John, presumably the difference on UH60 (and other types) between left and right wheel up slope is to do with lateral cyclic control margins not being equal?
What I mean is that whilst the cyclic may be central at MPOG on flat ground, you immediately lose some cyclic control margin on the retreating side because of the need to counter TR drift - this would give reduced margin to the left in the case of a counter-clockwise rotor.
A crosswind from the left would just aggravate the situation as you have to use more left cyclic just to maintain the hover - leaving less available for in-slope cyclic on sloping ground landings with left wheel up.
The converse would be the case with the Puma with a clockwise rotating MR.
We teach the use of the AI (AH) to assess sloping ground limits (or roll indications in nav kit which are usually from a VG anyway).
If you make an 'operational' style of landing, you might inadvertently exceed the slope limits whereas with a slower, academic style landing, the AI should be monitored all the way to MPOG to prevent exceeding the limits - that way the situation described by GM shouldn't occur.
The Lynx 7 however, was more uncomfortable as the fuselage had a 4 degree either way roll between the fuselage and the skids such that on a 12 degree lateral slope, when the controls were centralised, the AI could read 16 degrees of roll even though the skids were at 12 and therefore in limits.
The only worry about lack of lateral cyclic would be dynamic rollover which shouldn't be an issue if you are right wheel up in a CCW rotor as you are closer to the hover attitude (opposite for Puma).