ShareThis Page

Pine-Richland, DiNucci send Plum to 25th loss in a row

Michael Love
| Friday, Oct. 25, 2013, 11:51 p.m.

Plum hoped for something positive Friday in its regular-season finale against Pine-Richland on Senior Night.

The visiting Rams were trying to bounce back from last week's shutout loss to North Hills and gain some momentum going into the WPIAL Class AAAA playoffs.

Pine-Richland junior quarterback Ben DiNucci threw for 233 yards and three touchdowns to help the Rams score a 42-0 nonconference victory.

Plum fell to 0-9 with the loss, its 25th setback in a row.

The Mustangs will play a 10th game at 6 p.m. Wednesday at Greensburg Salem.

“Everyone, especially the seniors, wanted to get this one, but Pine-Richland made some plays and we weren't able to do the same,” Plum coach Matt Morgan said.

The Rams (5-4) led 21-0 at the break, as DiNucci found D'Ondre Gastion and Michael Merhaut on touchdown passes of 32 and 9 yards, respectively.

Brendan Burnham added a 25-yard touchdown run.

“We had a tough loss last week and didn't play to our potential,” Rams coach Eric Kasperowicz said. “We wanted to get our mojo back, and we played well.”

Gastion, a junior, finished with eight catches for 110 yards.

The Rams' leading rusher, junior Connor Slomka, didn't play Friday.

“He's a little banged up from the season, and we rested him to get ready for the playoffs,” Kasperowicz said.

With Slomka out, six Pine-Richland runners gained 149 yards on 33 carries.

The Plum offense was limited to 65 total yards — 23 rushing and 42 passing.

Freshmen Kevin Brown and Nick Coxon combined for 41 rushing yards on 19 carries.

Mustangs standout junior running back and inside linebacker Nathan Turchick suffered a left shoulder injury in the first quarter and didn't return.

“That was tough,” Morgan said. “He is the heart and soul of this team. It hurt not having him in there.”

Michael Love is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at

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.