Ford City beats Southmoreland with late field goal
By D.j. Vasil
Published: Friday, Sept. 20, 2013, 11:51 p.m.
It's every quarterback's dream to deliver a game-winning drive in the final two minutes of the fourth quarter.
Ford City junior quarterback Michael Bartosiewicz lived that dream Friday night, guiding his team to a game-winning field goal and a 9-6 win over Southmoreland in a Class-AA nonconference game at Ford City Athletic Field.
With the score 6-6 and the ball at the Southmoreland 38-yard line with 1:24 to play, Bartosiewicz led the Sabers (2-2) on a 31-yard, nine-play drive that set up a 24-yard field goal by junior Tyler Blaniar. After missing the extra point on Ford City's only touchdown, Blaniar left no doubt on the field goal.
“I just tried my best to stay calm and knew if I made it, we won the game,” Blaniar said.
Ford City coach John Bartolovic let the fans' reaction tell him the result.
“I actually turned around on that,” Bartolovic said about the field goal. “I didn't worry about him making it. I'm worried because they blocked the extra point earlier.”
The drive was set up after Southmoreland (0-4, 0-3) quarterback Brennan Bunner was intercepted by linebacker Garrett Virostek. The turnover came just five plays after a Ford City turnover: a Bartosiewicz interception.
Southmoreland was plagued by nine penalties for 105 yards, something that had Southmoreland coach Mark Adams angry after the game.
“It wasn't about the end,” Adams said. “It was about the beginning, the middle and also everything. I mean, my goodness, we come down here to play a football game. Let the kids play. When I see the referees more than I see football, I know something's wrong.”
Southmoreland junior running back Jake Pisula rushed for 141 yards on 33 carries.
D.J. Vasil is a freelance writer.
Show commenting policy
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.