ShareThis Page

Loss to Tampa Bay Rowdies caps winless month for Riverhounds

| Saturday, July 29, 2017, 9:48 p.m.

The Riverhounds will need a late-season push to reach the playoffs after July came and went without a win.

A goal on each side of halftime by Alex Morrell gave the Tampa Bay Rowdies a 2-0 win over the Riverhounds on Saturday night at Al Lang Stadium in St. Petersburg, Fla.

The Riverhounds (5-8-8) had drawn their previous four games, but the loss leaves them winless in their past six. Their last win was the previous meeting with the Rowdies (9-5-4), a 2-0 win on June 22 in Pittsburgh, yet they remain only two points out of the last playoff position in the USL's Eastern Conference.

Morrell had the Rowdies, who are 8-1-2 at home this season, ahead less than 11 minutes into the game. Marcel Schäfer worked down the left wing and sent in a low cross that Riverhounds goalkeeper Trey Mitchell was unable to corral, allowing Morrell to tap in from close range.

The Riverhounds hung around at 1-0 for more than an hour, but Schäfer again set up Morrell in the 76th minute with a lofted cross that Morrell volleyed into the ground and through traffic into the net.

Playing their third game in eight days, the Riverhounds had just 43 percent of possession in their first loss to the Rowdies in three all-time meetings.

Matt Grubba is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at or via Twitter @Grubba_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.