Thanks for the link.
I was interested to know how a 'confused handover' had occurred (wanting to learn something from this) so read the entire report rather than just the summary. This was illuminating:
"The instructor noticed that the student was continuing to make control inputs. He described using explicit language to encourage the student to fully relinquish control."
and
"despite an improvement in the continuity of instruction, his progress remained slow. The student had repeated difficulties in the circuit with control of the approach and landing."
Drilling down it would seem the instructor was faced with a difficult situation in which the less than stellar student wouldn't let go of the controls when he (the instructor) stated "I have control". He possibly then said something like "let go the effing yoke!", to no avail. One could read implied criticism in the report that he didn't repeat the standard phrase "I have control".
While I understand the importance of consistency in training, particularly with phraseology, I also have some sympathy with the instructor whom, when faced with hell going into a handbasket quicksmart, probably resorted to a very clear and direct instruction. At that point I'm not sure repeating the previous polite statement would have made any difference?
What is missing from the report, to my mind reducing its usefulness, is the student's age (and possibly their occupation), and exactly what the instructor said. The instructor was a 24 y.o. with 500-odd hours and if the student were say a 40 y.o. army officer one could imagine a reverse command gradient. And if the instructor simply said 'eff off', that's probably not going to be effective either. All surmise of course, but sometimes sanitised reports don't quite convey the full story sufficiently well.
FP.