This event is still under investigation but it to a degree the responsibility has been assigned to the crew as it seems the Captain has been dismissed. It appears that the Captain was concerned that the F/O was landing high and/or long on a wet runway. She closed the thrust levers and took control during the flare, when her attempt to correct it led to the nose gear collapsing on touchdown.  

This event occurred during the actual landing and the Captain had been PM during the approach. Use of a PicMA procedure would likely have had little effect on the outcome, as it was the F/O's leg and landing, other than that the final approach configuration might have been correctly set earlier by the Captain who would have been PF at that point. However in any event the F/O would likely have taken manual control at the same point, when landing clearance was given and the F/O disconnected the autopilot.

The low level exchange of control was not expected and not effected using standard phraseology. A point potentially relevant to PicMA are the need for clarity as to responsibilities during a F/O's sector - although the F/O was PF, the Captain seemed uncomfortable with some aspects of the PF's activities and preempted some PF duties, including making auto-flight and configuration changes rather than prompting the PF to ask for them and monitoring their correctness.

The full official report is still awaited and a provisional unofficial link is provided courtesy of its author.