Bennett Cerf wrote an item about that game – he even located a guy who admitted to being the Cumberland quarterback.
The QB remembered fumbling, and exhorting a teammate in position, “Pick it up!”
“Pick it up, hell!”, replied the teammate. “I didn’t drop it!”
For a similarly impressive performance, google ‘Linsey Dawn McKenzie’ AND “soccer game”. (Don’t do it at work).
There’ve been threads explaining cricket before, but to give Bradman’s achievements some perspective:
There is no particular onus in cricket to score off any given delivery, or even to hit it, as long as it does not hit the wicket. On the other hand, higher scores are the norm as a result. An individual score of 100 or more in a single innings is rated very good, and is beyond the reach of many players, though someone played largely for his batting would be expected to manage it reasonably regularly. 200 is extremely good; so good a batsman as Graham Gooch (England, from 1975 into the 1990s) managed only two scores of over 200 in his whole Test career, and no-one would consider it at all odd for, say, a six-match series to go by without any batman on either side making one. 300 is tremendously good; there has been a comparative rash of such scores in the last decade or so, but I think there are only 20-odd triple centuries in Test history.
Thus for individual efforts. As for longer-term consistency, Bradman’s ability to score a hundred or more every third innings is completely unmatched. Few batsmen have ever made a hundred hundreds; Bradman did it in about 200 appearances. Similarly with his efficiency at converting hundreds into really big scores. Jack Hobbs, of Surrey and England, whose career ended just as Bradman’s was beginning, holds the career record for centuries with 197 of them; but he scored them over longer time and more innings. And when Hobbs had made his hundred, he was famous for taking his foot off the pedal and letting someone else have a go. When Bradman was going well, he habitually cashed in to the fullest extent of his formidable ability.
To reiterate: a handful of players have been consistently good enough to average sixty-odd over their Test careers. The best of the rest are typically in the high forties. Bradman’s 99.94 stands utterly alone. It speaks for itself that newspaper hoardings screamed “BRADMAN FAILS!” if he did not make a Test hundred, but merely fifty or so. Most lesser lights consider fifty runs a good day’s work.
Mention ought also to be made of Dr W. G. Grace. Though his averages don’t match up to Bradman’s, he was the first to make a hundred hundreds, and he did it in an era when pitches on the whole were a lot more uneven than in Bradman’s day. (A cricket ball bounces on its way to the batsman. Obviously, if the pitch is out of true, the batsman has to cope with unpredictable variations in bounce, which may lead him to miss entirely or miscue, gifting a catch to the fielding side.)
I just say Jarvis because I see hockey as tougher than football, especially with the QB-protection rules in place now and the fact that the hockey season has so many more games to it… Not to say Favre isn’t tough, but there’s a lot more risk in hockey. And Jarvis was a top-caliber player, which made the feat even more impressive than if he were just some grinder.
DiMaggio’s is impressive, and we are unlikely to see its like again, but I don’t count Pujols out of making a run at it.
And not to be nitpicky, but VanderMeer’s isn’t a “streak.” You have to have at least three to be streaking.
What about Zippy Chippy’s streak of losses?
As I see it, whether 1994 baseball season ended because of a walkout, a strike or a lockout is irrelevant to the question at hand. Saying, “It never happened” is demonstrably incorrect. I went to games in 1994. They counted in the standings and the players’ accomplishments were tallied and made part of their individual records. The only exception to this is the silly and meaningless distinction about whether division championships were won, and the only purpose served by that silly distinction is to preserve the Braves’ division streak record at Montreal’s expense.
How 'bout 18 consecutive no-hit innings, bundled together as two seperate nine inning games. I’m sure there are some closers that have thrown more than 18 consecutive no-hit innings but over a span of maybe 16 games or so.
Vander Meer pitched a no hitter against Boston on 11 June 1938 and followed up against Brooklyn the next time he pitched. Boston finished 5th and Brooklyn 7th in the National League that year out of eight teams. The National League Batting average for the league as a whole was .267 and I haven’t found a site with team batting averages yet.
