OK, Dangerous to post on this thread in relation to the pilots, however one point I have not seen mentioned before is below.
First however I would like to, for the purpose of this post, to take it as given that in this situation these pilots made at least good decisions for this situation. Further, those decisions resulted in no major injuries and would not have been bettered by perhaps 99% of other pilots in similar circumstances. As such there is thus no room to personally criticize these pilots. Whether you agree or not with this is immaterial to this argument as it is taken as given.
Now, lets imagine this fuel/engine issue had occurred just a few seconds (2-3??) later. In such a situation, it could be argued that the pilots would have made exactly the same decisions, but the result could then have been a scrape on the runway, fire, and perhaps many deaths.
Alternately it could have happened a few seconds earlier and only that 1% of better pilots would have been able to even land it even on the grass.
Would it be fair to criticize these pilots in either of the other two situations? I would suggest not, even though they may have resulted in many deaths. The simple fact is that the lack of injuries seems to be a result of pilots making reasonable decisions in a window in which those reasonable decisions were able to have a mostly positive outcome.
Going back to the question about pilots posted above, I do think it is reasonable to question the pilots actions, but ONLY from the perspective of seeing if it would be possible to somehow increase the chance in the future that the right decisions are made within the right window. In reality, I don't think this is possible, but asking if it is possible does seem important.
TME