Unused sub again today. 

He's wasted at Norwich. 

On 02/10/2021 at 22:12, ForeverCarefree said:

Unused sub again today. 

He's wasted at Norwich. 

Started their first four games though.

Problem is that he was very underwhelming and he's lost his spot due to performances.

This is pretty much the consensus at the Norwich forums.

 

1 hour ago, Sindre said:

Started their first four games though.

Problem is that he was very underwhelming and he's lost his spot due to performances.

This is pretty much the consensus at the Norwich forums.

He looks underwhelming because Norwich is such a bad fit for him, I have no idea why we sent him there. 

Most sides are just going to dominate Norwich and steamroll them week after week. 

How is a player that's key characteristic is to recycle possession, pick out forward passes etc. meant to stand out in a side that's constantly on the backfoot. He's not a defensive player but is having to do a lot of a defending. He can't look good in a side that's scored 2 goals this season, the attacking players around him clearly aren't good enough. 

Norwich were meant to be a possession based side but they currently sit 14th in the possession stats table for the league with an average possession of 45% after 7 games. 

 

Norwich haven’t improved their performances without Billy, so to blame him for their form is just absurd. In fact, he was their best rated player in a match a couple of weeks ago despite them losing. Norwich are relegation fodder and we should have tried to loan Gilmour to Brighton, who have built a similar type of play to us and is working out nicely for them. Or just have kept him with us. If Barkley is getting minutes, Gilmour surely would have had his chances to play.

6 minutes ago, ForeverCarefree said:

He looks underwhelming because Norwich is such a bad fit for him, I have no idea why we sent him there. 

Most sides are just going to dominate Norwich and steamroll them week after week. 

How is a player that's key characteristic is to recycle possession, pick out forward passes etc. meant to stand out in a side that's constantly on the backfoot. He's not a defensive player but is having to do a lot of a defending. He can't look good in a side that's scored 2 goals this season, the attacking players around him clearly aren't good enough. 

Norwich were meant to be a possession based side but they currently sit 14th in the possession stats table for the league with an average possession of 45% after 7 games. 

 

45% average possession isn't bad for a newly promoted side and also suggest the aren't "constantly" on the backfoot as you say.

Normann coming in for Gilmour have also improved them quite a bit and they are players with similar characteristics. And while you say he's no defensive player he best learn how to defend rather quick then because he won't reach the top if he can't do some basic defensive work in midfield. 

 

1 hour ago, Sindre said:

Started their first four games though.

Problem is that he was very underwhelming and he's lost his spot due to performances.

This is pretty much the consensus at the Norwich forums.

He looks underwhelming because Norwich is such a bad fit for him, I have no idea why we sent him there. 

Most sides are just going to dominate Norwich and steamroll them week after week. 

How is a player that's key characteristic is to recycle possession, pick out forward passes etc. meant to stand out in a side that's constantly on the backfoot. He's not a defensive player but is having to do a lot of a defending. He can't look good in a side that's scored 2 goals this season, the attacking players around him clearly aren't good enough. 

Norwich were meant to be a possession based side but they currently sit 14th in the possession stats table for the league with an average possession of 45% after 7 games. 

 

2 hours ago, Sindre said:

Started their first four games though.

Problem is that he was very underwhelming and he's lost his spot due to performances.

This is pretty much the consensus at the Norwich forums.

 

Ken Hairy sounds like a Bob Mortimer character. 

1 hour ago, Sindre said:

45% average possession isn't bad for a newly promoted side and also suggest the aren't "constantly" on the backfoot as you say.

Rooted bottom of the Premier League table with 1 point would. 

1 hour ago, Sindre said:

And while you say he's no defensive player he best learn how to defend rather quick then because he won't reach the top if he can't do some basic defensive work in midfield. 

Xavi wasn't a defensive midfielder but I'm pretty confident Pep wouldn't have been telling him he needed to learn how to stick a foot in if he had any hopes of establishing himself as a top midfielder. 

You need to nuture a players strengths and build on their ability. Not just loan them out to relegation fodder and tell them it's character building. 

Gilmour has looked mustard almost every time he's pulled on a Chelsea shirt barring one performance against Crystal Palace. He's even managed to stand out in the Scottish national side. Now he's at a bottom of the table Norwich side are we really going to suggest that it's Billy that's the problem? 

33 minutes ago, ForeverCarefree said:

Rooted bottom of the Premier League table with 1 point would. 

Xavi wasn't a defensive midfielder but I'm pretty confident Pep wouldn't have been telling him he needed to learn how to stick a foot in if he had any hopes of establishing himself as a top midfielder. 

You need to nuture a players strengths and build on their ability. Not just loan them out to relegation fodder and tell them it's character building. 

Gilmour has looked mustard almost every time he's pulled on a Chelsea shirt barring one performance against Crystal Palace. He's even managed to stand out in the Scottish national side. Now he's at a bottom of the table Norwich side are we really going to suggest that it's Billy that's the problem? 

Let's not compare Gilmour to Xavi shall we. Last year it was Cesc and let's be honest, he's nowhere near their level.

