ShareThis Page

High school roundup: Big run boosts Bethel Park girls

| Thursday, Jan. 3, 2013, 10:08 p.m.

Megan Marecic, who finished with 25 points, led the Class AAAA No. 3 Bethel Park girls basketball team (9-1, 4-0) on an 11-0 run with four minutes left in a 60-54 win over No. 1 Mt. Lebanon (7-2, 2-1) in Section 4.

Christine Ehland and Alex Ventrone led Mt. Lebanon with 14 points each.

Central Valley 48, New Castle 36 — Kiana Law scored 22 points for Class AAA No. 5 Central Valley (8-0, 3-0) in a Section 2 win. New Castle (5-5, 1-3) was led by Rachel Razzano, Dana Perrotta and Kelsey Scott, who scored 11 points each.

Bishop Canevin 56, Chartiers-Houston 22 — Celina DiPietro scored a game-high 19 points, and Erin Waskowiak added 17 for Class AA No. 2 Bishop Canevin (8-0, 3-0) in a Section 4-AA win over Chartiers-Houston (4-5, 1-3).

Vincentian 77, Trinity Christian 30 — Brenna Wise scored 22 points to lead Class A No. 1 Vincentian (9-0, 3-0) to a Section 2 win. Trinity Christian (1-7, 0-4) was led by Rose Laird's 12 points.

OLSH 41, Avonworth 28 — Heidi Langhorst scored 12 points in Section 6-AA win for No. 4 OLSH (8-1, 3-0). Mackenzie Mayernik scored 13 points for Avonworth (5-5, 2-2).

South Park 71, Moon 34 — Shelby Lindsay scored a game-high 22 points in Section 5-AAA win for No. 3 South Park (9-1, 4-0). Megan Arendsen led Moon (6-5, 2-1) with 12 points.

North Catholic 64, Eden Christian 16 — Lauren Wolosik scored 33 points to lead Class A No. 3 North Catholic (5-4, 4-0) to a Section 2 win over Eden Christian (7-3, 2-1).

Ambridge 57, Ellwood City 37 — Katie Fischer, who eclipsed 1,000 career points, scored a game-high 22 to lead Ambridge (6-2, 2-1) to a Section 2-AAA win over Ellwood City (5-5, 1-3).

Mt. Pleasant 41, Yough 20 — Elaina Fearer scored 11 points to lead Mt. Pleasant (5-4, 2-1) to Section 3-AAA win over Yough (5-5, 1-3).

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.