I was referring to the extraordinary reluctance on PPRuNe of accepting that accident pilots could have made cardinal error/s and finding a plethora of marginally connected extraneous events that could conceivably have had a minor bearing on the matter and using them to try to exonerate or ameliorate the pilot's actions.
What most sensible people have is a realisation and understanding that 1) Errors and mistakes happen, 2) An accident or incident is never down to just one single factor and 3) Breaking the error chain at any point will prevent the accident or incident. You seem to have some fundamental difficulty accepting that point.
Yes, of course the crew made an error. However, had the NOTAM been presented in a clearer and more easily digestible format, had the airfield information been available earlier, had (making an assumption that they had some bearing on the incident) Pisa's ATC procedures been of a better standard: the error chain would have most likely been broken and the incident would not have occurred.
As I'm sure you're aware, the primary purpose of any investigation in an aviation context is not to apportion blame, but to prevent further accidents and incidents. By your logic displayed here, whenever there's an incident which has a human factors element to it, the investigation should simply conclude that the crew made an error, without bothering to look into the contributory factors. Why then bother having an investigation?
seen the box, tell me, had they read the NOTAM correctly is it likely they would have landed on the wrong runway, yes or no?
I don't know, and neither do you. To repeat what has already been said: if anyone's arrogant enough to think that this couldn't ever happen to them, I hope never to share an aircraft with you in any capacity.