ShareThis Page

North Allegheny swings past rival Seneca Valley in extra innings

| Friday, June 7, 2013, 9:12 p.m.
Bill Shirley | For The Tribune-Review
North Allegheny's Brandon Bergstrom (left) avoids the slide of Seneca Valley's Donald Valentine at second base while trying to turn a double play during a PIAA Class AAAA baseball quarterfinal game Friday, June 7, 2013, at Pullman Park in Butler.
Bill Shirley | For The Tribune-Review
North Allegheny's Brandon Bergstrom (left) and Seneca Valley catcher Bradley Gresock collide during a play at the plate during a PIAA Class AAAA baseball quarterfinal game Friday, June 7, 2013, at Pullman Park in Butler.
Bill Shirley | For The Tribune-Review
Seneca Valley catcher Brad Gresock prepares for a collision with North Allegheny base runner Brandon Bergstrom during a PIAA Class AAAA quarterfinal game at Pullman Park in Butler.

When North Allegheny reliever James Meeker took the mound, there was one out in the second inning and Seneca Valley already had two runs.

Meeker left the mound nine innings later, and the Raiders still had only those same two runs.

“I was just trying to keep it close and give us a chance,” said Meeker, who held Seneca Valley scoreless for the final 26 outs of Friday's 4-2 quarterfinal victory in the PIAA Class AAAA playoffs at Pullman Park in Butler.

North Allegheny's chance came in the 10th, when Brandon Bergstrom drew a one-out walk and scored on Matt Waugaman's two-out double. Waugaman later scored to give the Tigers a 4-2 lead.

“James came in and couldn't have done better,” NA coach Andy Maddix said. “That's a testament to the depth of our pitching staff.”

Seneca Valley's pitching was equally good. Connor Coward struck out 13 in eight innings.

“He was awesome,” Seneca Valley coach Eric Semega said. “You couldn't expect anything more from him.”

This was the fourth matchup between the section rivals this season, and all four were decided by two runs or fewer. Seneca Valley (19-5) won both regular-season matchups with 3-2 scores. North Allegheny (22-4) won, 4-2, in the WPIAL championship.

Once again, the first team to three runs won.

“You look at the box scores, and it's so close,” Semega said.

“Baseball in our section is awesome,” Maddix said, “but it may take years off my life.”

In Monday's semifinals, North Allegheny will face District 3 champion Lower Dauphin at 4 p.m. in Somerset. Lower Dauphin advanced with a five-inning victory over State College, 12-1.

NA junior Mitch Machi, who won the WPIAL title game, allowed two hits, two runs and lasted only four outs in Friday's start. Seneca Valley built a 2-0 lead in the first when Gianpaul Gonzalez walked, Sam Fragale hit an RBI triple and Carson Kessler added a run-scoring groundout.

In came Meeker, who allowed no walks and five hits, all singles.

“We've been blessed all year to have pitching depth,” Maddix said.

Typically the team's third starter, Meeker threw a five-inning perfect game in the regular season.

“This was a more impressive accomplishment than his perfect game, which is saying something,” Maddix said. “Seneca Valley is a great team, and the moment was the state quarterfinal.”

While scoring the winning run, Bergstrom collided with Seneca Valley catcher Brad Gresock, who had moved up the third-base line to field the throw. Gresock sustained a concussion and left the field.

“There's not much the runner can do,” Semega said, “and there's not much the catcher can do, either.”

Bergstrom reached base four times Friday, and three times he scored on a hit by Waugaman, including once each in the fourth and sixth.

“It's real nice for Matt to get hot at the right time,” Maddix said. “He struggled in the WPIAL playoffs and was doubting himself. Now, we're kind of riding on his shoulders.”

Chris Harlan is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at or via Twitter @CHarlan_Trib.

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.