First: first womens odi world cup – Complete Expert Guide

Quick answer for readers in a hurry: The first Women’s ODI Cricket World Cup was staged in England, and England were crowned champions. It featured a single round-robin with seven teams, played as sixty-over matches in traditional whites with a red ball.

The day the women’s game took the biggest step in its early history felt, to those who were there, like a beginning and a culmination at once. The outgrounds smelt of cut grass and packed sandwiches. Long skirts in the crowd, stubby mechanical scoreboards, a smudge of chalk on the blackboard announcing the batting order. Rachael Heyhoe Flint, brimming with a practical defiance that always read as optimism, led England onto fields made familiar by county summers. This was the first women’s ODI world cup—an audacious, privately backed, community-hosted tournament that would end with England lifting the trophy and the sport’s horizons permanently shifted.

This guide brings the tournament to life with an expert lens: the people who made it possible, the teams and format, how matches unfolded and who shone, why the event predated the men’s version and what that meant, and how the legacy ripples through every women’s one-day international that’s followed.

Origins and purpose of the first women’s ODI world cup

The organizer of record was the Women’s Cricket Association (WCA), a pioneering body that ran the women’s game in England for decades. Internationally, women’s cricket had been stitched together through goodwill tours and a fledgling network of national associations, later coordinated by the International Women’s Cricket Council (IWCC). The World Cup idea had hovered for years, but it needed something more than a shared dream: serious money and fearless cheerleading.

The cheerleader-in-chief was Rachael Heyhoe Flint, England captain, public advocate, endlessly persuasive fundraiser. The money arrived through Sir Jack Hayward, a philanthropist with deep affection for English sport who saw the value of placing women’s cricket on a world stage. Hayward’s backing paid for travel, accommodation, prize structures, and the infrastructure of an international tournament. The WCA provided the administrative backbone, scheduling matches, liaising with counties, and mobilizing volunteers across the country. The simple logic behind the event still feels modern: if you put the best women in the world in a proper competition, people will come, and the game will grow.

The first women’s world cup cricket host and why England mattered

England hosted the event not because it was the only possibility, but because it was the most organized and most willing. The WCA’s nationwide club network, an engaged press corps, and an ecosystem of county grounds gave the tournament a logistical landing pad. Across the south coast, the Midlands, and other friendly districts, county and club grounds welcomed the fixtures. While the crowds were modest by today’s standards, there was a steady hum of local curiosity—schoolchildren on term-time outings, club members in blazers, families curious to see international women cricketers up close. The choice of smaller grounds was intentional: accessibility over grandeur, intimacy over pomp. The result was a festival that felt local and global at the same time.

How the format worked and what the cricket looked like

The first women’s ODI world cup used a straightforward and demanding structure:

• A single round-robin league with seven teams.
• Sixty overs per side for every match.
• Matches played in white clothing with a red ball.
• No fielding circles, no powerplays, no DRS.
• Points accumulated across the league table decided the champion; there was no standalone final.

This was one-day cricket as it originally emerged in England: longer than modern ODIs, demanding batting stamina and bowling spells that tested not just skill but patience. Spinner-friendly afternoon spells were common. Openers were expected to bat long, and captains created run pressure not with ring fields but by bowling dry lines and marshalling five boundary riders with craft. The lack of powerplays meant individual strokeplay mattered, but partnerships were king. If a side strung together a calm, hundred-run stand through the middle, they generally won.

The teams at the first women’s ODI world cup

Seven teams took part, forming a tapestry that perfectly captured where the women’s game stood at that moment—strong domestic bases in a few countries, emerging structures in others, and creative solutions to ensure the best players could compete.

