Sharing sports equipment presents ‘low risk’ of Covid-19 transmission, research suggests

Prime Minister Boris Johnson labelled cricket balls "a natural vector" of Covid-19 but research led by Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine concluded transmission was unlikely

The risk of catching coronavirus from shared sports equipment, such as cricket gloves and balls, is unlikely, research suggests.

Last June, Prime Minister Boris Johnson labelled cricket balls “a natural vector” of Covid-19, but a study led by Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine concluded that sports equipment present a "low risk" of transmission.

Testing nine types of sports equipment (and one control material), the Strike study found that absorbent materials, like cricket gloves and tennis balls, were less likely to transfer the virus than non-porous equipment (racing saddles, rugby balls etc.).

The researchers concluded that, because of rapid viral decay, it is "very difficult" to transfer live virus off sports equipment whereas close contact between participants is a much more likely mode of transmission.

Speaking to the BBC, James Calder, from Imperial College and Fortius Clinic, said "The findings are important not only for elite athletes, but also for community sports and our schools.

"It shows that the risk of transmission when sharing sports equipment is lower than was once thought and it highlights the importance of promoting other infection control measures in sports, whilst urging equipment manufacturers to identify surfaces that may be less likely to retain viable virus."

"The findings are important not only for elite athletes, but also for community sports and our schools"

The equipment – including a cricket glove, a red ball and white ball – had a low dose and high dose of live coronavirus applied to its surface before being tested at one minute, five minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes and 90 minutes to see whether the virus could be transferred.

Covid-19 was recoverable on seven of the 10 materials after one minute with a low dose, but that number fell to one in 10 after five minutes and zero after 15 minutes.

When the high dose was applied, the only item the virus wasn’t recoverable from after five minutes was the cricket glove. However, after 30 minutes it was only recoverable on six of the 10 materials and two in 10 (the rugby ball and saddle) after 90 minutes.

Interestingly, white and red cricket balls had different rates of viral recovery – with the red ball having the lower level of recovery – because of the different surface finishes applied to the bovine leather.

Commenting on the research (which is yet to undergo peer review), Dr Emily Adams, a senior lecturer at LSTM, said: "Anything that is slightly absorbent like a tennis ball or some of the leathery cricket balls, it's very difficult to transfer any live virus off those. So we think that transmission from sports equipment is probably very low in these cases.

"Basically in many sports, like tennis, really the public health intervention should be focused on players and how players interact before a game, during a game and after a game and in transport rather than the sports equipment itself."