FBW design goals and aircraft performance
The following quote is taken from a document comparing B777 and A330 flight control design vis a vis aircraft performance limitations and pilot authority developed during the recent USAF tanker competition (emphasis is mine):
"The Airbus design allows the pilot to obtain, in a repeatable fashion, a consistent level of aircraft performance. However, the pilot may be prevented from obtaining maximum aircraft aerodynamic performance. The procedure for the CFIT escape maneuver in the Airbus aircraft as recommended by Airbus, is for the pilot to pull full back on the stick and apply TOGA thrust. Speed brakes if extended, will automatically retract. Control laws either stabilize the AOA at an optimum value or adjust pitch rate to obtain maximum allowed g. With the Airbus CFIT escape maneuver pilots can quickly and easily achieve a repeatable consistent level of performance allowed by the envelope limiting system. This ease of handling might, in certain cases, result in optimum CFIT escape performance, even though full aerodynamic performance may not be achieved. The argument can be made that pilot authority is limited in the “hard” design by the fact the pilot is prevented from exceeding the limits of the flight envelope. The Airbus design allows the pilot to rapidly obtain maximum allowed aircraft performance to avoid ground contact. However, the pilot is prevented from obtaining all possible aircraft aerodynamic performance. That last bit of available but not attainable performance may be all that is necessary to avoid ground contact."
For those so willing to cast doubt upon the flight crew you should give thought to the more likely event that they were trained to take specific actions on the assumption of control laws being in operation with valid inputs. The aircraft may well have betrayed the best intent and effort of the pilots in this circumstance.