ShareThis Page
Derry advances to PIAA volleyball quarterfinals |

Derry advances to PIAA volleyball quarterfinals

| Wednesday, May 30, 2012 12:30 a.m

Jeremy Hauser and Matt Dasinko each had nine kills to lead WPIAL runner-up Derry past City League-champion Obama Academy, 3-0, in the first round of the PIAA Class AA playoffs Tuesday at Carrick.

Derry got an eight-kill effort from Kyle Sauer, six kills from Shaun Kelly and eight digs from Andy Panizzi.

Ambridge 3, Manheim Central 0 — WPIAL Class AA champion Ambridge cruised, 25-20, 25-20, 25-23, in the first round of the PIAA playoffs at Juniata. Lee Smith had 24 kills and two blocks.

Cochranton 3, Deer Lakes 2 — Seniors Sean McTigue (29) and Tony Nicotra (21) combined for 50 kills, but Deer Lakes won’t get a chance to defend its state title after falling in the PIAA Class AA first round at Meadville.

Deer Lakes coach Rick Tatrn, who just completed his 42nd season, said the Lancers’ 25-23 loss in Game 2 was pivotal.

“I’ve learned a long time ago, the longer you stay on the court, the more things can happen to you, and they’re all bad,” Tatrn said.

Lower Dauphin 3, North Allegheny 2 — Riding high after winning its sixth consecutive WPIAL title, North Allegheny was bounced in the first round of the PIAA Class AAA playoffs.

District 3 fourth-place finisher Lower Dauphin pulled off a 3-2 (29-31, 27-25, 25-22, 13-25, 15-10) win over the Tigers, who were ranked No. 1 all season by the Pennsylvania Volleyball Coaches’ Association.

“It’s very disappointing,” NA coach Dan Schall said. “They had a couple guys that got hot and started to play with a lot of confidence as a team. They got the win in Game 2, and it just flowed from there.”

Chambersburg 3, Seneca Valley 2 — Seneca Valley led, 2-1, but couldn’t close out the match in the fourth game and lost the fifth, 15-8, in the first round of the PIAA Class AAA playoffs at Juniata.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.