2 hours ago, Munkworth said:

Nothing like a bit of wild speculation on a Sunday morning!

Not really "wild" is it? If your contract is relatively short then why make decisions for the long term? Keep players at your disposal to increase odds of winning trophies and bolster his CV, there is no award for developing Gilmour.

It is a common football assumption that this happens...

42 minutes ago, sonic90 said:

Not really "wild" is it? If your contract is relatively short then why make decisions for the long term? Keep players at your disposal to increase odds of winning trophies and bolster his CV, there is no award for developing Gilmour.

It is a common football assumption that this happens...

Bang, one word has let you down there buddy. 

Yes, it would appear that I’m in an extra dickish mood today wouldn’t it!m, so let back it up with some imagery.

1 hour ago, Munkworth said:

Bang, one word has let you down there buddy. 

Yes, it would appear that I’m in an extra dickish mood today wouldn’t it!m, so let back it up with some imagery.

Yeah, except that experience tells us that that’s what normally happens at our club. So I don’t think it is wild speculation from his side. In any case, I think that, under Tuchel, Gilmour will get some opportunities but mostly next season. For me, it is just annoying that we have such a player and he’s not involved at the moment when, bar the match against the dippers, our midfield has been underwhelming.

6 minutes ago, RMH said:

Yeah, except that experience tells us that that’s what normally happens at our club. So I don’t think it is wild speculation from his side.

It’s not the manager who decides to move on though is it? Maybe Tuchel is thinking he can buck the trend and get himself a longer contract?

Maybe he’s seeing the likes of Mount, James, Christensen and CHO (when he’s not being subbed on and off) has him thinking what other gems our academy could provide?

Theres only one person who knows what’s going on in his mind and what his objectives/expectations are and it’s none of us silly c**ts on here is it?

2 minutes ago, Munkworth said:

It’s not the manager who decides to move on though is it? Maybe Tuchel is thinking he can buck the trend and get himself a longer contract?

Maybe he’s seeing the likes of Mount, James, Christensen and CHO (when he’s not being subbed on and off) has him thinking what other gems our academy could provide?

Theres only one person who knows what’s going on in his mind and what his objectives/expectations are and it’s none of us silly c**ts on here is it?

What a wild speculation from your side, isn’t it?

Just now, RMH said:

What a wild speculation from your side, isn’t it?

Yes. It was intended to prove a point. 

22 minutes ago, Munkworth said:

Yes. It was intended to prove a point. 

I don't know how to put it in a soft way but instead of dancing all over the place it's better to just take the L sometimes.

1 minute ago, sonic90 said:

I don't know how to put it in a soft way but instead of dancing all over the place it's better to just take the L sometimes.

21 minutes ago, Munkworth said:

I don't know what that means?

1 hour ago, Munkworth said:

It’s not the manager who decides to move on though is it? Maybe Tuchel is thinking he can buck the trend and get himself a longer contract?

Maybe he’s seeing the likes of Mount, James, Christensen and CHO (when he’s not being subbed on and off) has him thinking what other gems our academy could provide?

Theres only one person who knows what’s going on in his mind and what his objectives/expectations are and it’s none of us silly c**ts on here is it?

Does the length of a contract mean anything at Chelsea when it comes to managers staying or going? Only in terms of the amount of the pay off. Certainly doesn't guarantee any job security under Roman.

 

36 minutes ago, just said:

Does the length of a contract mean anything at Chelsea when it comes to managers staying or going? Only in terms of the amount of the pay off. Certainly doesn't guarantee any job security under Roman.

 

I don’t know and I wouldn’t want to speculate... 

On 03/03/2021 at 16:01, dkw said:

Oh without a doubt, this summer will see us linked with every german from Karl Marx to Michael Schenker. But its worrying how little Tuchel is using Gilmour, after we kept him from going out on loan. 4 or 5 months of no top level football is not going to help him at the moment.

Micheal Schenker, and Uli John Roth, the best strike force ever, and they're German 

I think he’ll get a lot more game time next season if TT moves back to his preferred 4141, with Billy at the base of midfield like he did with Weigl. Gives Billy 6 months to get accustomed to what TT wants.

