If I smash my Hummer while trying to park it in a too small garage, who's to blame? The car?
But I've already set up a letter to Airbus, suggesting to build slender delta wings and Mach 2+ capabilities again. Those things are much easier to park, think about it.  :P

More seriously, I think that those incidents are indeed the worst thing to happen for a manufacturer.
But if there was a general "too big", we would see those happenings more often. The A380 is flying and taxing since years.
I'd say that the rather low number just shows the "usual" outcome of precise or not so precise work on e. g. current ground charts and measurements.
Since other planes don't run into buildings (or at least one can't read about it that often) but sometimes into baggage carts, we're seeing a rather normal operation of such a big plane.
If the size only harms a parking CRJ or a Paris building since starting operations, that's a good overall outcome in my eyes.

Maybe they improve the wings with some more sensors and/or cameras then, to allow the pilots to gain some pre-warning time, but I really doubt that the general "airports are too small for the A380" is a valid statement.
If you look into the history of the 80 meter box definition, you will see that the main driver of preparing airports for bigger planes (as the 747) was Boeing, at the time they were planning to compete in size (which they gave up later since you can't easily stretch a plane without large design works).

Now if there was a huge A380 flying around while all other planes are so much smaller, it would indeed be an exception.
But looking at the 747-8 for example (which is longer as the current A380 and just at the limits of the box size) doesn't give me "oh, she's so small" feeling at all.
And Boeing now does what every dev would do when he can't enhance his product any further than the current state. Promoting the downsides as the advantages.
So, when following Boeing marketing, the 747-8 is just right, the A380 is too big and the 747 is oh so much more efficient.
Well, if you just read the brochures (which airlines usually not use as their main source of information about new buys), you may get that picture.
But, wait, Airbus does brochures too.  :D

The sales of the 747 passenger version aren't that good (that's why it's coming in red now, pleasing the maybe more "open" Asian market), you may guess why. The sales for the 747 freighter are, but since there's no competitor available this shouldn't be too surprising.
They've chosen the right step, to go freighter first since all A380 activities focus on the passenger version and the high sales there will also manifest that movement. Airbus actually can't produce the freighter (although e. g. Fedex had large orders there and was really happy with the plane in concept), their resources don't allow that without dropping on the passenger sales which largely depend on the production rates.
A rather good outcome for both devs, so to speak, and the now real competition focuses on the 787 / A350 sector. That's where a real Boeing against Airbus fight goes on since the planes are in THE main segment of future sales and both are fighting as passenger models.

And, no doubt, the 787 is a great and new plane (from the concept, so no enhanced old school tech) and it also arrives first in the market.
That's a big pro and will be a heavy burden for Airbus to take, although they've already collected quite some orders on the A350.
I think that the duopoly in that sector just continues while the smaller sector gets eaten by the CRJs and Embraers.