Meet Jack Scott, holder of two unbreakable sporting records

The only reason he still has a gig writing here is because he's old mates with the owners If they're content to keep providing his pension plan by paying him for these scribblings and lowering the overall tone and quality of the site, well, that's their call - ultimately they're the ones paying the bills

You're probably right about an apology, but at a minimum he should retract his false information when its clearly proven incorrect. However when insulting someone based on false information, an apology should be given, especially as a paid contributor.

I suspect it's actually a furphy that Nothling replaced Bradman, created by Nothling's joking that that was what happened afterwards. If you look at the teams for the 2 tests (Bradman's first, and the next one), Australia's lineup in the first test at the Ekka Ground in Brisbane was Woodfull, Ponsford, Kippax, Hendry, Kelleway, Ryder, Bradman, Gregory, Oldfield, Grimmett, Ironmonger. I'm guessing at where Jack Gregory would have batted because he'd been injured when bowling - Charlie Kelleway also got injured later in the game and it was the last test for each of them. The second test team showed 3 changes - Vic Richardson, Otto Nothling and Don Blackie came in, and Gregory and Kelleway went out with their injuries along with Bradman. If you look at the changes, the team loses a batsman and 2 all-rounders (one a fast bowler, the other a medium pacer. The one was just about a true all-rounder and the other a batting all-rounder. They had opened the bowling in the first innings of the series), and replaced them with a batsman, a pace bowling all-rounder (Nothling) and an off-spinner (Blackie - who was Australia's oldest test cricketer on debut at 46). So looking at it, who do you think replaced who? On a like for like basis, pretty clearly Richardson for Bradman and Nothling for Gregory, while Blackie for Kelleway is more a decision to go with an extra bowler after overloading the batting with 4 batsmen, 3 batting all-rounders (Hendry, Ryder and Kelleway) and Gregory the first time round. Whether Richardson was coming back from injury or Bradman was simply dropped, I don't know, but it's pretty clear in my view that Richardson replaced Bradman.

Thanks Paul D, i just noticed that. Obviously The Roar auto spellcheck presumes to know better than me what it is I'm writing. Yes, auto spellcheck - Nothling, Nothling, Nothling.

maybe he's still got his abacus out double checking the numbers

I don't expect an apology, nor ask for one. I give as good as he. I'm sure others feel the same there. I do however man up and acknowledge my errors...as you say, we won't read a retraction from him.

I'll just add - his name was actually Nothling - I know this, as there's a street near my parents place in Caloundra called nothling st named after him, used to walk past it every day going to the beach he was born on the sunny coast, hence the honour

Thanks David, You didn't deserve the vitriol directed at you. On a similar theme I guess (to Scott), Bradman was dropped after his first test, & then never dropped again. The man who replaced him in that 2nd test of 1928/29 was a Qld all-rounder by the name of Otto Nothing (born 1900). Otto didn't do much himself & was just as quickly replaced by a returning Bradman for the 3rd test. However, Nothing was also an outstanding rugby player who appeared 20 times for the Waratahs in internationals between 1920-24. His position was fullback & he was considered one of the outstanding exponents of the position up until the outbreak of WW2. These 20 internationals were retrospectively declared in1986 as actual test matches by the ARU. This made Nothing one of those rare beasts - a dual international representative of Australia.

I've lost count of the amount of times he's done the same thing when called to task about peddling out false information.

More loonies again tonite. Must be a full moon.

He threw out similar insults to readers that took him to task about his inability to understand the eligibility laws in rugby a few days back. Failed to address his error or apologise when his error was clearly proven wrong. He just left the conversation.

David... It's one thing to be wrong, but another to never acknowledge or accept responsibility for your mistakes. I've been reading your articles for over a year and I cannot recall a single occassion where you have admitted your mistakes. All you seem to do is insult the posters that call out your mistakes. And when it has been comprehensively proven that you are wrong, you go into hiding. Lift your game.

Thanks Daniel. Thanks for hearing our concern. Much appreciated.

Thank you editors for listening.

Hi everyone. Yes, the information regarding Bradman's strike rate is faulty and as such that section of the article should not have been published. My apologies for the confusion with that part of the piece. It has now been removed.

Spruce, the entire website is wrong because it's the same logarithm for every player. Howstat should not be cited in any way shape or form for a strike rate statistic look at Sir Jack Hobbs for example http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerProgressBat.asp?PlayerID=0774 As of test 12 he has a strike rate of 1,231.65 (over 12 runs a ball) because he's scored 973 runs but they only have a record of 79 deliveries from 2 innings out of 23. So he scored 57 runs from 79 deliveries, and 916 runs from zero deliveries. According to Howstat. The only explanation for Lordy claiming these stats as gospel is his usual utter indifference towards being accurate or correct in these articles

Again - peddling a stat based on a clear error in the computation. Nice. Professional stuff.

yes, well done David. Thanks for showing me incomplete stats which therefore validates MY POINT EXACTLY! How you possibly peddled this stat when there were 11 tests missing, 6 of which he scored 100 or more, and then fail to account for the mathematically impossible jump in strike rate from test 9 to test 20. I echo entirely the well crafted, intelligent response of Paul D, and also would rather hang my hat on the S/R proposed by cricinfo (where they have freely admitted to having incomplete data, and are not an embarrassment to year 8 statistics). Christ on the cross. I've actually emailed Howstat to let them know of their statistical error (which no doubt was more due to a logarithmic error rather than human incompetency). If someone offered me $10 million to state that Bradman's strike rate was 71.40 based on the massive gaps in data, and the clear error in the calculations, I'd turn it down. My dignity is worth more that. I'll await your reply.

Your example, not mine. Is the author allowed to be a troll?

Could be a good exercise for the ACB to give the work experience kid. If you did have access to the actual scorecards, and you were able to track who bowled in what order(this might be hard), you could maybe recreate his and his partners' innings and then figure out his strike rate. Wouldn't be much fun.