• England: The host nation and eventual champions; led by Rachael Heyhoe Flint and powered by the all-round brilliance of Enid Bakewell.
• Australia: Immaculately drilled and athletic, with pace and sharp glovework; they would finish runners-up.
• New Zealand: Organized, resilient, and extremely well-schooled, with a batting core that prized placement and running as much as power.
• Young England: A development side created to give promising English youngsters tournament exposure; their enthusiastic, fearless cricket added a wonderfully raw edge to the event.
• International XI: A composite side formed to bring in high-quality players from countries not sending official teams, plus a few who were available through residence and relation. This team was essential in guaranteeing a robust schedule and wider participation.
• Jamaica: A standalone island side from the Caribbean, lithe and fierce in the field, building a legacy that would later flow into a unified regional team.
• Trinidad and Tobago: Another island side from the Caribbean, technically sound with bat and ball, and possessed of that sunny, combative temperament that makes cricket in the West Indies such a delight to watch.

Why the International XI and Young England were crucial

The International XI and Young England were not mere fillers; they were structural innovations, designed to solve real problems. Not every cricketing nation had the resources to send an official side or to field a deep squad. The International XI opened doors to talented players whose passports or boards were not yet aligned with big-tournament ambitions. Young England, meanwhile, was the opposite: a talent incubator. The WCA recognized that filling a fixture list at an inaugural world cup shouldn’t be a zero-sum choice between elite competition and development opportunity. These teams ensured competitive balance, more matches, and a wider experience base for a generation that would go on to serve the game for decades.

A concise look at the competition structure and playing conditions

• Overs per innings: 60
• Ball and kits: Red ball, white clothing
• Fielding restrictions: None
• Decision review technology: None
• Umpiring: Domestic officials with international assignments, many working multiple fixtures across the tournament
• Travel: By coach and rail between county outgrounds, with rest days built in
• Points system: A win added to a cumulative league total; the team at the top after all fixtures became champion
• Weather contingency: English early-summer rules of engagement, including occasional damp mornings and the odd lost overs scenario managed by local playing conditions

England’s campaign and why they won

Strong teams tend to look serene, even when the margin for error is slim. England’s leadership core—Rachael Heyhoe Flint at the helm, a battery of senior players beside her—treated the event like an extended Test match in terms of discipline. Enid Bakewell embodied that approach with the bat: secure defense to start, precise rotation through the infield, and then a sudden surge once bowlers over-pitched. She could recast an innings in an hour without venturing once into recklessness. Her contributions with slow left-arm spin completed a classic all-round footprint that every one-day captain craves.

The batting blueprint was clear: build partnerships, exploit small boundaries when they presented themselves, and resist the seduction of quick, loose strokes early in the day. The bowling blueprint was even simpler: suffocate the scoring rate, make the batters manufacture shots, and hunt for wickets in the squeeze. England’s seamers maintained a nagging line; spinners, especially those who relied on drift rather than big turn, were given long spells to weave patterns. Fielding was tidy, and with Heyhoe Flint’s restless energy behind it, mistakes were pressed into collapses.

A defining fixture came against Australia, the other heavyweight. The tone of that contest said as much as the score: an opening stand that blunted the new ball, an all-rounder’s calm acceleration in the second half, and the closing out of a chase with ice-cold field placements and bowling plans. Australia were relentless throughout the tournament, but England were relentless and clinical when it counted.

Australian resolve and New Zealand professionalism

Australia brought what Australian cricket always brings: fast bowling with intent, wicketkeeper-batters with presence, and an aura of ruthless efficiency. Their seamers extracted bounce on greenish surfaces, and their batting unit understood pacing in sixty-over cricket better than most. If England had not been so complete, this would read as a story of Australian triumph; instead, their excellence served as the whetstone on which England sharpened their title credentials.

New Zealand were the picture of one-day professionalism—excellent between the wickets, patient with the ball, and engaged tactically. They rarely beat themselves. Their batting, studded with players who found gaps rather than fences, frequently placed them ahead in the middle overs. Even when they finished in bronze, they felt integral to the event’s credibility; no one collected cheap points off them, and the cricket always looked like a contest between equals.

