Centaurus and Nev No
The concept of having the F/O fly the ****ty approaches is not new. It was SOP at TAA/Australian 20 odd years ago. It was the blue tail version of the monitored approach. The procedure allowed the PIC to monitor, more accurately, what was going on around him, rather than focussing on the actual manipulation. At the minima if the F/O had heard nothing to the contrary he had a mandatory missed approach. Upon breaking visual the PIC had a couple of seconds to get his perspective and inputs sorted before he took over the landing. The F/O stayed head down into the roll out, to monitor speed /sink reducing the risk of "duck under" or speed excursions, or as we say now, unstabilised approach.
The system worked well.
Having used both ways of conducting the "monitored approach" I personally prefer the F/O flying. Unfortunately my current operator has it the other way around.
The PIC always had the option of taking over, as was his recognised right. Indeed it was mandated that he take over, it was only a matter of judgement as to when he would do so. This got over the hurt feelings problem that some seem to think is a factor. And also eliminated any misgivings that the PIC might feel, about having given away the leg.
Win win.
Maui