Although the Vincentian boys basketball team led Northern Cambria, 39-24, at the half, coach George Yokitis was less than pleased with his team's performance.
“I was sort of aggravated, because we were lethargic and quit doing what we do,” Yokitis said.
Yokitis' rant sunk in as Vincentian came out and, “played the best quarter of basketball since I have been here,” he said.
The Royals laid down 41 points and advanced to play the only team who handed them a loss this season — Bishop Carroll. Results of that game were unavailable as of press time.
Tony DiNardo led Vincentian with a triple-double (31 points, 10 rebounds and 10 steals), and Ryan Wolfe chipped in 16 points. Jim Kenna added 10, and Jay Cortese scored 12, nine of which came in the third quarter.
With such a monstrous quarter, the Royals only scored two points in the fourth and still came away with an 82-47 win.
“The triple-double is a testament to the team and how good my teammates are,” DiNardo said.
Kevin Fischer handled much of the distribution, and he said he is happy to do his part.
“Whoever I pass the ball to I know will do something good with it,” Fischer said. “Our defense is what really helps our offense score in transition.”
Senior Matt Lang said the Royals managed to avoid the championship hangover, and the team is on the path to do all it set out to do.
“WPIALs was nice, but we have to get back at it,” Lang said.
“We have to play our way, crank it up a notch and shoot with confidence.”
Jerry Clark is a sports editor for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-779-6979 or email@example.com.
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 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.