[PapaNew]

Sounds like Monty was more analytical and, given the chance, could mount an effective attack as in North Africa, but was weaker in the spontaneous actions and decisions of the kind of aggressive warfare Patton waged.

Makes me think of Monty as more of a chess player while Patton was more of a Vince Lombardi.

[colorado tanker]

Yep.

Also relevant, I think, are their respective backgrounds. The Brits came close to being run out of Egypt. Rommel was very close to Alexandria. There was no room for error and caution was called for. Montgomery was also a divisional commander in the BEF whose unit was forced to the Dunkirk pocket and evacuated.

Patton's background was completely different, having steeped himself in the new mobile warfare doctrine built around the tank. With the resources America was sending into the war effort, he could also afford to take risks.

And, as you suggest, the two men had very different temperaments. Patton must be biting nails about now. He is bogged down in siege warfare in Metz and is being held back by the seemingly intractable supply problem.