Toss & Conditions

Head-to-Head

Hampshire W have won all of the last three meetings against Essex W. In the most recent clash, Hampshire defended their total successfully and kept Essex to 137/9, winning by 23 runs. The defining detail was Essex losing nine wickets while chasing, which shut down the pursuit. Across these three games, Hampshire have repeatedly come out on top, making the recent pattern one-sided.

HAHampshire W 160/7

ESEssex W 137/9

2026-05-26 · HAM-W won by 23 runs

ESEssex W 153/8

HAHampshire W 195/2

2025-06-12 · HAM-W won by 42 runs

HAHampshire W 215/3

ESEssex W 190/7

2025-05-30 · HAM-W won by 25 runs

Essex W

Essex W are 5th in the T20BW regular season with 13 points. Their last three show a tight 3-run win and a 6-wicket chase win before a 5-wicket defeat, so the form line reads competitive rather than dominant. The most telling result is the 3-run win, where they held on under pressure to close out a narrow finish.

ESEssex W 145/7

SUSurrey W 149/5

2026-06-05 · SUR-W won by 5 wickets (with 14 balls remaining)

ESEssex W 132/4

LALancashire W 128/8

2026-05-31 · ESS-W won by 6 wickets (with 13 balls remaining)

ESEssex W 146/7

YOYorkshire W 143/10

2026-05-29 · ESS-W won by 3 runs

Hampshire W

Hampshire W are 6th in the T20BW regular season with 8 points. Their last three include a draw, a 23-run win over Essex, and a 32-run loss, so momentum has been mixed rather than building. The most telling result is the draw against Surrey W, with both teams finishing on 121, showing how fine their margins have been recently.

HAHampshire W 121/8

SUSurrey W 121/10

2026-05-29 · Match Drawn

HAHampshire W 160/7

ESEssex W 137/9

2026-05-26 · HAM-W won by 23 runs

HAHampshire W 146/8

DUDurham W 178/5

2026-05-24 · DUR-W won by 32 runs

Playing XI

Key Stats

Verdict

Models are split: two lean Essex W while two lean Hampshire W, and the model average is 50%–50%. Bookmakers diverge from that split, pricing Essex W at 41% (2.22) vs Hampshire W at 59% (1.58). Key stats narrowly favour Essex W 4-3 overall, driven by their stronger points, NRR, and Elo profile. The swing factors are whether Essex’s season-level edge can override Hampshire’s 3-0 head-to-head run and Hampshire’s stronger late-innings economy profile.

Bouchier sets, Wellington seals

Maia Bouchier’s clean striking set up the game, but it was Amanda-Jade Wellington who delivered the knockout blow, spinning Essex into a heap once the chase began. Hampshire Women’s 155/4 always felt above par after Essex’s early stutters, and Wellington ensured there was no late twist as Essex were bundled to 100/9, losing by 55 runs despite a brief middle-overs rally.

Powerplay damage decides chase

The match swung hardest in the first six overs of Essex’s reply. They limped to 27/3 in the powerplay, immediately turning a manageable requirement into a steep climb. Hampshire’s bowlers then kept the squeeze through the middle, where Essex crawled to 55/5, and the asking rate ballooned beyond reach. By the time the death overs arrived, Essex could only add 18 runs, with wickets and dot balls smothering any chance of a late surge.

Bouchier’s 70-run platform

Bouchier’s 88 off 55 was the innings that lifted Hampshire from competitive to commanding, built around a 70-run partnership with Francesca Sweet (35 off 30) that kept the scoreboard moving through the middle. With the ball, Wellington’s 5/18 was decisive, repeatedly breaking any rebuilding attempt, while Georgia Adams’ 3/18 ensured Essex never found a second gear even when Jodi Grewcock’s 30 and the Gardner-Grewcock stand offered a flicker of resistance.

Home comfort never arrived

Pre-match, Essex’s home run and slightly stronger season indicators suggested they could edge a tight one, especially if they controlled key phases. Instead, Hampshire flipped the script in the very areas that mattered: they started faster with the bat (46/1 in the powerplay) and finished harder (41 runs at the death). Essex’s head-to-head wobble resurfaced once early wickets fell, and the chase became a question of survival rather than tempo.