Archive

King wins Uniontown Invitational | TribLIVE.com
News

King wins Uniontown Invitational

Connellsville’s Kenny King posted a time of 17:21 as he took first place at Saturday’s A.J. Everhart Invitational. Teammate Brad Showman finished in 11th, with a time of 18:45.

Southmoreland’s Nick Baron and Steve Imel each medalled, with Baron taking ninth in 23:17. Imel’s time of 23:19 got him a 10th place.

Kenny Miller of Frazier finished 22nd with a time of 19:34.

Uniontown’s Paul O’Neil took 15th with a time of 19:04.

In team competition, Laurel Highlands placed third, amassing 82 points. Larry Brink placed third to lead the Mustangs with his time of 18:27. Greensburg Salem was the top team, with Franklin Regional getting second.

In the girls’ race, Allderdice finished on top, edging Greensburg Salem. Laurel Highlands tallied 87 points to come in third.

Connellsville’s Shannon Kovack earned a third place with a time of 21:59, and teammate Molly Mullaney was just behind, finishing in 22:39.

Frazier’s Rebecca Leary took ninth with a time of 22:58, two seconds under her goal, and Southmoreland’s Maria Rendine was 10th with a time of 23:17.

Bethany Work of Laurel Highlands was seventh with a time of 22:54.

Girls Soccer

Section 1-AA

W’burg 8, Geibel 4

Kaitlyn Fagan scored two second-half goals, but Geibel fell to Waynesburg. Emily Pennington and Megan Sopko scored a goal apiece for the Lady Gators, and Pennington shared goalkeeping duties with Sabrina Szabo.

Megan Summersgill led the Lady Raiders with four goals, and Kaitlin Scott kicked in two.


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.