The Caribbean flavor and the joy of representation

Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago are perhaps the most charming part of the tournament’s tale. Their presence affirmed something beyond logistics: that women’s cricket had genuine Caribbean roots. The cricket was athletic, the catching crisp, the smiles wide. You could see, in their footwork against spin and the lively run-ups, the strands that would later braid into a West Indies women’s tradition. In a world cup concept that needed both excellence and breadth, these island sides delivered color, style, and a reminder that a global game is built by many hands.

The International XI and Young England were the tournament’s risk-takers

The International XI gave the competition a cosmopolitan feel. Some of its players had mixed domestic backgrounds, and they meshed quickly. They became every neutral’s second team: underdogs strong enough to trouble anyone on the day. Young England, meanwhile, were buoyant. They played with the freedom of a side untethered to old scars. On good days their enthusiasm became pressure; on other days, the lesson was simply logged for the next match. For a development team to live inside the pressure-cooker of a world cup was progressive then and would be considered progressive now.

Enid Bakewell and the players who defined the tournament

Two names sit at the heart of nearly every serious recounting of the first women’s world cup: Enid Bakewell and Rachael Heyhoe Flint. Bakewell, the complete cricketer, constructed innings with old-school craftsmanship and then came on to bowl left-arm spin with the rhythm of a metronome. She topped the run-scoring charts and contributed key wickets, the ideal tournament player. Heyhoe Flint’s numbers were valuable, but her leadership was invaluable: timely bowling changes, a nose for the moment, a calm that spread.

Beyond them, a rich cast did the heavy lifting. New Zealand’s professionals kept games on a leash. Australia’s fast bowlers, typified by an aggressive, chest-up approach, insisted on bounce and seam. Wicketkeepers across the event, often unsung, were a stabilizing force in conditions that could turn tricky as evening damp crept in. For Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago, batters stepped into the ball with Caribbean economy of motion and bowlers found swing when clouds rolled over. Young England’s leg-spin, pace, and in-the-ring fielding often surprised teams that arrived expecting to bully the youngsters.

A note on statistical leaders that still echo today

Tournament metrics from this event established the first pages of the women’s ODI record book. Enid Bakewell finished as leading run-scorer and, remarkably, among the top wicket-takers as well—one of the great all-round campaigns in one-day cricket of any era. England’s attack produced consistently tight figures; Australia’s pace battery collected crucial top-order wickets; New Zealand’s economy rates told of a side that never released pressure. A Young England leg-spinner topped the wicket charts, an early signal that leg-spin would always have a special place in the women’s one-day game.

Scorecards from the event are preserved in major cricket archives, and they make for fine reading: disciplined opening stands, mid-innings squeezes, late blossoming partnerships. The shape of an ODI chase you know today—the quiet consolidation followed by a planned lift—was there in the first women’s ODI world cup in embryonic form.

Why the first women’s cricket world cup predates the men’s tournament

It remains one of the most potent facts in cricket’s long story: the women’s world cup arrived before the men’s. Ambition, not mimicry, drove it. The women’s game moved more nimbly because it operated outside the conservatisms of the professional men’s establishment. The WCA and its international allies could make decisions quickly, attract patronage from forward-looking benefactors like Sir Jack Hayward, and mount a world competition run on goodwill, volunteer toil, and the stubborn belief that excellence deserves a stage. The men would follow; the women were first.

England women as champions and what separated them

Everything about England’s triumph sprang from clarity. They knew the conditions better, they understood sixty-over cricket instinctively, and they married method to nerve. Fielding mattered: they cut off singles and threw to the right end; they rarely offered second chances. Bowling discipline mattered more: full at the start, nagging lengths in the middle, and patience when searching for wickets. Batting partnerships were the golden thread: the opening pair set the tempo, the middle order absorbed, and the late hitters added what the era allowed.

The final standings and how the table felt

A round-robin produces a narrative that sifts out pretenders. England finished at the summit, Australia in second, New Zealand third. Young England and the International XI delivered wins that changed the texture of the table and the mood of neutral fans, while Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago contributed energy, flair, and hard-learned lessons that fed directly into later regional success. It wasn’t a tournament defined by blowouts and minnows; it was defined by variety and intent.

