ShareThis Page

HS highlight reel: Ambridge contests McGinnis transfer

| Monday, Oct. 6, 2014, 10:12 p.m.

Ambridge will contest senior Stephon McGinnis' transfer to Aliquippa, leaving the senior ineligible for now.

The WPIAL received transfer paperwork Monday morning without a signature of approval from Ambridge's principal, executive director Tim O'Malley said. As a result, the WPIAL will hold an eligibility hearing for McGinnis, a standout football and basketball player who switched schools last week. That hearing likely won't come until next week at the earliest.

McGinnis (5-7, 141) was the leading receiver this year for Ambridge's football team and a 20-point scorer last season for its basketball team as a first-team, all-section guard. McGinnis can practice with Aliquippa but won't play in games until his eligibility is determined.

The WPIAL must schedule several other eligibility hearings as well. Among them, the Lincoln Park boys basketball team added two transfers from Sto-Rox, junior Jihad Cromer and sophomore Michael Smith. Sto-Rox has contested the transfers, O'Malley said.

Also, the WPIAL must reexamine the case of Lincoln Park junior Nick Aloi, who the board in April declared ineligible until Jan. 21, 2015, the one-year anniversary of his transfer from Ellwood City. After Aloi appealed, the PIAA last week returned the case to the WPIAL for reconsideration. The WPIAL is awaiting input from the PIAA before scheduling a second hearing with Aloi.

“We want to see what it is we have to rehear,” O'Malley said.

— Chris Harlan

Stats of the day

10

Receptions for Seton-La Salle's Danzel McKinley-Lewis last week to give him 32, second best in the WPIAL.

32

College scholarship offers for Central Catholic football player John Petrishen, who added West Virginia Monday.

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.