COMMITTEE COCK-UPS : SHOULD " WE'RE ONLY AMATEURS " BE ACCEPTED AS A VALID EXCUSE ?

This is not an easy question to answer. Certainly in most social clubs committees are made up of willing volunteers , keen to serve the club in the best way they can. The fact is that any club member who wishes to stand for committee will quickly find him/herself on committee , given the absence of competition for places. Members often get elected unopposed , even for key posts , and so there is a real likelihood that people with no experience of running an organisation will end up taking on management responsibilities for which they are clearly ill-suited.
In small clubs committees are largely made up of amateurs, although long serving officers may have acquired the necessary guile and expertise to do a competent job.
However , in larger clubs many committees will be blessed with " professionals " in their ranks. These are people who have all the necessary management skills to undertake committee work in a highly effective and efficient way. Critical decision making , based on sound analysis and careful consideration , is what they are used to all their working lives. Accountants are ideal candidates to undertake the post of treasurer. Lawyers are perfect for the role of secretary, and retired chief executives would excel in the roles of chairman and vice-chairman. Bridge clubs , it should be noted , typically appeal to people who belong to the higher socio-economic grouping of upper middle-class individuals , boasting professional and managerial job status.
So when cock-ups occur , should such well-qualified committees be allowed to excuse themselves by claiming " we're only amateurs " ?  I think not. The standard of care , and degree of competence ,  expected of these high calibre people must be way above that of the man on the Clapham omnibus. Decisions they make should reflect sound business acumen. Their collective knowledge , skill and wisdom is so immense , they should not be making cock-ups in the first place , let alone resorting to limp excuses to deny any responsibility or blame. 
So if a committee , contrary to expectations , botch up a disciplinary process , by failing to follow their own Constitution rules , or adhere to rules of natural justice , they cannot excuse themselves on the grounds of " amateurism ".
What they can be guilty of is abuse of power , by believing they are a law unto themselves , and that private social clubs should be exempt . possibly , immune from any outside or judicial interference. It some instances this blinkered view reflects arrogance as opposed to ignorance. As one learned judge astutely pointed out " unfortunately there is always the hazard of the sheer ineptitude of honest and well meaning gentlemen with little or no training in legal matters , being asked to undertake the quasi-judicial functions involved in a club's disciplinary process ".