Injuries haven't slowed Canevin
Bishop Canevin has had five players miss significant chunks of time with injuries — yet has seemingly gotten better.
Megan Hart (ACL), Becca Vanek (foot), Daisha Reed (concussion), Bailey Burgess (mononucleosis) and Julia Martin (ankle) have all been either banged up or, in Hart's case, lost for the year.
Still, the Crusaders lead Avonworth by a half-game in the Section 3-A standings with two games in hand. They split two meetings.
“The girls have overcome quite a bit of adversity,” first-year coach Jared Steigerwald said.
Senior Julianne Hart and sophomore Ellese White have six goals apiece. Goalkeeper Caroline Clarke has posted 10 shutouts.
• With last year's two leading scorers, Mikalya Mance and Hannah Ponitz, out because Mance decided to play for the Riverhounds and Ponitz tore her ACL, the Yough girls soccer team hasn't missed a beat. Sophomore Shawna Zaken leads the way with 23 goals. Junior Natalie Luppold has 18 and senior Franki Berarducci 11. “Those girls have picked us up when we needed picked up,” Cougars coach Dann Appolonia said. Alex O'Brien, Sam Maughan, Tayler Powell and Ellie Balko have been dominant in front of keeper Leigh Appolonia, who has 11 shutouts. Yough (12-3, 10-1), which has allowed just five goals in 15 games, captured the Section 1-AA title for a second consecutive year Monday.
• With a win over McGuffey on Wednesday, South Park can clinch a share of its 17th straight section title. The Eagles have compiled a 203-6-3 section record during that stretch, reaching the WPIAL final seven times and the semifinals 12 times.
— Jason Mackey
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.