Share This Page

PIAA lacrosse roundup: Peters Township, North Allegheny fall in semifinals

| Tuesday, June 4, 2013, 8:54 p.m.

Reilly Masterson scored seven goals to lead Radnor to a 19-9 win over Peters Township in the PIAA girls lacrosse semifinals Tuesday at Cumberland Valley High School.

The Red Raiders opened a 9-0 lead at halftime, but Peters Township came back in the second half. Alli Hurley had four goals, and Gina Vilsack and American University recruit Sarah Bootman had two goals each for Peters Township, which closed the gap to 12-9 before Radnor scored seven unanswered to end the game. Duke recruit Caitlin Carey also scored for the Indians.

“I think our girls came out a little bit scared, and I don't think they truly believed they could be in the game,” Peters Township coach Kristin Slemmer said. “I think in the second half we turned it around.”

“Even down, 9-0, it's easy for a lot of teams to hang their heads. We got back into the game, so I really am proud of them for fighting and not giving up.”

Radnor will play Harriton in the championship at noon Saturday at Hersheypark Stadium.

La Salle 14, North Allegheny 1 — Matt Rambo scored five goals and Sean Coleman had two goals and five assists to lead La Salle in the PIAA boys lacrosse semifinals at Cumberland Valley High School. Grant Page scored just before halftime to get the Tigers on the board, but they were not able to rally down, 9-1.

“They were just too good… they are just on a different level than teams in Western Pa.,” NA coach John Rullan said. “We have no regrets. It was a challenge that we wanted to see where we were at, but those kids were just too good and we couldn't get any goals by them.”

La Salle will play Conestoga in the championship game at 2:30 p.m. Saturday at Hersheypark Stadium.

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.