My response:
In the long run, the answer to your question is no. There are specific protections in California which would give a good "defense" to a lawsuit. Participation sports are inherently dangerous; i.e., known as "primary assumption of the risk," even in so-called non-contact sports, injuries frequently occur. As long as you do not increase the risk of injury to a point that is above and beyond that which is to be expected, then you'll have no liability.
However, that's not going to stop an irate parent from suing you. So, the better question would be, "Could I get sued if a child gets injured?", and the answer to that question is yes, which will, in and of itself, engender thousands in legal costs. So, even if you win, you'll lose.
Whenever dealing with "other" people in group events, it is always better to have insurance that will defend you in the event of, even a frivolous, lawsuit.
Either that, or come up with some sort of a legally solid "Waiver of Liability" for the parents to date and sign.
There is no duty to protect a plaintiff from risks inherent in the activity in which plaintiff is engaged. Known as "primary assumption of the risk," this doctrine completely bars plaintiff's right of recovery against the defendant landowner. [Knight v. Jewett (1992) 3 Cal.4th 296, 308-309, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2, 9-10]
A primary assumption of the risk defense most commonly arises in occupational injury cases (injuries arising from risks inherent in plaintiff's occupation, and in recreational or sporting activity injury cases. There is no duty of care to eliminate or protect against dangerous conditions that are an integral part of the sport or occupation itself. [Knight v. Jewett, supra, 3 Cal.4th at 315, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d at 14]
IAAL
