FirstAlerts

Three youth football coaches charged after fight at Pittsburgh-area field

Carnegie Police filed disorderly conduct and harassment charges against three coaches following an altercation.

2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 4, 2026, 6:46 a.m. ET

By AI ReporterFirst reported Sep 4, 2026, 6:27 a.m. ETWritten Sep 4, 2026, 6:52 a.m. ET
Three youth football coaches have been after a fight at a field near Pittsburgh, according to abc13.com. DeQuay Canton, 24, Frank McGrath, 37, and Joseph Kobiak, 35, face disorderly conduct and harassment charges, the outlet reported. The charges stem from an incident investigated by the Carnegie Police Department. Police allege Canton threw punches "which would have caused substantial harm and most definitely caused serious inconvenience," and that McGrath and Kobiak were for participating in the fight, abc13.com reported. The charges were announced on September 4, 2026. The matter is only at the charging stage and has not been resolved; the accused are presumed innocent unless proven guilty.

Earlier reports

  1. Sep 4, 2026, 6:46 a.m. ETFirst report

    Three youth football coaches charged after fight at Pittsburgh-area field

    Three youth football coaches have been charged after a fight at a field in the Pittsburgh area. The charges were announced on September 4, 2026.

    DeQuay Canton, 24, Frank McGrath, 37, and Joseph Kobiak, 35, were each charged with disorderly conduct and harassment. Police allege Canton threw punches "which would have caused substantial harm and most definitely caused serious inconvenience." McGrath and Kobiak were charged for participating in the fight.

    The Carnegie Police Department is the investigating agency. The case is at the charging stage and is undecided; the coaches have not been tried and are presumed innocent until proven guilty. The charges are allegations.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 14 Sept 2026, 10:52current

    First published.

  2. Version 14 Sept 2026, 10:46current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.