has shifted from inconvenience to structural threat.

Beyond the scoreboard: a public health concern

The report’s most far-reaching warning concerns the nation’s health. Sport England found that nearly three-quarters of people affected by this year’s unprecedented heatwaves took part in less sport and physical activity. At a time when governments are trying to raise activity levels and ease pressure on health services, climate change is quietly working in the opposite direction. Damaged local pitches, cancelled sessions and dangerous heat all reduce opportunities for ordinary people to stay active, and the effect falls hardest on grassroots facilities that communities rely on most.

What the sector must do

BASIS calls for climate resilience to become a boardroom priority across British sport. Its recommendations include dedicated adaptation plans, improved climate risk reporting and a £30 million annual fund to help protect grassroots facilities from increasingly volatile weather.

The logic is sound. Better reporting would force clubs and governing bodies to confront risks they currently overlook, while adaptation planning, from improved drainage to heat-resilient scheduling, can reduce long-term costs. A dedicated grassroots fund recognises that the facilities most exposed are often those least able to pay for protection.

Conclusion

The BASIS report delivers a clear verdict: British sport is living with the consequences of climate change but planning as if it were still a distant possibility. From flooded stadiums and unaffordable insurance to postponed seasons and falling participation, the evidence is already present in accounts, fixture lists and health data. The question is no longer whether extreme weather will reshape sport, but whether the sector will adapt deliberately or be forced to react, at far greater cost, after the damage is done.