Self-positioned ILS approach
I am an ATCO at a regional airport in the UK, 30 years experience. It's common practice for us to offer self-positioned approaches to commercial aircraft when it's quiet, rather than giving radar vectors to the ILS, if that's what the crew prefer.
Having watched these take place over several years, I'm struck by the huge variations in the way that flight crews appear to programme their aeroplane to intercept the ILS (typically, A319/320/321 and B737 family nowadays). I've seen LLZ intercepts from 90 degrees to the LLZ and at ranges from 10 down to 5 nm from touchdown, even in very poor weather. I've seen aircraft whistle through the LLZ and (eventually) correct and some which clearly capture the GP from above.
My point is this: if we vectored you in such a fashion, wouldn't you have every right to complain about ATC giving you an unstable approach?! When I teach a student ATCO how to vector to the ILS properly, I always tell him/her to be mindful of the weather conditions and the effect of drift, when selecting a 30/40 degree closing heading, and try to allow a period of level flight before the aircraft captures the GP from below, aiming for a 7-9 mile final. We teach that ATCOs should be mindful of pilot (in)experience and the possibility that the pilot-flying may be under instruction/check-ride.
Personally, I have a strong professional wish to give the crew as stable an approach as possible. Are my views outdated these days, given the abilities of the modern aircraft? Would you expect me to instruct you to go-round if I thought the approach was unstable, from what I observed on radar?