Anyone who bowled the tournament after the balls were excluded has no grounds to sue. They knew what happened and still chose to participate. Anyone who feels that strongly about the situation should have withdrawn and not participated.
The only people who could potentially sue are those who bowled before the exclusions were announced since they were unknowingly competing against other bowlers using potentially illegal equipment, and those scores were allowed to stand.
Once the exclusions were announced it was known. Participants after that who bowl are basically agreeing with the USBC's handling of it, or don't care enough to withdraw.
Either way it goes, you at least agree that because of the inequity created by the USBC, there are some bowlers who have grounds to sue!
Right, not *anyone* has grounds. Only people that bowled prior to the decision on the excluded balls might have a potential case. Even then, what would they want? Refund of entry fee? Refund of all expenses they paid to participate (airfare, rental cars, hotel, etc.)? Throw out/disqualify all scores bowled with excluded equipment prior to the date the exclusions were announced?
When the scores are logged at National events, does the score sheet also require submission of the make/model/serial number of the ball used to bowl that score? Is there any way that a court would even be able to know how many [or which] scores were bowled with equipment that was subsequently excluded? What if someone used an excluded ball for only 1 game in their set, but then switched to an approved ball for the remainder? What if someone used an excluded ball for only 5 frames of a game, and then switched to an approved ball? Is the court going to call every "pre-exclusion" participant in as a witness and make them testify or submit a statement under oath as to whether or not they used an excluded ball to bowl their scores? So many moving parts that it may be virtually impossible for any kind of settlement to be determined.