I think Gilmour is a great talent and he may become a top player in time. But he's not as good as some suggest at this point. And i've seen plenty of young midfielders at this club get overhyped only to fizzle out and "only" turn into a decent player in time. Two or three years ago it was Ampadu who was the next big thing for example.

He is never going to have a future here in the double six unless he learns how to defend properly. He was often a liability for us defensively and he's been the same for Norwich. So he needs to adress that and become better, which he hopefully will in time.

 

5 hours ago, Sindre said:

Started their first four games though.

Problem is that he was very underwhelming and he's lost his spot due to performances.

This is pretty much the consensus at the Norwich forums.

 

Did poor wee Billy sit on you as a child? That is nowhere near the concensus on that forum and I assume you know that. Those comments are in a thread titled "Drop Gilmour". I've been on that forum since the start of the season and the concensus is that Billy needs to be played in a midfield with a proper defensive structure in order to thrive. 

2 hours ago, ForeverCarefree said:

Rooted bottom of the Premier League table with 1 point would. 

Xavi wasn't a defensive midfielder but I'm pretty confident Pep wouldn't have been telling him he needed to learn how to stick a foot in if he had any hopes of establishing himself as a top midfielder. 

You need to nuture a players strengths and build on their ability. Not just loan them out to relegation fodder and tell them it's character building. 

Gilmour has looked mustard almost every time he's pulled on a Chelsea shirt barring one performance against Crystal Palace. He's even managed to stand out in the Scottish national side. Now he's at a bottom of the table Norwich side are we really going to suggest that it's Billy that's the problem? 

I think you're getting too emotionally attached to this. Billy is a proper professional now and this comes with the territory. Again, he's only 20, he won't be a guaranteed starting XI regular in the first place in teams not named Borussia Dortmund. 

He needs to ride out the bad times and keep proving himself as long as he doesn't get a bad injury. Worse comes to worst, we can always recall him. 

 

1 hour ago, Liam said:

Did poor wee Billy sit on you as a child? That is nowhere near the concensus on that forum and I assume you know that. Those comments are in a thread titled "Drop Gilmour". I've been on that forum since the start of the season and the concensus is that Billy needs to be played in a midfield with a proper defensive structure in order to thrive. 

Don't know that and if someone is waxing lyrical about him then let me know. One quick search today is what I did and pretty much everyone i saw found him underwhelming.

Which would be expected the way I thought he played the few times I've seen him this season.

But enough negativity. Hope he turns into a proper player one day. He's got the potential to do so.

Hopefully there's a clause in the loan that lets CFC recall him in January, however as there's no space for him in the squad bc  the club stupidly signed Saul  and the 2 unwanteds RLC & RB are looking somewhat useful again to TT, so that leaves Wee Billy as a nailed on member of the loan army for the foreseeable future. He probably went to Canaries bc of the Kraut connection with Farker, and if he's still doing fark all there by January hopefully he farks off and comes back to Cobham!  

22 hours ago, Sindre said:

Let's not compare Gilmour to Xavi shall we. Last year it was Cesc and let's be honest, he's nowhere near their level.

I think Gilmour is a great talent and he may become a top player in time. But he's not as good as some suggest at this point. And i've seen plenty of young midfielders at this club get overhyped only to fizzle out and "only" turn into a decent player in time. Two or three years ago it was Ampadu who was the next big thing for example.

He is never going to have a future here in the double six unless he learns how to defend properly. He was often a liability for us defensively and he's been the same for Norwich. So he needs to adress that and become better, which he hopefully will in time.

 

We play Jorginho in a double 6 and he can't defend either. Instead relying on good positioning and being comfortable on the ball under pressure. I don't see why we need to be training Gilmour to be able to make 5 tackles a game to become a top player. 

I think its more than fair to compare him to Xavi too. No one has said he's as good as prime Xavi currently, but they have similar profiles and play style. 

One of Norwich’s key players last season was a lad on loan from Tottenham who is similar to Gilmour in playing style so the loan made sense in the summer. However Norwich in the championship and Norwich in the premiership are two different kettles of fish. He’s a quality player though and there’s still time for him yet.

25 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

We play Jorginho in a double 6 and he can't defend either.

That's a myth.

1 hour ago, Sindre said:

That's a myth.

I've watched people walk past him on many occasions. I've also seen Billy get stuck in a lot more than him. Nothing against him, his positional play is fantastic and intercepts a lot of balls but he's weak as piss and slow as a snail. Surely you can't honestly think he's a good defensive holding mid? Probably one of the reasons Tuchel decides to stick with three CB's to cover him in the middle of the park. 

15 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

I've watched people walk past him on many occasions. I've also seen Billy get stuck in a lot more than him. Nothing against him, his positional play is fantastic and intercepts a lot of balls but he's weak as piss and slow as a snail. Surely you can't honestly think he's a good defensive holding mid? Probably one of the reasons Tuchel decides to stick with three CB's to cover him in the middle of the park. 

There is no evidence that we're playing a back 3 because of Jorginho. This isn't a new myth either, I have heard that before and it didn't hold water back then, definitely doesn't now. Jorginho is a good DM, he showed it in the CL last season and for Italy and even for Sarri when he played 37 PL games in a 4-3-3 while we had Kepa and D.Luiz as our defenders. Last match after he came in we won because of the red card, without him there was no guarantee that we would have scored a goal.

