ShareThis Page
Plum grabs fourth place in Section 2-AAAA |

Plum grabs fourth place in Section 2-AAAA

| Sunday, January 31, 2010 12:00 a.m

Don’t count the Plum girls’ basketball team out of the WPIAL playoff chase just yet.

The Mustangs jumped back into the race in Section 2-AAAA with a 48-30 road victory over Woodland Hills on Saturday.

Plum (7-10, 3-5) took a 23-11 lead into halftime and cruised to break a two-game losing streak. It now has a half-game lead over Woodland Hills (5-11, 3-6) for fourth place. The top four teams in each section qualify for the WPIAL playoffs.

Karleigh Weichler had 17 points, and Taylor Adams added 13 for Plum.

Fox Chapel 64, West Mifflin 31 — Three Fox Chapel players scored in double figures as the Foxes (15-2), ranked No. 4 in Class AAAA by Tribune-Review News Service, earned a nonsection win over West Mifflin (8-8).

Sara D’Amico, Lindsey McKamish and Jenny Papich all scored 14 points for the Foxes.


Fox Chapel 48, Valley 43 — Jake Wilfong and Brendan Duquette each scored 12 points to lead Fox Chapel (8-8) to a nonsection victory at Valley (7-11).

Andrew Kanaan scored 12 to pace Valley, which led, 21-18, at the half.

Tom Weremeychik added 10 points for the Vikings.

Plum 67, Woodland Hills 52 — Plum (14-4, 6-2) had five players score double digits and used a big third quarter to pull away from host Woodland Hills (3-13, 2-7) in a Section 2-AAAA game.

Neal McKown had a team-high 19 points, Adam Flood scored 12 and Nolan Cressler, Ryan Duke and Bobby Theiss had 10 apiece for the Mustangs, who bounced back after two straight losses.

Plum outscored the Wolverines, 22-6, in the third quarter.

Imani Christian 84, Chewick Christian Academy 33 — At Penn State New Kensington, Kevin Bair and Jake Furman both scored 12 points for Cheswick Christian Academy (7-12, 3-5), but Imani Christian was too much for the Chargers in a Southwest Christian Athletic Conference game.

Imani jumped out to a 31-3 first-quarter lead.

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.