Plum rifle team qualifies for playoffs
The Plum varsity rifle team won two big matches last week — upending Butler and Hempfield — and the victories put the Mustangs in the WPIAL team playoffs, set for Tuesday at the Dormont/Mt. Lebanon Sportsmans Club in Canonsburg.
Plum picked up its win against section leader Hempfield on Thursday by recording one of the best scores in the WPIAL this season and one of the top results in the history of the Plum rifle program.
The Mustangs scored an 800-70x.
All eight Plum shooters hit the innermost ring on the target — worth 10 points — with all 10 of their shots.
The group nailed the bulls-eye 70 times.
The Mustangs needed every point and bulls-eye, as Hempfield scored an 800-69x.
Senior Jake Danik and juniors Josh Repasi and Ian Michaels tallied perfect 100-10x scores, while junior Melissa LeClair added a 100-9x.
Rounding out the varsity scorers for Plum were senior Scott Kolar (100-8x) and juniors Anastasia Klonowski (100-8x), Rebecca Hall (100-8x) and Mikaela Zacher (100-7x).
The win was the first for Plum over Hempfield in four meetings this season.
The Mustangs closed out their regular season Tuesday against Indiana.
The match was to be contested past the deadline for this week's edition.
Five Plum shooters also will take part in the WPIAL individual championships on Feb. 14, and it also will be at the Dormont/Mt. Lebanon Sportsmans Club.
Michael Love is a staff writer with Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-388-5825 or at firstname.lastname@example.org.
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 â 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.