I was tought, if one fails, and the other is on FIRE, let it burn ( as long as it is developing thrust ). Obviously, it appeared the engine failed, and a re-light was in order. But, it didn't fail, did it?. Are there times that the commanded thrust won't match thrust-lever position on Airbuses?.
I don't have the actual facts here, but from a discussion standpoint consider that the engine damage was severe enough to result in an engine stall/surge condition resulting in the EGT going through the roof. It's entirely possible that the rotors still spooling developed some thrust, but with so little air the EGT was probably setting off warning signals and thus being addressed by the crew.
I would expect that the only rule based intuition here was not to take action on both engines simultaneously, but that some action would be part of the intuition
(happy to be corrected on this by what the procedures actually state)