Venues, travel, and the feel of the schedule

The schedule zig-zagged through county and club grounds that gave the event its unmistakable English summer feel—coastal breeze at one venue, hedgerows and crows at another, soft light falling over a field with a sloping outfield somewhere else. Teams traveled by coach, sharing jokes and snack boxes after tight finishes. Local volunteer networks made sandwiches, ran scoreboards, and stewarded crowds. Match mornings began with dew and careful pitch inspections; some surfaces were green and a touch soft, others flat and brown by teatime. The day-to-day rhythm was charming and relentless—practice, play, travel, repeat—exactly the sort of routine that turns teams into champions or exposes cracks.

Then and now, and what the evolution tells us

One-day cricket has transformed since the inaugural women’s world cup, but the first edition’s DNA remains legible in the modern game. The basics—protect your stumps, bowl to a field, run hard—have not changed. What has changed is almost everything around those basics.

A compact comparison that illuminates the arc:

• Overs per innings: Then: 60; Now: 50
• Ball and kits: Then: Red ball, white clothing; Now: White ball, colored clothing
• Fielding restrictions: Then: None; Now: Powerplays and inner-circle rules that shape tactics
• Technology: Then: No replays, no DRS; Now: Full broadcast analysis, DRS, ball-tracking
• Pace of play: Then: Methodical, attritional phases common; Now: Calculated aggression as a default, power hitting late
• Global reach: Then: Local crowds, newspaper coverage, radio mentions, niche TV windows; Now: Worldwide broadcasts, professional contracts, multi-sponsor ecosystems

The inaugural event did not merely set a precedent; it created a vocabulary. Once teams and fans saw women’s one-day cricket in a world cup frame, the sport had a reference point. Every subsequent edition refined the template, but the outline—national pride, tournament durability, and the special tension of a league table that can topple on any given day—was present from the start.

Key entities and the roles they played

• Rachael Heyhoe Flint: England captain, organizer, public advocate, and the moral center of the event’s campaign. She turned conversations into commitments and commitments into a world cup.
• Enid Bakewell: The all-rounder against whom all-later all-rounders can be measured. Runs at the top, control with spin, a big-match temperament.
• Sir Jack Hayward: The quietly decisive benefactor whose financial support made the entire enterprise viable. Without Hayward’s backing, the first women’s world cup would likely have remained an idea.
• Women’s Cricket Association (WCA): The administrative home that managed logistics, liaison, and the volunteer army. A masterclass in doing more with less.
• International Women’s Cricket Council (IWCC): The coordinating body that bound national associations together and underwrote the event’s international legitimacy. Its later absorption into the global men’s governance structure unified cricket’s administrative world.

A closer look at tactics in sixty-over women’s ODIs

The extended innings created a unique rhythm. Captains arranged bowling resources into long, overlapping spells that aimed to control the run rate rather than chase wickets at all costs. The absence of powerplays meant batters rarely saw a string of fielders packed inside the circle; instead, they faced a chessboard in the deep with gaps to pick. Singles were plentiful for those who could nudge and place. Bowlers explored angles more than they attacked stumps for dramatic effect; the wicket ball was often the one after a boundary—when the batter tried to force a second stroke and miscued into the pack.

Spin was fundamental. On benign pitches, slow bowlers could put a lid on the run rate with minimal risk. On worn surfaces, they became wicket-takers, chalking up dismissals as batters tired. Seamers looked for just enough movement to kiss the edge, and wicketkeepers did the rest. Slip fields came and went depending on conditions and match situation; one of the great pleasures of watching the first women’s world cup was the constant tinkering in the cordon.

