Given the Harvard's well known reputation for spinning off a stall, particularly if inadvertently stalled in the final approach configuration - that is "interesting".
I just took a look on the national archives website, but unfortunately can't seem to see any A&AEE flight test reports on the Harvard - it would be really interesting to compare that supposition to the published characteristics of the aeroplane.
I did find this webpage with a set of what appear to be wartime USAF training notes for the Harvard....
https://www.t6harvard.com/pilot-stor...nd-manual-pdf/
If you download chapter 5, and go to page 62 you find...
When you recognise the stall, recover by simultaneously apply positive forward stick pressure and opening the throttle to the sea-level stop. Apply rudder pressure as necessary to keep the nose of the aircraft from yawing as it comes down, and aileron pressure, as necessary, to keep the wings level. Normally, additional right-rudder pressure will be necessary to overcome the gyroscopic action of the propeller as the nose is lowered. Allow the nose to continue down to an attitude slightly below the normal cruising speed, straight and level flight attitude.
<snip>
The possibility of a wing dropping during a stall, and the proper corrective action, bears further detailed discussion at this point. Most modern aircraft are so constructed that the wing will stall progressively outward from the wing root to the wing tip.
<snip>
The rudder should be used in such a manner as to prevent the nose from yawing toward the low wing. That is, it should be used to keep the nose attitude straight ahead.
It goes on for several pages after that, but so far as I can see, every mention of the rudder is about either preventing further yaw, or keeping the ball in the middle. It repeats several times what we'd still say now - unstall the aeroplane with elevator, then use the ailerons to roll wings level.
G