Sobelena please note BOAC's evidently unintentional and unforeseen assumption that a Spectator or Spotter would immediately understand his gist when he said that "Harsh braking/undercarriage collapse or runway excursion with a standing c/crew member is not ... (perfectly safe)".
BOAC was merely introducing his illustration as an example of some additional but potential unforeseen hazard, and NOT a commentary on what was significantly likely to happen next in the particular case. Now we knew that when we read it, but Spectators / Spotters are generally not as informed as us on risk management practised by the flight crew, are they?
So again, please let's not berate them for misinterpreting our false assumptions.
Go arounds aren't unusual but this one was unusually caused, so why dismiss the story so brutally?