;moved to correct choronological order 
 Without question the article is biased!  

 But which is to be expected after all, inasmuch as it was obviously written by a British person, as betrayed by the spelling, grammar and sentence formation. In my view, his comparison to Wellington and Marlboro must surely have those military giants revolving in their graves at lightspeed.  

 The only question I have is why "the neutrality of this article is disputed" disclaimer has not been thus far appended? 

 In contrast, Omar Bradley's unbiased assessment of Montgomery in "A Soldier's Story," written by a humble, self-effacing man with no axe to grind is quite enlightening, and gives the numerical specifics of the supply situation at that time. But even before his vanity, arrogance and personality quirks had alienated not only the American generals, but also the majority of the British ones as well, Monty was regarded by his peers as slightly above mediocre, a commander who took shrewd advantage of the overwhelming amount of American weaponry and supplies afforded him courtesy of Mr. Roosevelt. 

 And not just Bradley. For when such a vast array of Generals contemporary to Montgomery  again, even the various British Generals and Marshals  who knew and fought alongside him at that time, in consensus say the salient features about him were that, 1) he was overly cautious to a fault, 2) he was more afraid of losing a battle than winning one, and that, 3) he would never engage the enemy without at least a 2-1 advantage in manpower, 4) with an even greater ratio in weapons and materiel, well, 5) that speaks volumes, doesn't it?  

 But, the British at that time were in desperate need of a battlefield hero to lift their spirits, and so you have "The Hero of El Alamein" myth. A close look at the specifics of the Nort African campaign bear out the fact that this victory was won more due to the Allies overabundance of resources in direct proportion to Rommel's lack thereof.    jfblodi, 12:12, 2009 Jan 7. 
 :The "spelling, grammar and sentence formation" should not be the subject of criticism, because that is governed by policy on style. As for the rest, if there are valid criticisms, they will have been written about by reliable third party sources and shouldn't be too difficult to find.