The PPL/IR quote is quite telling. Referring to beginning IR students as "cadets".
It's referring to the 95% of persons at an UK FTO who are young, ab-initio attendees of a full-time "frozen ATPL" course with the intention of becoming professional pilots. Perhaps "Cadet" was merely a shorter way of saying that, which wouldn't make the typical reader vomit or think of WW2 uniforms.
What I'm still missing is a legal reference, applicable to JAA (or UK CAA) flight under Instrument Rules, that would disqualify putting Lydd as an alternate
which I have been taught to do appears not to be a legally challengeable issue, as pointed out accurately
A flight test is not an exercise in barrack-room lawyering. No-one is saying that Peter was failed because of these items. Maybe they were emphasised as "fail points" because the examiner thought he might be reluctant to accept them as input without this sort of emphasis.
How they were positioned is quite a different topic from their legitimacy as debrief points.
would also be legitimate items of feed back about this particular event.
Perhaps. Generally in the flight test environment, a candidate's main priority is to focus on the feedback to him, so he may improve and meet the test standard. It seems to me the more fruitful discussion.