Assumed Certainty
42go,
As yet, there is no factual evidence (for accident investigation purposes opposed to a legal view) stating the touchdown position. Similarly, the tailwind value is unknown; forecast, reported (when), accuracy of recording, unknown, … some of the uncertainties which pilots have to manage every flight.
'Marginal landing distance' is subjective - it implies that the margins of performance were known beforehand, not as assumed with hindsight.
What was the landing distance required as defined by national / operator requirements - not referenced so far; nor the basis of aircraft performance (repeated questioned in previous posts), then what procedure or guidance as to how this is used; e.g. additional factors, considering next worst case runway condition (no facts as to what the crew were told nor the actual runway conditions - including grooved or not, rubber contamination, …)
We need to reflect on our own experiences. How often do we judge the actual point of touchdown - how precise, what was the achieved landing distance opposed to what was expected, again how would we know, runway braking action, tyre tread wear.
For those who have flown a go around in similar circumstances - what was the trigger factor which changed the original plan, why.
"Why', how did this situation differ from similar marginal approaches with a satisfactory landing.
If we can answer why, then this is a basis for questioning the crews action, always subjective, even if we have assumed certainty.