Share This Page

Carlynton cliips Vincentian boys soccer in shootout

| Wednesday, Oct. 31, 2012, 8:58 p.m.
Pine Creek
Louis Raggiunti | Pine Creek Journal Sophomore Norman Gottshalk and the Vincetnian Royals continued to take flight as a program this season, but the team was upset in the opening round of the playoffs.

When Mitch Riehle took over the Vincentian boys soccer program, he inherited a talented core of players, many of whom he previously had coached as children.

The team was primed for a run at a title with talents like Mike Haberman, John Michael DiDonato, Alec Costa, Corbin Costa, Nick Bensics, Nick Giltrow and Ethan Andolina.

The Royals enjoyed a 10-4 regular season, riding a nine-game winning streak at one point, but the team dropped three of its last four, including a 2-1 decision in the opening round of the playoffs in a shootout against Carlynton.

“It was a disappointing loss, and I felt we could have played better,” Riehle said. “We played them in the preseason and scored in the first minute of the (playoff) game. Then, we started to play sloppy. Communication lacked, and we had problems passing and funneling. I thought we were the better team; we just weren't mentally prepared.”

The game was tied, 1-1, at the half, and Haberman was hit with his second yellow card, forcing him to sit out and giving Carlynton a man advantage.

After the loss, Riehle reflected on his talented group.

“I will miss the seniors. Four of them I coached since fourth grade,” Riehle said. “They are a talented group skill wise.”

The coach already is looking toward next season and said the group coming back is talented and has the ability to work well together.

“We had a good season, and now, we will look to next year,” Riehle said.

Jerry Clark is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-779-6979 or jeclark@tribweb.com.

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.