England vs Australia as the fulcrum of the title race

A title race must have a fulcrum, and here it was the showdown between England and Australia. Australia’s new-ball attack, brisk and unforgiving, forced England to start with tight leaves and soft hands. The hosts chose survival first; the surface rewarded patience. A steady opening stand set up the platform, and then the all-rounders re-tuned the tempo, scything anything short and driving anything overpitched. Australia remained in the chase for long periods, but England’s field placements—ring fielders in precisely the right place for the miscued clip, deep fielders aligned to the wind—turned likely boundaries into singles and likely twos into ones. It was championship cricket, measured in decisions more than moments.

The essence of the points table without drowning in figures

Because the tournament used a pure round-robin and because the event is so often pigeonholed as a statistical footnote, it’s worth stating the essence plainly. England won more and won more convincingly. Australia were just a half-step behind. New Zealand were too disciplined to fall out of the medal places. Young England and the International XI took games deep and executed upsets that gave the table drama. Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago were competitive, never collapsible, and their contributions laid tracks for a regional approach that would soon transform women’s Caribbean cricket.

How the first women’s world cup changed careers and trajectories

For the individuals involved, the tournament was a template for what a professional future could look like even if the game was still technically amateur. Crowds recognized faces. Journalists, some skeptical at first, came back for second and third looks. Players felt the difference immediately when they returned to club cricket—young girls approached with autograph books, coaches referenced televised clips and newspaper cuttings, and local leagues asked for speaking appearances. The know-how acquired—how to bat through forty overs, how to bowl in the death overs, how to captain in a race where net run rate could matter—leaked into domestic systems everywhere.

The India connection that arrived later

India did not feature in the first women’s world cup, a historical note that underlines both the logistical challenges of the era and how quickly the women’s game would expand thereafter. The next time the event rolled around, India not only participated but embraced the format fully, placing the women’s ODI world cup firmly on a subcontinental map that would become vital to the sport’s growth. The inaugural edition, however, belongs to the trailblazers elsewhere—it is their scaffolding on which later growth stood.

A compact, practical atlas of the inaugural event

• Host nation: England
• Champion: England
• Format: Single round-robin; sixty overs per side
• Teams: England, Australia, New Zealand, Young England, International XI, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago
• Ball and clothing: Red ball, whites
• Governance: Organized by the WCA with international coordination through the IWCC
• Financial backbone: Sponsorship and patronage led by Sir Jack Hayward
• Scorecards: Preserved across leading cricket archives and histories
• Defining qualities: Community-run logistics, county outgrounds, disciplined cricket, and surprisingly modern tournament craft

Why this first edition still commands respect

The inaugural women’s cricket world cup mattered because it fused authenticity with ambition. It did not pretend to be something it wasn’t—no gargantuan stadiums, no fireworks—but it also refused to apologize for wanting to be world class. The standard of play was high, the competition balanced, the tactics advanced by the standards of the day. The women who participated did not punch above their weight; they were the weight class.

The tournament also reset the relationship between the sport and its watchers. Fans could now talk about women’s cricket in the context of championship stakes. They could debate selections, compare bowling figures across nations, and track who topped the run lists. The analytical language of one-day cricket—strike rotation, death bowling, partnership value—entered the women’s game’s mainstream conversation because this first world cup gave it structure.

Long-tail clarity woven into the narrative

• The first women’s ODI world cup was held in England and won by England.
• The event predated the men’s tournament and helped define ODI cricket’s early identity.
• Seven teams played: three full national sides, two Caribbean islands, a development side, and a composite International XI.
• The format was a single round-robin of sixty overs per side; points decided the champion rather than a standalone final.
• Enid Bakewell emerged as the leading run-scorer and a top-tier wicket-taker, the tournament’s definitive all-rounder.
• Rachael Heyhoe Flint’s leadership and Sir Jack Hayward’s patronage were decisive in getting the event off the ground.
• India’s debut in the women’s world cup came later; the inaugural edition did not feature an Indian side.
• Scorecards and match results from the event are available in authoritative cricket archives, providing a statistical spine for historians and fans.
• Venues were county and club grounds across England, a deliberate nod to accessibility and community engagement.

