Fast start by Plum halts Pine-Richland
In an effort to get some tough competition to prepare for section play, the Pine-Richland Lady Rams basketball team visited Plum.
The game didn't get off to the start Lady Rams coach Cliff Foster hoped for, but despite the 16-3 run by Plum to open the game and the 58-37 final tally, there were some positives Pine-Richland was able to take away.
“We were down, 22-3, at one point to start the game,” Foster said. “If you erase that, it was 35-34 the rest of the way. Wipe out that six-minute (span), and we are cool.”
One aspect of the game that was difficult for the Lady Rams was the pair of forwards the Lady Mustangs sported in 6-foot-3 Courtney Zezza and 5-11 Krista Pietropola, a matchup that favored Plum.
“This was an extension of our practice,” Foster said. “We came in and took a deep breath ... perhaps too deep.
“We have a lot of young girls, and Krista is a fantastic player for Plum.”
Despite the clear size advantage for Plum, Pine-Richland managed to get some tough points from the perimeter as well as in the paint.
Marisa Hombosky led the way with nine points, including a 3-pointer. Caitlin McMaster chipped in seven, and Chelsea Rourek added eight.
More important than the outcome of this game was the work against a rather tough team, and Foster noted that Section 3-AAAA, is the toughest there is.
“Our section is the best by far, and we wanted to win this game for our section, but the work against a good team is what we needed,” Foster said. “Sure, the loss hurts. Nobody likes to lose, but we won't be in the Valley of Death because we lost.”
Foster's optimism is justified. Pine-Richland defeated section-leading Oakland Catholic and doubled up North Hills, 50-25.
Despite a recent skid, the Lady Rams look to build their section win total as they visit North Hills at 7:30 p.m. tonight.
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 â 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.