Shady Side Academy swim team splits two meets
By Marty Stewart
Published: Wednesday, Feb. 13, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
The Shady Side Academy swim team split a pair of meets last week.
On Feb. 5, the boys lost to Plum, 97-71, while the girls fell, 86-82.
The Indians rebounded on Feb. 7 to sweep Mars in a section meet and remain undefeated in the section.
The boys picked up a 91-72 win while the girls were 85-71 victors.
“Two meets — one good, one not as much,” SSA coach John Landreth said. “(It was a) snooze fest against Plum on Tuesday.
“They are a AAA team that did not elicit much emotion on our side.”
On the other hand, Landreth said the Mars meet was a huge one for his athletes.
“They have a very good squad, but we had a dramatic change in emotion and motivation,” Landreth said
“Many, many lifetime- best swims occurred.”
Boys winners against Plum were: Brendan Leech (200 yard IM, 100 backstroke), Ryan Koul (50 free), Thad Ellis (100 free) and Ellis, Andrew Lehman Leech and Koul in the 200 and 400 free relay.s
Girls winners were: Destin Groff (200 free), Caroline Colville (100 back) and Karen Shi, Ali Sarner, Emily Jaffe and Groff in the 400 free relay.
At the Mars meet, boys winners were: Leech (200 free, 100 back), Ellis (50 free, 100 free) and Ellis, Leech, Frank Benckart and Koul in the 200 free relay.
Girls winners were: Jaffe (50 free, 100 butterfly), Colville (200 free), Groff (200 IM) and Sarner (100 backstroke).
Marty Stewart is a sports editor for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-782-2123 or email@example.com.
Show commenting policy
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.