However, no hits for 18 straight innings is something that probably won’t happen again even against weak hitting teams.
Not the greatest ever but a local High School girls volleyball team did a remarkable thing. At Sweet Home school in Amherst New York.
“A 292-match winning streak that spanned eight undefeated campaigns from 1978-1987. The streak obliterated not only the previous record for girls’ volleyball (93), but far surpassed the mark of 218 consecutive wins by the Baskin, Louisiana girls’ basketball team (1947-53) which had stood as the longest win streak in history of high school sports in the United States.”
Team averages were:
Boston - .250
Brooklyn - .257
Well, turns out that Orel Hershiser had pitched 59 consecutive scoreless innings during a months span in 1988. 6+ games worth.
This competition is held every four years. There were several competitions skipped because of major wars. The US held the cup for 132 consecutive years, during which time the competitors spent millions of dollars redesigning boats and training crews trying to win the cup away. The Brits felt it was a major hit to their naval superiority that the upstart Yanks were able to win competiton after competition, and they were obsessed with winning the cup away.
The fact that this took place over 132 years makes it even more impressive - it’s not hard to believe the Americans would be able to assemble a topnotch crew for one or two competitions, but to be able to dominate over several generations is unprecedented and unmatched in any sport. Read the link.
Yes, but your argument ignores the fact that there was no conclusion to the 1994 season. Since it didn’t play itself out, one can’t say that any team won their division that year.
Sure, we’ll call it 12 in a row. 13 after this year is over. 
**JohnT[/] and zamboniracer, I think I can end this debate for you:
Forget about 1994.
Atlanta won 1 world series in that time span.
They were spotty in the NLCS.
Certainly it means something to win a bunch of division titles, but hardly a feat to be compared to say, Lance Armstrong, or any of the other examples listed.
You are right. And even at that, the Braves 1 World Series win was over my poor Cleveland Indians. Not that I’m bitter.
Well you might have me if the thread was who is the toughest SOB ever * or what is the toughest tough man streak. But it is “most impressive” streak & I cite again Farve’s uniqueness. QB protections or not he is the only man to ever do it –* by 52% freakin’ percent**.
Jarvis (tough b^st^rd that he is) is ahead of Unger by 51 games or 5%. He is barely 6% ahead of number 3 Andy Hebenton. To compare Jarvis’ streak to Farve’s is unfair (& I hate being forced to knock him as a Caps guy myself) – but in the end what we can say about Jarvis is that he did something a little bit better that at least two other guys have done.
Farve did something 52% better than any man in his sport at any time has done. No one, even “in this age of QB protections” is creeping up on him. There is no real comparison between Jarvis’ and Farve’s streaks. Brett is more impressive because of the single quality of his streak.
To compare across different sports, I would suggest that a streak be compared with who was second for the same achievement. What was the second best hitting streak? What was the second (Byron Nelson) best made-cut streak? I posit that the best streak is the one that most exceeds the second best.
If you’re compairing to Vander Meer’s feat, those are scoreless innings, not hitless innings.
My votes:
Least likely to be repeated has to be Vander Meer’s consecutive no-hitters.
Most remarkable: UCLA’s run. Ten National Championships in 12 years, seven consecutive, playing in single elimination tournaments, and including the 38 game tournament winning streak and overall 88 game winning streak.
This is next to Miami’s streak of what? 18 or 19 games?
Totally unimpressive next to Oklahoma’s 47 game streak in collegiate play(1953-1957). Look at that streak next to the next longest in (modern, i.e. post WWII) NCAA football (U of Miami, 34, 2000-2003*). The Sooners’ streak is 40% longer. Then there are the 12 consecutive conference championships (1948-1959), more than any other I-A team.
Of course, all this pales in my book next to UCLA basketball and I’m an unapologetic Sooner fan.
*Sadly, Oklahoma also used to have the #2 streak at 31 games.
Tiger woods just ended his 142 tournament uncut streak.
Nicklaus made 105, so Woods’ streak is 35% longer. Not in the ballpark with Favre’s consecutive starts as far as individual streaks go.