The report blames poor communication between pilot and master. In my experience the pilots in that port are not interested in hearing from the master. It is a busy port and a short pilotage so each pilot handles a lot of ships.
It wasn’t a key point but one detail of the MAIB report was the pilot could request the pilot board at the pilot station instead of in the channel.
That might be true technically and maybe the port/pilot would readily agree. On the other hand the port really has the upper hand. They could make the captain wait for a pilot for a couple hours, or the port could reschedule pilot time to 2 a.m.
The reason the MAIB suggests having the pilot board at the pilot station instead of in the channel is to give more time for master- pilot exchange (MPX).
The standard approach the MAIB is using here is not going to work, this is not a problem pilots and captains can solve in real time on the run. It’s not about individuals or specific ports or berths. The whole system needs to be looked at as a whole.
For the report the port ran simulations to see at what speed is required to make that turn. That should have been long before any of these mega-ships arrived at that port. The port and/or the owners should have been required to calculate the required information and provided it to port control, the pilot and the captain long before arrival.
Upon pilot boarding the pilot and captain should have access to a completed plan with a planned track with the required speeds points clearly marked.