Norwin girls third at Gateway meet
Norwin's girls opened their cross country season close to where they hope to finish.
The Knights placed third as a team in the girls standings at the Gateway Invitational, and three Knights — two girls and one boy — placed in the top 20 of their respective races at the first meet of the year on Saturday.
The Norwin girls had 99 points, which placed them behind only Hempfield and Laurel Highlands. The Knights' boys team placed 11th with a total of 211 points, while Baldwin finished first.
In the girls race, Hempfield's Morgan Ansell won in a time of 20 minutes, 37 seconds. Abby Pristas placed in 14th and was the top finisher for Norwin with a time of 22:29, while Hannah Rusinko was 19th in 23:22 for Norwin.
On the boys' side Ethan Martin of Fox Chapel turned in the winning time of 17:20. Norwin's top finisher was Brendan Moretton, who placed 18th in 18:48.
Also competing for Norwin's girls were Julia Rosso, Cam Grudowski and Becca Rohak, who finished 21st, 22nd and 23rd with matching times of 23:31. Lindsey Dawson was 28th in 23:48, and Becca Peters was 46th in 24:43 for the Knights.
For the Norwin boys, Brenden Wagner was 45th in 19:53, Charles Huss was 46th in 19:58, Andrew Bradley was 48th in 20:01, Trey Bueley was 54th in 20:13, Clay Brough was 56th in 20:22, and Logan Dunn was 75th in 21:25.
Matt Grubba is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-388-5830 or 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.