ShareThis Page
West Point juniors rout Plymouth |

West Point juniors rout Plymouth

| Monday, July 28, 2008 12:00 a.m

Rebecca Taylor pitched a no-hitter and improved to 3-0, and the West Point junior softball team cruised past Plymouth, 10-0, in six innings in the state semifinals.

West Point scored six runs in the second and four in the fifth to take a 10-run lead going into the sixth.

Nina Kersene, who allowed nine hits, took the loss.

Emily Adisey doubled twice for West Point twice.


Little League

Moon 3, West Point 1

The West Point 11-year-old all-star team loaded the bases in the top of the sixth, but Moon third baseman Jeff Boggs dived and snagged Austin Greene’s line drive to end the game.

Moon’s Marco DiVlassio was the winning pitcher, and West Point’s Tony Pilato took the loss.

Moon scored two runs in the bottom of the fifth to break a 1-1 tie.

Josh Bogats, Nathan Prickett and Marco DeVlassio doubled for Moon. Jay Flock doubled for West Point.

American Legion

Latrobe 13, Young Township 3

Brian Hantz was the winning pitcher, and Latrobe defeated Young Township in a Region 7 game stopped in the sixth because of the 10-run rule.

Latrobe’s Jess Tetkoski and Nate Campbell each tripled.

Hantz limited Young Township to four hits.

Hollidaysburg 13, Kiski Valley 9

Hollidaysburg scored eight runs in the final inning in a come-from-behind, Region 7 victory over Kiski Valley.

Nick Long was the winning pitcher, and Blake Pavlik was tagged with the defeat.

Preston Jones doubled twice for Kiski Valley, and Tyler Garrone and Carter Haponski each doubled. Kiski Valley’s Justin Colamarino and Jake Schaffer both had triples.

Andy Young doubled for Hollidaysburg.

Junior Legion

Greensburg 4, Keystone Rehab 2

Jordan Truscutt was the winning pitcher, and Greensburg defeated Keystone Rehab in the Western Regional Tournament.

Nick Draghi, Vinnie Mongelluzzo and Nick Biehl all had doubles for Greensburg

is a former freelancer.

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.