No, I don't think you're missing anything. You're actually pointing out flaws that the artist probably had not noticed.
Their perspective is off. If you dissect work from artists of any skill level you will most likely find something that is a little off (except maybe Scott Robertson, I'm convinced he is a robot haha.) As long as things look "good enough" most people wouldn't notice. As you improve and get a better eye, you'll start noticing these flaws in professional's work.
The horizon line here is right along the middle pier, given that we cannot se the top or bottom portion of the planks. As you pointed out, no lines converge on the horizon, and some even seem like they may never converge at all - good eye!
Sometimes when I look at work from amazing artists the idea of getting as good as them can become daunting. If you can find flaws in their work though, it makes them seem more human, and that maybe the task isn't as impossible as the voice in your head is telling you.
I think analyzing before copying is good practice. If you find weird discrepancies like this the forum can always discuss them - critiques are good! I also agree with @mitsuki-youko about the grid method. Just be careful in obsessing over getting it perfect. This assignment is more about trying to understand an artist's decisions rather than creating a photocopy (which I have mistakenly done before.) Another method is to have an invisible copy of the landscape under your drawing and make it visible every now and then to check what needs fixing.
Ok I'm done now - Keep up the good work!