Liverpool FC Forum

by **JBG** » Fri Dec 19, 2003 12:58 pm

Roy Evans v. Gerard Houllier?

If these two stood toe to toe and decided to duke it out, who would win?

Roy Evans:
Pros
1. Never finsihed outside the top four
2. The Robbie Fowler and Steve McMannaman days.
4. We played some lovely football.
5. Beat Arsenal a lot.

Cons:
1. The Spice Boys.
2. Players like Phil Babb, Oyvind Leonharsen, Neil Ruddock etc
3. Never won anything other than the gay league cup.
4. Never qualified for the champions league.
5. We were a soft touch to the likes of Coventry.
6. Man UTD beat us a lot (and often very easily).

Gerard Houllier:
Pros:
1. Won a few trophies.
2. Michael Owen played some great stuff.
3. Played in the Champions League twice.
4. Getting some great results in Europe.
5. Beat Man UTD a lot.

Cons:
1. Won a lot of Mickey Mouse trophies and tried to pass this off as “success”.
2. Played dreadful, ugly football.
3. Signed some good players (Litmannen, Anelka) then let them go.
4. Brought in a load of rubbish from France.
5. Still a soft touch to the Coventrys and Southampton’s of this world.

by **Owzat** » Fri Dec 19, 2003 2:18 pm

- Houllier has more trophies but has spent more money in doing so.
- Evans never finished outside the top four in a full season in charge but Houllier managed 2nd place
- Houllier sorted out the defence and has since managed to undo that
- Evans didn't waste millions on "potential"
- Houllier makes too many excuses and talks a better game than he delivers
- Evans took over from Souness when we were at a low point, Houllier took over when the club had good players and decent league finishes

Bottom line is their league achievements are comparable with Houllier slightly ahead. The trophy count is strongly in favour of Houllier but how many millions has he spent in achieving it? For me it is close but Evans shades it because he had less resources and achieved respectable results, Houllier has thrown money at the job and not achieved results in proportion

by **116-1065305004** » Fri Dec 19, 2003 2:42 pm

What is sad Houllier has done a fantastic job in the past but because he selfishly refuses to step down he will always be rememembered as the man who destroyed the club for the past couple of seasons he has been in charge.

by **greenred** » Fri Dec 19, 2003 2:52 pm

its a toss up between the two but I voted for roy.We played some fantastic football under evans and got our act together defensively under houllier, the double act was presumably a way of bringing the two systems together ,but as we all know it didnt work. At the end of the day we are no closer to winning the league then we were under souness so they both failed.Houlliers legacy may have been different if he had left after his heart problems.At that time the team was a coherent unit that looked ready to win something big.He would have been mentioned in the same company as shankly and paisley as an all time legend.He f##ked up big time by staying on because now he will be remembered in the same way as souness and evans.The choice of liverpools next manager will be the most important decision since the appointment of bill shankly.The right man will regain our place in the top two or three teams in the world.However, the wrong man will finally establish us as a mid table club living on the scraps of a glorious history(like spurs)

If we pick the wrong man liverpool are finished as a top club.Its that important in my opinion.

by **JBG** » Fri Dec 19, 2003 4:26 pm

I think we are at a lower level now then back in the Roy Evans days.

Houllier hit greater heights than Evans but also reached some greater lows, such as the past 13 months.

Evans' side was consistently good in that it was very dangerous at times, played good football, but ultimately flattered to deceive. However, at no time under Evans could you call Liverpool "dreadful". His team had a few arrogant idiots and big time Charlies, but the problem was more mental and attitude rather than sheer lack of ability.

Evans' side eventually became a joke because most people accepted that in terms of skill and ability his Liverpool were just as good as Arsenal and Man UTD, but lacked the same professionalism of those teams and were a bit of a soft touch at times.

by **Owzat** » Sat Dec 20, 2003 12:56 pm

How many of Houllier's signings do you think would be needed to have made Evans' team work? Gerrard and Owen would have come through anyway it was mainly the defence which was shaky. Stick Hyypia and Henchoz in the back four and you'd have a much better balanced side

James
Carragher
Hyypia
Henchoz
Wright
McManaman
Redknapp
Gerrard
Thompson
Fowler
Owen

Not bad eh?

by **ROBtheRED** » Sat Dec 20, 2003 6:30 pm

EVANS/HOULLIER XI

. Dudek

Carragher Hencoz Hyypia Riise

McManaman Gerrard Redknapp Barnes

Owen Fowler

On top of their form this side wouldve won the league!

by **Coley** » Sat Dec 20, 2003 9:19 pm

Great choice for a poll JBG, it's a bit like choosing between your favourite hangover poos. I mean are the runny stinky one's better, or the big solid ones that are 12" long?

I vote for Evans. If we're going to be cr#p i'd rather we played some great football with a manager with a great LFC past. I also agree that Evans side was only a couple of defenders short, so what happened?

by **supersub** » Sat Dec 20, 2003 9:33 pm

Coley wrote:Great choice for a poll JBG, it's a bit like choosing between your favourite hangover poos. I mean are the runny stinky one's better, or the big solid ones that are 12" long?

I have to go with the long solid one because it does leave a big smile on your face once it's over,whereas the runny stinky one causes a mess which takes forever before the last lingering remnants have finally been flushed away.

by **leothelion** » Sun Dec 21, 2003 5:20 am

PREFER NOT TO CHOOSE BUT IF I HAD TO I'D SAY EVANS HE STARTED BUILDING THE TEAM OK MAYBE A FEW CAME UP TRU THE RANKS LIKE EVANS HIMSELF BUT THEY HAD HEART AND WANTED TO PLAY FOR THE POOL.HOULLIER CAME DONE OK WITH THE PLAYERS THAT EVANS BUILT UP BUT BUT BUT THEN SOLD THEM BROUGHT IN HIS OWN AND WE ALL KNOW WHAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE

by **redandblue** » Mon Dec 22, 2003 1:12 pm

We are at a much lower level now than we were under Roy. At least Roy had the team playing some good football. I always felt that Roy's biggest weakness was his inability to deal with the likes of Fowler and Macmanaman. Unlike most of the guys on the board here, I thought that the two of them were idiots. Robbie had a great talent, but wasted it. Did you see him last week for City against the Mancs? He looked like a fat pub player. Overweight, slow and useless.

I actually thought that Houllier's decision to get rid of Fowler was a good and brave one. He couldn't get the best out of him (neither did Roy) and we got a big over-inflated price for him. Robbie had the potential to be a really top European player, but ultimately was a waster.

The biggest difference between GH and Roy was the post match conferences. If we lost, Roy was always honest enough to stand up and be counted........the opposition was better, we weren't good enough, or whatever. With GH, it's always ridiculous excuses which reflect badly on the club. I'd take Roy ahead of the French clown, any day.

Liverpool FC Forum

Houllier v. evans

Houllier v. evans

Who is online