Randomized non-comparative trials: an oxymoron?

The best defence of the randomised non-comparative design that I’ve heard was a case where they said they just wanted to split the participants into two groups, without any intention of comparing them, and randomisation was the fairest way of doing that. But that’s still a bit weird to me because the study was looking at two alternative treatments, so comparing them would seem a logical thing to do. Also they still described the study as a randomised controlled trial - which, without that comparison, it isn’t.