As long as the substance of the wine was not not tampered with, you have no case. The substance of what contains the wine has no relevance unless the container could somehow corrupt the wine (e.g. broken pieces of pottery cause the wine to be mixed with clay dirt). Romulus is correct...that is a serious charge and very difficult to prove. Best to err on the side of validity.
This is nothing new for Villanova. I'm currently sitting right down the road from "that place" and a decade ago, I was being subjected to the worst atrocities (liturgically speaking)at that truly God-forsaken place.
I'll never forget the "Easter Vigil" I attended. A nun with incense in leotards. The total nutcase of a priest who said while grabbing a newborn and running around the chapel with it and holding it aloft. "This is what it's all about!!!" This lunacy was of course rewarded with the thunderous applause of the dupes in attendance.
And another thing, when you taste salt and honey in your communion host, it's a tell-tale sign all you are getting is lousy bread. You don't even have to deal with the intent or lack thereof to deny the validity of the services.