RiverRats rally to beat Danville
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Saturday, March 10, 2007
Niel Loebig and Claude Whitaker made impressive debuts for the Pittsburgh RiverRats Friday.
As a result, the RiverRats came from behind to pull out a thrilling 34-29 victory in Danville (Ill.) over the Demolition in the American Indoor Football Association.
Loebig completed 12 of 30 passes for 157 yards and five touchdowns as the RiverRats beat the Demolition for the second time in six days to up their record to 2-3.
Whitaker, a former California University standout, caught a pair of 14-yard touchdown tosses.
Danville took a 29-28 lead on a field goal with 2:30 remaining before the River-Rats came back to win on Loebig's 36-yard touchdown pass to Marko Thomas with 31 second remaining.
David Dinkins caught the other touchdown passes covering 35 and 30 yards.
David Abdul kicked two extra points and the RiverRats were awarded two points on a safety for intentional grounding in the end zone.
"Our defense played phenomenal at times especially at the end of the game," said RiverRats coach Shawn Liotta. "I was proud of our team coming back on the road like they did."
Eugene Padgett came through with a big interception in the fourth quarter for Pittsburgh.
The RiverRats are on the road again a week from today at the Johnstown Riverhawks.
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.