A short table that clarifies the teams and their identities

The women’s ODI world cup history timeline anchored by the first edition

From this first gathering sprang a lineage that amplified every dimension of the women’s ODI format. More nations joined. The overs per innings eventually settled at fifty, aligning with the modern game. Colored clothing, white balls, and fielding restrictions reshaped the geometry of contests. Prize money and television brought professional stakes. But the through-line is clear: without the inaugural event, there is no spine for the later body of women’s world cup records and memories to attach themselves to.

England’s win and what it meant at home

The trophy did more than sit in a cabinet. It changed how county boards spoke about the women’s game, how schools pitched cricket to girls, and how clubs thought about facilities and scheduling. Media coverage, though far from saturated, became measurably more respectful; the dismissal of women’s cricket as an amateur curiosity was harder to maintain after an international league demanded the attention of anyone who cared about cricketing craft. The women themselves took that credibility back to their clubs and counties, forging a bridge between the international summit and grassroots foundations.

Tactical snapshots from memorable passages of play

• The controlled chase: England, set a target that required three-and-a-bit runs an over, navigated with a pair of stands that never broke rhythm—a masterclass in required-rate batting in the sixty-over era.
• The squeeze: New Zealand, defending a middling total, used dot-ball pressure and immaculate ground fielding to shut an innings down. An inner ring that cut off ones was as effective then as a powerplay ring is now.
• The fast-bowling burst: Australia’s openers, sensing moist grass early, pitched full for movement and then banged a heavy length to force mis-hits on the bounce. If DLS had existed, they might have been even more dangerous under cloud.
• The leg-spinner’s spell: Young England’s young wrist-spinner, flight and dip as her weapons, took a cluster of middle-order wickets by luring batters into drives that weren’t quite there. It modernized the day in one spell, asserting that leg-spin would always have a say in one-day cricket.

How historians and statisticians read the event

The analytics mind looks at the first women’s ODI world cup and sees the scaffolding of an ODI model: the measurable value of partnerships, the predictable wicket patterns across sixty overs, the importance of economy rates, and the setting of early benchmarks for totals on English summer pitches. Statisticians use the preserved scorecards to track the first instances of what later became everyday currency: the first women’s ODI hundred, the early five-wicket hauls, the highest run aggregates at a world cup before expansion lifted those ceilings. The key is context: in an era without powerplays and with longer innings, strike rates look different but are no less instructive.

A human memory of the first world cup that matters most

If you ask those who were on the boundary or in the dressing room what they carry from that world cup, they talk about small, indelible moments: a teammate’s grin in the huddle after a wicket; a crowd’s communal intake of breath before a big shot; a captain walking back through a chain of fielders, patting shoulders and pointing quietly to where the next ball might go. They talk about the pride of pulling on a shirt that said country, of hearing applause that felt like approval rather than indulgence. They talk about the feeling, after the final league day ended with England on top, of a world made a little wider.

Legacy and impact that continue to compound

Every women’s world cup since has been indebted to the inaugural event for its geometry and its legitimacy. Administrators learned how to schedule women’s multi-week, multi-location tournaments. Broadcasters learned how to package the rhythm of women’s ODIs into compelling stories. Sponsors discovered that aligning with women’s sport built reputational capital that outlasted campaigns. Most of all, the players saw a pathway: the world cup as the pinnacle of one-day cricket, the place where great careers are both proven and crowned.

The most succinct conclusion in a long story

England hosted the first women’s ODI world cup. England won it. Seven teams played a single round-robin of sixty overs per side. Enid Bakewell made the tournament her canvas; Rachael Heyhoe Flint made the tournament possible. A patron’s funding, a volunteer army’s labor, and a captain’s vision created a competition that predates the men’s and sets the baseline for all that followed. The cricket was good enough to win doubters and brave enough to win the future. That is the only measure that matters, and on that measure, the first women’s world cup remains one of the great leaps in the history of the sport.