Lost in Saigon, you ask:
There is even a possibility that it was the First officer who actually landed the aircraft.
The BA38 incident notwithstanding, (where the captain apparently did leave the FO to land the aircraft after the double engine failure on short finals at Heathrow), I think you'd be looking for a very long time for a captain who's leave the FO to land the aircraft in a situation like the one this crew faced. I'm standing by to be contradicted, (there might be one out there), but suffice to say, I certainly wouldn't.
From the moment the crew saw the first ECAM warning, the FO would have been one busy, busy individual, working his butt off right up to impact to complete multiple checklists that would have included repeated attempts to get at least one engine going again.
For those who seem to be offended that the media are concentrating their accolades upon the captain, I think it would be a safe assumption that the captain, when cleared to make a statement to the world's media, will heap much praise upon
all his crew.
Hey, let's all be thankful the media have for once got it right and are acknowledging that we are in fact something more than "glorified bus drivers". If this had happened in Australia, it's an almost dead certainty the bastards would have got the story completly wrong and spun it such a way as to make the crew appear to have screwed up - or accused them of "murdering" poor defenceless geese.
Edited to add: I wonder if this incident will have any impact upon the minds of the management of certain airlines who insist that maximum automation be used at all times? With such policies, in a few years, there won't be any of us left who know how to fly the aeroplane
(sorry, cousins - airplane) 'by the seat of our pants'.