You keep bringing up Jorginho in regards to Gilmour as if they play the same style of football, but anyone that watched both knows that they are essentially 2 different kinds of players. If Billy Gilmour were a better player he wouldn't be somewhere else on loan today, simple as that.

1 hour ago, Sindre said:

That's a myth.

Just had a quick look for reference.

Jorginho wins 53% of his tackles, Billy wins 67% of his tackles.

Jorginho wins 58% of his aerial duals, Billy wins 75% of his aerial duals.

Jorginho has won 398 duals and losing 447. Billy has won 39 losing 41.

If people want to brand Billy as poor defensively, we can't pretend like Jorginho is good at it. 

https://www.premierleague.com/players/5682/player/stats

https://www.premierleague.com/players/24221/Billy-Gilmour/stats

 

2 hours ago, zolawannabe25 said:

One of Norwich’s key players last season was a lad on loan from Tottenham who is similar to Gilmour in playing style so the loan made sense in the summer. However Norwich in the championship and Norwich in the premiership are two different kettles of fish. He’s a quality player though and there’s still time for him yet.

I remember when Norwich were in the PL last and before lockdown even though they weren't getting the results they needed they were by in large playing well.

I was stressing that we had to send Billy to an appropriate manager (ie not Bruce/Dyche etc) and was happy with Norwich. Hopefully they can get back to those performance levels to which Billy will get a lot out of his time there whether the results follow or not.

3 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

There is no evidence that we're playing a back 3 because of Jorginho. This isn't a new myth either, I have heard that before and it didn't hold water back then, definitely doesn't now. Jorginho is a good DM, he showed it in the CL last season and for Italy and even for Sarri when he played 37 PL games in a 4-3-3 while we had Kepa and D.Luiz as our defenders. Last match after he came in we won because of the red card, without him there was no guarantee that we would have scored a goal.

You keep bringing up Jorginho in regards to Gilmour as if they play the same style of football, but anyone that watched both knows that they are essentially 2 different kinds of players. If Billy Gilmour were a better player he wouldn't be somewhere else on loan today, simple as that.

See post below. Both would be playing the 'regista' role for us. If people want to brand Billy as poor defensively, we can't pretend J5 is better. 

28 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

See post below. Both would be playing the 'regista' role for us. If people want to brand Billy as poor defensively, we can't pretend J5 is better. 

Not true, Billy is the "Kovacic" role, not a regista. He runs with the ball and goes forward often, you need to watch him at least. And there is no doubt that Jorginho is a better player still. But keep trying to compare a player with 15 PL appearances to a player with over 100...

Edited October 5, 20214 yr by Gol15

2 hours ago, RIP Mourinho said:

Jorginho wins 58% of his aerial duals, Billy wins 75% of his aerial duals.

Haha how on earth has he managed that?

2 hours ago, RIP Mourinho said:

Just had a quick look for reference.

Jorginho wins 53% of his tackles, Billy wins 67% of his tackles.

Jorginho wins 58% of his aerial duals, Billy wins 75% of his aerial duals.

Jorginho has won 398 duals and losing 447. Billy has won 39 losing 41.

If people want to brand Billy as poor defensively, we can't pretend like Jorginho is good at it. 

https://www.premierleague.com/players/5682/player/stats

https://www.premierleague.com/players/24221/Billy-Gilmour/stats

 

So defending is all about winning duels?

Jorginho has elite positioning and reads the game extremely well. And his movement, energy and ability to retain possession in tight spaces is excellent. 

Of course, he's slow and struggles to recover when we turn the ball over in advanced areas. But so does Gilmour.

By your definition, Zouma is a better defender than Thiago Silva.

Gilmour is as good or better than Jorginho offensively but is nowhere near as good defensively.

20 hours ago, Gol15 said:

Not true, Billy is the "Kovacic" role, not a regista. He runs with the ball and goes forward often, you need to watch him at least. And there is no doubt that Jorginho is a better player still. But keep trying to compare a player with 15 PL appearances to a player with over 100...

Billy is more than adept to play regista. Don't try to belittle me with the 'watch him at least' just because you have a hard on for Jorginho. No one is saying Billy is better, its literally a comparison. Should've known a comment about Jorginho would have had you on my back though, so tedious. 

18 hours ago, ashwin said:

So defending is all about winning duels?

Jorginho has elite positioning and reads the game extremely well. And his movement, energy and ability to retain possession in tight spaces is excellent. 

Of course, he's slow and struggles to recover when we turn the ball over in advanced areas. But so does Gilmour.

By your definition, Zouma is a better defender than Thiago Silva.

Gilmour is as good or better than Jorginho offensively but is nowhere near as good defensively.

Never said it was all about winning duals. If you bother to read further up the thread you see me mention about Jorginho's elite positioning for intercepting balls etc. However, if someone is running at our defence, i'd rather have Billy there to challenge them 1v1 than Jorginho because you know he'll get stuck in, not just dangle a leg.