Thanks TB. No Hobo I am not a troll and flew and instructed on both types of approach in my time so I do know what I am talking about.
Alf, BEA were doing "Monitored Approaches" before the Trident. The philosophy was that the old fellows flying Elizabethans, DC3s, Viscounts etc were pretty good at hand visual flying so it was thought that it would be better if the co pilot flew down to minimums and the old fellow took over to land when visual. At the time (late 60s) BEA (although the first) were not the only people doing Autolands. BOAC managed to do them very well on the VC10 without using the "Monitored" approach. And regarding the article you quote, I do remember Steve. I am afraid I will disagree with you about balance as he was always very pro monitored approach, would not tolerate any opposition and took those views with him when he went to the FSF.
I think the best description of the "Monitored" approach was when the BOAC and BEA teams were at Palmdale and Mr Lockheed asked them to explain it to them. Before the BEA team could launch into their description the inestimable Hugh Dibley replied quickly " It is rather like w*****g - you know 99/ change hands." Mr Locheed was most amused - the BEA team were not.
For me the best argument against the approach is what I mentioned earlier. Neither of the two major manufacturers positively promote it and I have faith in what they say rather than what a few people in BA say. And no other major airline does it on every approach. Some airlines do it on bad weather approaches ( I suspect that the likes of Jet2 do it then because they were persuaded when ex BA proponents joined them on retirement from BA) but again other airlines who did do it (GO when it was the LCC of BA) stopped when they were taken over. (EasyJet did not pick it up when they took over GO)