Narrow loss ends Quaker Valley girls lacrosse season
It was a tough way to end the season for the Quaker Valley girls lacrosse team.
The Quakers were faced with the tall task of facing 13-1 Shady Side Academy in the opening round of the WPIAL Division I playoffs. They were no strangers to the Indians, as Quaker Valley fell to them, 16-8, on April 26.
The Quakers gave it their all, leading 5-4 at the half but eventually lost to Shady Side Academy, 9-8.
“In my eyes, we were winners,” Quaker Valley coach Nellie Kraus said. “They played as a team and didn't get down on each other. They delivered the game plan we had set up. They executed it perfectly. You have to live and learn and be a better team from it next year.”
Sophomore Annie Henry led the team with three goals, and sophomore Megan Amorosa had two goals.The loss dropped Quaker Valley to 8-8-1.
It was a year of ups and downs: The Quakers dropped three games by a one-goal deficit but had a strong finish to the season, winning four of the final five regular-season games.
“We had a lot of heartbreak with the one-goal losses to Seneca Valley and Sewickley Academy,” Kraus said. “I am just really proud they continued to get better. The girls rose up and met the goals we set at the beginning of the year. We had a lot of depth, so we should be strong the next two seasons.”
Nathan Smith is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at firstname.lastname@example.org orvia Twitter @NSmith_Trib.
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.