Nothing in life comes with only positives; even miracle medicines have side effects (those hair-restorer pills I took which made my teeth fall out and my toes turn green. And ‘restored’ hair only to my ears).

Roy Hodgson deserves to be judged at Liverpool on his Liverpool performances only; however, until we get around to those, it’s important to know his strengths and weaknesses.

Until we can see for ourselves what media interpretations of his methods are true and which are bullshit, we need to get a grip on both sides of the argument. He has my support, but as with a new player who’s been signed, we need to know what might make it a good signing, as well as what might stop it from working. The key, of course, is to be 100% fair in our judgements of what he does at Anfield.

After a few days spent debating the merits of Roy Hodgson, including discussions with Fulham season ticket holders and bloggers/authors, Scandinavian scouts, and the perceptions (and expectations) of various Liverpool fans, I feel I’ve got a better handle on what he can offer and, equally important, what we have no right to expect from him.

These are my conclusions, as a detailed list/analysis of pros and cons.

This post is for Subscribers only.

[ttt-subscribe-article]