No matter how much You train, there will always be a scenario that is unique.
Sure, 98-99% of what can be expected is, or can be trained.
But training has it limits in view of cost, so EFFECTIVE training is something else as dragging students through all possible scenarios in an endless training program. You would create robots, that get lost if the reality does not fit their training experiences.
The best part of training should be honing the decision making process, because that is what keeps people alive.
Sure there have been cases where a GA after TD would have had a better outcome, as there are instances that aborting the T/O after V1 would have had saved lives. Easy in hindsight, reading the accident report.
But for me a touchdown is selecting reverse, no idea how one could train initiation a GA after TD without stomping this basic rule.
Training those one off scenarios would introduce a new set of risks and thus lives, IF a pilot elected to use them in circumstances that did not validate them.
O yes, I did make a few long landings. Good weather, a nice headwind, good braking coefficient, long RWY. Nobody getting nervous in the office. No issue, but when I would have ended with the nose gear past the THR lights, I would have had ran into serious trouble.
And please captplaystation, do not question my knowledge of the English language, I might not be as fluent as a native speaker, but apart from the fact I master four more, I consider it more than enough to take part in this discussion. As is my 22 years experience on B747 200-300 and 400 series. As is my comprehension of one off decisions that saved the day for one, but killed others.