Some encouraging words from the gaffer:

“It’s absolutely no mistake. It was unfortunately not his choice. It was my choice. The choice was made for Chelsea and not for the personal goals of Billy. He accepted it in a five-minute talk. I hope he knows how much I appreciate him.

“He has three big problems: N’Golo Kanté, Mateo Kovacic and Jorginho. I can only strongly recommend the Scottish national team to nominate him because this guy trains on the highest level. They should not be worried about his ability to compete.

“We talk now several times because sometimes he does not make it to the 18 because we play with two central midfielders and I already have one of the three guys I mentioned on the bench.

“But it does not mean like when you are out of the squad that you first have to find your way back to the bench. You can start the next game. I am happy he is here. We need a strong four midfielders.”

I thought it was hard on him that Tuchel subbed him. He wasn’t the worst of our team. Tuchel made 9 changes and the only player trying new things gets subbed. I mean, put him in and don’t change the other 8 in the starting team.

17 minutes ago, RMH said:

I thought it was hard on him that Tuchel subbed him. He wasn’t the worst of our team. Tuchel made 9 changes and the only player trying new things gets subbed. I mean, put him in and don’t change the other 8 in the starting team.

He seems to like subbing our young uns off for some reason,  which is something I hate. Nothing worse than a manager taking a young player off for an older player to see a game out, that's exactly when they should stay on to learn how to control games to a conclusion. 

Had a good first half but was sacrificed in the second in an attempt to wrestle back control of the game despite most of the play coming down the opposite side that he was playing on. 

Continues to convince me that he's got a bright future at Chelsea though. 

Thought he played really well today, despite being subbed.

Very good performance on an individual level but at the same time shown why we ain't doing the hipster thing and dropping Jorginho for him.

While you can reasonably argue that they're close individually, Billy currently doesn't have close to the level of chemistry with Kova as to what Jorgi has and as the Croatian is our best midfielder that simply has to be factored.

Edited March 21, 20215 yr by Argo

He hasn't got the chemistry with any midfielder because he's not been played much. But when he does, like today, he shows more progressive passes and play than Jorginho (obviously he's still got a way to go). You play Billy with a similar team to that that played against Atlético and he plays better and starts to understand his future midfield partners. What you can't expect him is to have 9 changes in a team and expect him to be dominant. Kovacic was also bad, and so were the rest of his team mates. Billy was the only one trying passes through the Sheffield defenders. Don't substitute him, get the fecking starting line up right and play him within a more gelled team. (Not like we care whether the players go to their national teams rested or not, why should we rest our players in an FA Cup quarter final for the sake of the national teams?)

The criticism frequently levelled at Kante, Kovacic and Jorginho is that forward players make a run and then these 3, for whatever reason, don't attempt to make the pass. 

I don't necessarily agree with that, but today was the reverse. On a number of occasions today Gilmour made the pass but the forwards never made the run.The 2nd half sliding tackle to win the ball and then the quick forward through ball to CHO, which he didn't try and make, is just one example.

Yes, he is small and doesn't add any physical presence but his touch is really excellent and he has great vision. Already I have no qualms when I see his name on the team sheet.

 

1 hour ago, dkw said:

He seems to like subbing our young uns off for some reason,  which is something I hate. Nothing worse than a manager taking a young player off for an older player to see a game out, that's exactly when they should stay on to learn how to control games to a conclusion. 

Totally agree with this dkw. Especially when that young player has been one of our best performers on the day.

Just knew he would be subbed second half - especially after Christensen went off and we were struggling to contain Sheff Utd. It was an easy call for TT and it was disappointing, although I did expect him to bring Kante on for Billy.

Didn't help Gilmour today that when he was looking for that forward pass, CHO and Giroud were poor and Mount and Pulicic not a great deal better.

4 hours ago, just said:

Yes, he is small and doesn't add any physical presence but his touch is really excellent and he has great vision. Already I have no qualms when I see his name on the team sheet.

 

Exactly. He is throwback to the footballing midfielders of yore and not the athletes of today. It is crucial that we keep this young man at our club, at least for the romantics among our supporters.  My heart sank when he was subbed - @dkw is spot on above. 

I love the way he strokes the ball, like some said very old school, he looks so unflustered, and very very assured, plus he's so bloody good looking (well according to my Mrs)...