Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2007

No, it doesn't really mean this -- at least not here in Australia or (I
suspect) in Britain. If anything, it implies a purely narrow response
to a question (and thus one that could be deceptive in its effect).

Tinwhistler's "at face value" is much closer.

It's really about dealing with the question posed and answering just
that and nothing else.

Perhaps you have taken a detour home from work at the local pub and
have met up with an old friend and then got home much later than
expected.

Your partner says: Gosh you're late today. Did you get held up on the
way home?

You say: Yes, I did (playing it with a straight bat).

In cricket, the idea of not playing with a straight bat usually refers
to attempts to manipulate the ball's direction after leaving the bat so
as to defeat field placements and create run-scoring opportunities.
Inevitably, the attempt to score in this way increases the risk that
one will lose control of the ball's path (the width of the presenting
bat face being smaller) and deflect it in some undesirable way -- e.g
onto one's stumps, in the air to a fielder behind the wicket or even in
front if the ball hits the leading edge.

When one plays with a straight bat, one returns the ball to the bowler
along the path of its approach, trading a scoring opportunity invited
by use of the initial momentum of the arriving ball for stolid defence
of one's position at the crease.

In Australia, the phrase is commonly used when a politician gives a
minimal response to a question where it would be tempting to offer a
more politically satisfying answer on some issue. Someone is invited to
comment on the likely consequences of some piece of political
horsetrading at a coming cabinet vote and instead of saying -- "well
actually we've done the numbers and I can announce that our proposal
will be endorsed 55-45 after Mr Brown took our offer of a cabinet post"
he plays the question with a straight bat and says "we're quietly
confident that in the end, the right decision will be made", avoiding
the risky business of embarrassing an ally.

TOF

[...]

 
Reminds me of another idiom "playing hard and fast", which isn't quite
the same thing, is it.

No - a "straight bat" in cricket is as distinct from "an agricultural
swipe".

Remember - the target for the bowler (pitcher) is three wooden
sticks stuck in the ground behind the batsman - and they are standing
vertical. Thus a good (or cautious) batsman with attempt to keep
his bat vertical to "protect" his wicket as he swings at the ball.

Thus the term "a straight bat". With an "agricultural swipe however,
the temptation is to take a hearty swing at it in baseball style
(with the bat tending to the horizontal plane) which is generally a
recipe for disaster - at least with a competent bowler - as you
will have little or no time to correct the trajectory of you bat
between the time that the ball bounces off the mat and
arrives where you are, having suddenly changed its travel
vector due to the spin imparted on the ball by the bowler.

This concept is important enough that the batsman may ask
the umpire to help him line up his bat before the ball is bowled.
He will shout out something like "Middle and leg from where
the bowler bowls please!" whereupon the umpire (Nunkey)
while assist him to line up his (vertically held) bat between
the middle and leg stump as sighted from where the bowler
bowls at the other end. This spot is then marked by the batsman
with a piece of chalk on the mat, or by dragging his toe in the dirt
to mark the spot.

After this little ceremony is complete, the batsman will
assume the stance, facing the bowler with his chin out
and tapping his bat tentatively on the ground a few times
(to make sure it is still there) before the bowler starts
his run-up.

Jitze

Okay. I take it that that would be understood. Short for "in a
straightforward manner" or sumfing.