ShareThis Page
High School Sports

Roundup: McCauley's 41 not enough for Yough

| Sunday, Jan. 9, 2005

Even though Yough's Ben McCauley scored a season-high 41 points, it wasn't enough as Thomas Jefferson (9-5) edged the Cougars 67-65 in a non-section boys basketball game Saturday.

In a game that saw several lead changes, Yough (9-5) ended the first quarter up 16-15. Thomas Jefferson shot its way into the lead at the half, 34-30. The Jaguars only scored eight points in the third quarter as Yough surged back into the lead 47-42. The fourth quarter saw the Jaguars recover and post 25 points in the quarter, all leading to Billy Arre hitting a 12-foot jumper with less than 20 seconds left to give the Jaguars the win.

Albert Gallatin 59, Laurel Highlands 46 -- Jarrod Lint netted 18 points for Albert Gallatin (10-4) in its non-section win over Laurel Highlands (7-8). Gregg Forse had 15 points for Laurel Highlands in the loss.

Girls basketball

McKeesport 60, Greensburg Salem 58 -- With seconds left, Amy Johns scored to give McKeesport a non-section win over Greensburg Salem (10-6) in girls basketball play. Johns finished the game with 24 points. Mary Cook scored 21 points for the Golden Lions in the loss.

Norwin 65, Franklin Regional 57 -- Jessica Schake tallied 20 points as Norwin (10-3) toppled Franklin Regional (9-5) in a non-section game. Alissa Schake had 11 for the Knights.

Connellsville Area 54, Highlands 43 -- Ashley Benzio led Connellsville with 17 points as the Falcons defeated Highlands in a non-section contest. Also for the Falcons, Rachel Means added 13.

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.

click me