Review: 'Testmatch' at the Orange Tree

Definitely a game of two halves, Kate Atwell’s Test Match is an intriguing and energetic exploration of the way Britain’s colonial past has influenced its present and how the idea of ‘fair play’ actually pans out in a game famed for its integrity and decency.

BOOK NOW

OUR VERDICT

×

Expand

All is filtered through the lens of, firstly, a contemporary women’s cricket match and, secondly, the privileged perspective of eighteenth-century men from the East India Company formulating the embryonic rules of modern cricket.

As the play opens on Cat Fuller’s simple and effective circular set, we witness the two sides of a top-class woman’s match that’s been thwarted by a rain delay; cooped up together all manner of simmering frustrations boil over in the claustrophobic atmosphere.

Latent racism and prejudice come to the fore and it’s clear that there’s much more at stake than simply winning the game.

There are some lovely lighter moments, too, such as when the Indian team members jokily suggest that all British attempts at world expansion perhaps sprung from our capricious weather. A first-rate cast positively fizzes with energy and makes this a really stimulating, sparky first half.

In the interval, two bewigged ‘gentlemen’(the all-female cast as before) entertain the audience, and their blustering conviviality continues into part two as the origins of cricket, ‘the gentleman’s game’ as it’s always known.

Stationed in India, two members of the British ruling class, ably assisted by their resourceful native helper, Abhi, emptily posture and pontificate, their only real priority is their own pleasure; the starving natives (and an opium-doped wife) nearby are conveniently forgotten as they work out how cricket should be played, their own interests shaping the rules of course.

The same cast brings wonderful zest to proceedings, but whilst the zany tone of the scenes is initially fun - in small doses - it can feel a little discordant with the tone of Part One as the action hovers a little uneasily between the serious and farcical. Diane Page’s production has much to recommend, not least originality, but, whilst commending the cast unreservedly (they’re largely terrific), presently, the play feels a tad piecemeal, potentially a winner but in need of more dramatic cohesion.