ShareThis Page

Clairton, Summit Academy to meet with WPIAL over benches-clearing fight

Chris Harlan
| Monday, Nov. 6, 2017, 12:48 p.m.
Clairton huddle up before the kickoff between Jeannette and Clairton on Friday Oct. 27, 2017 at Clairton.
Christian Tyler Randolph | Tribune-Review
Clairton huddle up before the kickoff between Jeannette and Clairton on Friday Oct. 27, 2017 at Clairton.

Football coaches and school administrators from Clairton and Summit Academy will meet Tuesday afternoon with the WPIAL board of directors to discuss last week's benches-clearing fight.

The WPIAL received ejection notices Monday from the game officials, who ejected three players, but the reports also asked that the WPIAL look into the incident further, WPIAL executive director Tim O'Malley said.

“(The officials) want people to look at the film,” O'Malley said, “so we've invited them in — the officials, principal, head coach and athletic director from both schools — to review what went on and to see if there's been any further (disciplinary) action taken in response to what occurred.”

The fight started after a touchdown run by Tre'sean Howard gave Clairton a 39-12 lead and one play after quarterback Brendan Parsons was injured by a late hit. Two Clairton players and one from Summit were ejected as the benches cleared at Neil C. Brown Stadium. The two Clairton players ejected will be ineligible for this week's quarterfinal contest against Carmichaels.

The officials' reports were not critical of either coaching staff, O'Malley said.

Chris Harlan is a Tribune-Review staff writer. 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.