USPF volleybelles end elimination with no. 1 spot in Cesafi girls
THE University of Southern Philippines Foundation Baby Panthers took a step closer to defending their title in the Cebu Schools Athletic Foundation, Inc. (Cesafi) girls volleyball after ending the elimination at the top with a sweep of Sacred Heart School-Ateneo de Cebu (SHS-AdC) Magis Eagles yesterday at the USPF covered court.
The Baby Panthers were comfortable in their home turf as they defeated the Magis Eagles, 25-23, 25-17, to advance to the semifinal round as the no.1 ranked team with a 6-1 win-loss record. They relegated Ateneo to the fourth spot with its 4-3 card.
“The training that we had really worked,” said USPF head coach Rizarri Yolanda, who earlier exclaimed that to be among the top four is their main goal.
Now that they had achieved it, Yolanda said, “Next is to be champion again. To defend our crown. Most likely, that is how it should be.”
“For the upcoming semifinal rounds, we will be working more on our confidence because our players’ skills are already there,” she added. “Because they get intimidated when opponent gets the upperhand on the score.”
USPF shares the same record as the University of San Jose- Recoletos (USJ-R) but the latter fell to second as they lost to USPF in the elimination rounds. At third is University of San Carlos (USC) Warriors with their 5-2 card.
Eliminated were Southwestern University (SWU)-Phinma (3-4), University of Cebu (UC) Webmasters (3-4), Cebu Doctors University (CDU) with 1-6 and Cebu Eastern College (0-7).
In the Boys division, CDU won by default against USJ-R; USC defeated SWU, 18-25, 25-15, 25-16; USPF ruled over UC, 25-21, 25-20; Cebu Institute of Technology-University won against Ateneo, 25-13, 25-20; and USPF defeated USC, 25-21, 29-27.
The semifinal rounds for the Girls division will start next Saturday (Oct. 13).
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.