How about a goalie with a Gordie Howe hat trick?
I figured it was shortly after I posted, but I’m not sure what the point of the joke is.
I don’t know if this would qualify as a “sporting feat”, but…unanimous election to the Baseball Hall of Fame on the BBWAA ballot. Maybe very soon…
If Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb or Willie Mays(among others) can’t get 100%, I don’t believe anyone will.
I think the problem there is that anyone who would ever get 100% are going to be first ballot inductees, and there are always a handful of writers who refuse to vote for anyone first ballot. So those people who might get 100% on their second ballot are already in.
Vote percentage is not an achievement. Being selected is the achievement, and there are no fractional selections.
10 goals in a World Cup. It’s been done 3 times, but the last time was 1970.
Ronaldo got close with 8 in 2002.
Sorry it was in homage to one of the funniest threads I’ve ever read (if you’re not a darts fan look away now):
http://search.catflaporama.com/post/browse/532370717
Well worth reading the whole thing but an example:
This is logically equivalent to saying that there’s no such achievement as, say, winning a game by shutout, because winning is the achievement and there is no such thing as a fractional win.
Achieving a 100% induction vote is a feat that would be of great interest to baseball fans, so it’s a valid suggestion. As three imbeciles apparently thought Ken Griffey Jr. wasn’t good enough for the Hall of Fame, it’s probably impossible, but you never know.
Yeah, I agree. The thread title says “Sports Feats”. 100% induction vote would be quite a feat.
On the other hand, it’s not something the athlete himself is doing. If a kicker manages to make a 70 yard field goal, that’s something the kicker did (albeit with the help of a favorable wind, and a coach who gave him the opportunity, and so on). If 100% of sports writers vote for a baseball player, that’s something the sports writers did.
Still, we give credit to Nadia Comăneci for earning that perfect ‘10’.
Actually she only scored a 1.00.
I’m not sure anyone truly believes Griffey wasn’t good enough for the hall. I can think of two reasons why one (or three) might have not voted for him: some voters don’t want to elect anyone on a first ballot, and some may have thought he was going to be elected anyway, so they wanted to use their scarce votes for someone else (voters only get ten votes.) I don’t personally think the first reason is valid, but it does seem to be real.
Like we give credit to pitchers and hitters for strikeouts and hits that maybe could have been ruled walks or fielders’ errors. The umpires’ and official scorers’ judgements are integrally part of the competition.
A BBWAA vote isn’t part of the actual game of baseball; it’s not even essential to Hall of Fame recognition, in the long run. Satchel Paige is not less of a Hall of Famer than any other.
Peremensoe:
While that might be true, I know that I (and probably a great number of others) consider those who were eligible to voted in by the BBWAA and were to those who were eligible but failed with them and were instead inducted by the second-(and third and fourth ad infinitum) chances committee, like Phil Rizzuto, Bill Mazeroski or Joe Gordon.
(Of course, that doesn’t apply to Satch, who was never BBWAA-eligible to begin with.)
I don’t think the second reason is valid, either. Gaming the system is, IMHO, unethical. If a guy is the 11th best player available, then he shouldn’t get your vote.
That struck me when I read the post. Intuition tells me that the longer, more streamlined American football should travel further. Anyone know the physics regarding this?
But you can give a rugby ball a more solid kick; easier surface area for foot contact.
I can see your point, and to clarify my original post there: I don’t think the second reason is valid, necessarily. I just haven’t really thought it through. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if some clear first balloters lost votes due to that logic.