Just a few points here.
Simply because the pilot in question failed to make the 75% mark doesn't for one moment reflect badly on him....what margin, for example, did he fall short by?....then there is the question as to why he was on the course in the first place ?......did he have any detailed technical involvement / knowledge in a particular role prior to the course that justified his attendance... or was this a "one off" event for him ?....was language as factor at all ?....did he actually want to be there ?.....as these are all variables and thus unknown to most of us, it's not really fair to have a dig at the guy simply because he's a pilot ( fair game in many other aspects I agree
but not in this instance )....and has been mentioned, how does failing to meet the 75% mark reflect his ability as a pilot ?......there's no relevance is there towards his airmanship and flying skills to name but a couple of issues.
He was doing a type course after all......had it been the tech.aspect of his licence,
then I
would get concerned.