"(d) If the pilot in command lands at an airport other than the nearest suitable airport, in point of time, he or she shall (upon completing the trip),"send a written report , in duplicate, to his or her director of operations, stating the reasons for determining that the selection of an airport, other than the nearest airport, was as safe a course of action as landing at the nearest suitable airport. The director of operations shall, within 10 days after the pilot returns to his or her home base, send a copy of this report with the director of operation's comments to the certificate-holding district office."
It is amazing how defensive some of you are.
Disclaimer: I have flown long-haul worldwide for many years but would never claim to have as much knowledge as some of you seem to have on the subject.
Here's my take on it. Part of my mental checklist in any abnormal situation is to cover my ass (unless it is life-threatening of course). If I were to read the above section and saw that I would have to defend my decision to not land at the nearest suitable airport, I think my ticket takes precedence. That language says to me, "It's OK to continue, but you better pray nothing goes wrong."
Well, obviously this crew rolled the dice and it bit them in the butt. How do you explain flying across the US, Atlantic Ocean with the end result being a fuel emergency? I am sure they did not foresee this but my point is, why take the chance?
Would they have been overweight for a fuel stop in Gander? Was it worth it now in retrospect to continue on? What if they arrived only to find the airport closed due to some unforeseen circumstance?
My airline teaches that it is better to err on the side of safety; A policy that I am thankful that they embrace.