EASTON SUES NCAA; NEW GUIDELINES MAY BATTER FIRM.

Byline: Patrick Hipes Daily News Staff Writer

Easton Sports, the industry's leading aluminum bat manufacturer, filed a restraint-of-trade lawsuit against the NCAA late Friday, seeking $267 million in damages and injunctive relief to save the Van Nuys company's lucrative position in the marketplace.

The lawsuit came as a response to a decision made Thursday by the NCAA Baseball Rules Committee to alter specifications on bats used by college teams beginning Jan. 1, 1999.

If upheld, the rule change would render obsolete nearly 1.3 million bats already in circulation, costing the industry an estimated $140 million and forcing companies to scramble to meet the new standards by the beginning of the year.

``This is something you do only as a last chance when you have a situation that becomes irrational,'' said Easton Sports chairman Jim Easton, who has estimated that his 400-employee company could lose between $75 million to $80 million under the new guidelines. ``(The NCAA decision) would keep us out of the market for about a year, and we think it's unfair.''

The use of aluminum bats, often a touchy issue, became a hot topic after this spring's College World Series, when the high-scoring tournament culminated in USC's 21-14 victory over Louisiana State in the championship game.

Critics complained about the proliferation of scoring while wondering about the safety of using the metal bats. The NCAA's ruling Thursday would force a maximum batted-ball exit velocity and change both size and weight specifications to make the bats perform more like their wooden counterparts used in professional leagues.

``I love scoring runs, so I don't have a problem with (aluminum bats),'' said Cal State Northridge baseball coach Mike Batesole, voted Collegiate Baseball's 1998 Coach of the Year. ``Nobody's getting hurt out there, so from that standpoint I don't see the logic. The real deal is the kids. They're just getting bigger and stronger.''

Easton said concerns about safety were overblown and thinks the NCAA used the argument to justify its decision.