Gateway soccer players earn all-section honors
The WPIAL playoffs are over, and the PIAA tournament has just begun, but some other soccer honors were handed out recently, and players from Gateway were among those recognized for their efforts on the pitch in the 2013 season.
Seventeen players were voted to the Section 3-AAA girls soccer team.
Gateway seniors Emily Stevens (forward), Allie Warsaw (goalkeeper) and Hanna Crable (defense) made the list, as did Gators junior forward Maggie Hilton.
Stevens scored a team-best eight goals and added seven assists for Gateway, which made the playoffs after finishing third in the Section 3 standings.
Hilton added six goals and had a team-best 11 assists.
Crable and Warsaw anchored a defensive unit that gave up 28 goals in 19 games and pitched six shutouts.
The Gators lost to Bethel Park in the WPIAL quarterfinals, 3-1, after upsetting North Allegheny, 2-1, in the first round.
On the boys side, a pair of Gateway players were voted to the Section 3-AAA Finest 16 all-star squad.
Earning recognition for the Gators were juniors Jared Jenkins and Joe Klonicki. Jenkins led the team with six goals.
Fellow junior Chris Conti was named to the all-section honorable-mention list.
It was a tough year for the Gateway boys.
The Gators finished 3-9 in the section, and six of the nine section losses were by one goal.
The Section 3 boys and girls soccer coaches voted for the all-section teams, and each coach was not permitted to vote for their own players.
Michael Love is a staff writer with Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-388-5825 or at 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.